Corbyns Torque

And he had to sneak up behind them!

Only one gransnetters voter?

Here you go

www.gransnet.com/forums/news_and_politics/1244906-Corbyns-Magnetism

He has a certain 'je ne sais quoi' but it's those around him that I suspect.

Or is he made magnetic because of the 'current' creating a magnetic field around him?

Magnetism it is.
Keep it accessible.

Magenetism - he is attracting voters with his gentle charm?

Torque is the force applied that causes something to turn around a central point, ie Corbyn is the 'central point' and someone else is applying the torque (Momentum?).

Well. we've certainly used it to explore the nature of Corbyn .
I like Kinematics - the geometry of motion.
It'll be interesting to see how Corbyn shifts. Or not!
And the alliteration rocks.

Hell bells, I didn't know what Torque meant

As DH keeps telling me - Physics is a lovely subject

magnetism?

I love it Jalima. And I'm learning so much about the science of movement too!

Kinematics?

Most importantly, we're coming to the end of this thread. What shall we call the new one?

Still waiting for Labour party policies which are Marxist!

Well, we have to wait and see when if they ever get into power!

But no doubt John's extremist views will not see the light of day if the rest of any hypothetical Labour Cabinet have much to do with it.

Keep going lg and P65. Enjoy arguing with yourselves. Although a bit of good advice might be when you find yourself in a hole stop digging!
Still waiting for Labour party policies which are Marxist!

So now I'm really confused trisher. Who's the elephant and who's the mouse in this?

No one has said the Labour Party is The Marxist Party. No one has said they've copied pages from Das Kapital. Same as no one believes the Tories will deny abortions to victims of rape.

I think the economic theories admired by the shadow chancellor are just a little more important than the personal beliefs of a backbench MP. I'd disagree that they hold equivalence. No one is voting for JRM to set the ethical framework for the nation. They would be voting for JMcD to set the financial framework though. That's why their beliefs are not of comparable importance. One is highly relevant to the influence and power they would have in office. One really isn't.

I'd also say that it's not only what they intend to do that's important, it's the outcome of that action that matters. However fantastic his intentions, they are not feasible and the outcome could be chaotic. I mean, who thinks it costs nothing to buy assets 'because it nets itself off'. (I can find you the video of him saying this on the Andrew Marr show if you like) I know when Corbyn tried to put that chestnut into practice in Portcullis House at the cafe, he had to leave without his assets (4 cups of caffe latte). Those theories might sound great on the podium, but really, if you can't make them work for a few cups of coffee, what chance do you have with the transport, power and utility infrastructure of the whole country?

Am sure that you wouldn't mind having a Government led by Marxists trisher but the point is an awful lot of people wouldn't be!
You are allowed your preferences and others theirs.
The LP haven’t actually implemented any policies, as they are not in power.

I didn't ask if JM was a Marxist- I asked what Marxist policies you saw being implemented by the Labour Party. There aren't any of course so you chose to enter into a discussion with yourself about John MacDonald. When we reach the stage in this country of building governments on what people believe, I personally would much rather have a government with a member who has studied Marx, and who may, or may not, be a Marxist now, than have someone who believes that a girl who is raped should be denied the right to a safe abortion. But actually both things are irrelevant and what matters is what the party they belong to intends to do.
All the rest is obfuscation.

Primrose

He did claim that he is a Marxist (filmed evidence) and had been waiting for the financial crash of 2008 'for a generation'.

However, he did say as well that he has a lot still to learn from Marx, so perhaps he doesn't understand what Marxism means.
Or perhaps he is a liar, who knows?

trisher, I think it's John McDonnell's right to self-identify as a Marxist. Telling people they are illogical when they accept his own statements that he is a Marxist is not fair on him.
He's allowed to be a Marxist if he wants to be!

lemongrove h the invective being chucked around on here because there is criticism of Corbyn and McDonnell and Momentum
There is no "invective" at all on this thread and nothing about your criticism of any of those three. There is an attempt to ask reasonable questions about the foundations of the statements being made, which has met with little in the way of reasoned reply. Much of the logic on this thread is along the lines of "This animal is grey. Elephants are grey. Therefore this must be an elephant (when it is actually a mouse.)

"So now you see it as "silly" that some learn from history "

No it is not silly to learn from history .

Surely though is silly is to deny the history of an individual or organisation .

Definition of FORUM= a meeting or medium wher ideas or views on a particular issue can be exchanged

It is you GracesGran who stifles / spoils the flow of a thread by your arrogance in wishing all posters to speak, post, think according to your values/ standards or lack of & it is you who cannot accept any other view point than your own, especially if not expressed to your satisfaction!