Corbyns Inertia

Well durhamjen thinks he is wonderful, so that’s one at least.

There was a PLP meeting tonight, GracesGran. Maybe it got a bit heated?

The Tories just have Corbyn on the brain, just like some on Gransnet. They've forgotten how many Jeremys they have in their own party.

Anyone else think him wonderful?

He's doing better than Hunt on the NHS, lemon.

??

Any other Tories on here?

Only Tories apparently Lemons. Like the one Jen was referring to. Are they all that weird? Is it a requirement? It would explain a lot of the unintelligible posts I suppose.

Must be, GracesGran. I'd never realised it before I saw that video.

Sorry GG but that's no argument at all. The LP may be a social democratic party. But it's not lead by a social democrat. The shadow chancellor is not a social democrat. I'm sure you understand that we're talking about Corbyn & McDonnell, not the Labour Party. To many people, there is a difference.

Primrose do read. They see themselves as democratic socialists not social democrats. It's a name. Most people who need to know understand the difference. Those they are attracting as voters understand the difference. The article I quoted noted the difference.

Do I need you to understand the difference - no. Does the Labour Party need someone who will never even consider voting for them to understand the difference -no. Does GN need you to understand the difference - no.

Corbyn says he is a democratic socialist. I believe him. It's your problem that you do not.

Democratic socialism is defined as having a socialist economy in which the means of production are socially and collectively owned or controlled alongside a politically democratic system of government.

So no capitalism for Corbyn then. The government runs everything. Old school USSR style. But with votes.

I agree - that's Corbyn and McDonnell.

That's one definition of democratic socialism.
Do you know what democratic means?
Nothing to do with old-style USSR.

Those they are attracting as voters understand the difference

Can we be sure of that assertion?
Or were some lured by ambitious 'promises'?

You are now agreeing with yourself and your own interpretation Primrose although I have a feeling that you are probably the only one you generally agree with.

I am happy to wait and see where the Labour Party goes as, for me, something really has to be better than the Cons we have in power currently.

But GG, that's not my 'interpretation' at all.
What's wrong with the Wiki definition?
Happy to take this step by step and word by word.

Corbyn says he is a democratic socialist. I believe him.
Probably.

I think there are many people in this country who want social democracy and a party offering that would win with a huge majority.
But that is just opinion.

But what exactly IS social democracy? Has it ever been defined?

We live in a democracy. All adults get the vote. Social democracy - is that a bit like social engineering because that has very sinister implications. We also live in a welfare state so in theory we look after the least fortunate members of society. ( Whether the welfare state is fit for purpose or not is a whole new thread's worth of discussion.)

This social democracy sounds to me like the level playing field of society which doesn't recognise effort and ambition and aspiration. We'll all be equal despite getting on in life through dint of blood sweat and tears or we'll work for a pittance so we pay more tax to even things out? That's not a policy for the working classes, is it, working being the operative word? JC and company's social Utopia is based on the politics of envy. Yes, ensure big corporations and wealthy individuals pay their taxes by all means but that would have to be on a pro rata basis or ALL workers would suffer when the wealthy leave the UK.

Many workers strive to get by but Corbyn would overlook the working poor or those who budget, seeking those people as "haves". Everyone would suffer as he brings the country to it's knees looking after only one sector of society.

Gone are the days of Labour championing the workers. That's history more's the pity. Labour does not have a monopoly on caring and all the virtue signalling in the world from its supporters fools no one.

Labour looks to its own agenda, much more so in recent years with the force of the aggressive far left behind it. Their sort of democracy is a limited, blinkered view which will make every sector of society except the poorest worse off. There is no vision for real democracy or fairness but a burning desire to upset the status quo and topple the establishment. They scream "NHS and homelessness" at every turn ( watch them) but they fool no one. Social democracy in the hands of Corbyn and McDonnell? No thanks. An Orwellian nightmare.

By the look of things the best bet is that Primrose and Day6 discuss this between them while they sort it out and the rest of us can get on with RL, safe in the knowledge that over the years we have grown to understand exactly what both Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism are.

While you do that you might also, in your infinite wisdom, try and define what "Conservative" actually stands for. While it seems Social Democracy/Democratic Socialism do not trouble those who are inclined to support such political ethoses (I know it's ethe but would no doubt be castigated for using it) it is obvious that endless redefining of these names is only important to those who want to attack the Labour Party with endless waffle.

The Cons seem to have lost the plot completely however, and, while being a "broad church" may have served them in the past it is now just causing endless infighting. I am sure they would appreciate you both putting them back on the right track sooner rather than later.

GG - what's wrong with the definition of democratic socialism that I posted?

If anyone votes labour they will be voting for a manifesto published by the Labour Party.

All past labour leaders have re cognised that because of the rabid right wing press dominance in the U.K. it is almost impossible for a labour government to win, which is why we say Blair courting Murdoch before the labour win in 1989.

However, future leaders will undoubtedly be in a totally different position because the young and not so young voter is rejecting what it sees as a coterie of elites at the top which includes the very wealthy being supported by the Tory Government and the traditional press.

That is why Corbyn was able to speak directly to those who now get their main source of information from social media and not the old guard.

They liked what they saw and perversely the more the traditional old right wing press criticised him the more the new voter was convinced that this old argument should be rejected.
For example the Daily Mail carried 16 pages screaming and tearing into Corbyn on the day before the election.

Labour can now get its manifesto across without being at the mercy of those with a rabid right wing agenda. Supporters of labour are waking up to the fact that they have nothing to fear from this once strangle hold as we can get our information from other sources and leave those ancient relics behind.

The internet has far more power than the press, think of the links of bloggers we have posted here, voxpox etc,

Yes I actually agree with you annie

I’m waiting for a new Corbyn disparaging thread so that I can look at the manifesto in depth.

twitter.com/VoxPox