The Nasty Labour Party - what they really stand for.

Although I'm not a fan of Blair, I remember the '90s, when the Tories seemed to be immovable when opposed by traditional Labour.
I got the impression that he decided to compromise some of his principles, just to get the Tories out. And it worked.
I thought it was a clever calculated move, taking into account the social changes at the time

Far be it from me to start arguing about the records of past Labour governments but the 1998 - 2010 governments put money into schools, initiated Sure Start and put money into the NHS. Weren't they also responsible for Working Tax credits?

I agree that they could have been a bit more radical while they had a thumping majority but they were, I think, constrained by the prevailing economic belief in the need to cut national debt and deficits by restraining government spending (hence PFI).

Apologies, should be Labour Government years of 1998-2010, not 1998-2012 above.

M0nica, regarding your post @ 16:56 today, the Labour government years of 1998-2012 are years that should be denied as anything resembling true socialist. The beginnings of the Gig Economy, zero hours contracts and denying the trade unions relief from the Thatcher legislation that so restricted their ability to fight the foregoing very much demonstrates Blair's lack of any real socialist principles.

However, that lack of principle while still taking money for the Labour party from low paid trade unionists by way of their affiliation fees eventually brought forward the trade union grassroots activists to once more "take back" the Labour Party into the broader Labour movement by means of democratic but necessary radical action.

Whether that rejuvenated radical Labour Party will gain the majority electorate support will be known following the next General Election whenever that comes. However, I have great respect for those that have taken back what they had always paid for, and whether they succeed or not at the polls, Labour once again has policies that are true to its founding.

And that is the way it should be.

One of the endearing features of the Labour Party is their predilection for saying piously, whenever, they look at a current MP whose views they do not agree with, or previous labour governments whose views they no longer believe in that they were not real socialists, but closet Torys. Its a quick 'get out of gaol' excuse.

A tactic much used, in the past, by the
-socialist- communist countries of Eastern Europe, and especially the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, where it could be described as a quick get in to gaol tactic, although it could also lead to summary execution.

Beware those who deny their past.

Gordon Brown is a socialist , his actions through his life prove this. Actions not endless Empty talk. He is also a gentleman .

Blair and Brown were in no way, socialists. They were in fact closet Tories in similar fashion to some on this forum.

As evidence of the above the below BBC documentary lays out the Blair/Brown collusion with the Bankers to keep deregulation in place in the early years of the two thousands. That brought about the banking crisis of 2008 that we are still all paying for as a nation today.

I believe all who watch the below documentary will witness that The Blair government was in no way socialist and cared little for working people in Britain.

Documentary web address:-
www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bmbhzb via @bbciplayer

Paddyann claims Gordon Brown isn’t a socialist , that is rubbish

everybody getting wound up about reds under the bed

But they are not 'under the bed' are they paddyann?

They are OPENLY honest about their far left beliefs, many of them Marxist.

Not only that, we have seen a profound and notable transformation of the Labour party since Gordon Brown's tenure. You'd have to be living in an underground bunker all your life not to have noticed how far left activists have gained hold of Labour's NEC - how many far left Momentum/Corbyn supporters make up the NEC? Have you not been aware of deselection of moderates?

It's just disingenuous to state it's not happening.

Labour is moving to the far left. Reds are ON the beds.

Corbyn has enough to cope with , all this news about Russia, his brothers / comrades

this is just a new wave of McCarthyism,evrybody getting wound up about reds under the bed ...honestly I wouldn't get your knickers in a twist .There are too many "labour" party members who are still Blairites ...like Annie to let the left wing be even SOCIALIST never mind communist .It wont happen.Corbyn and cohorts will talk a good talk but when they get to No 10 they'll be the same as the rest .

Well said POGS. With all the posts referring to peasants etc , war on ‘Class ‘ is certaintly uppermost in the minds of some.

Luckygirl

" Please do not panic - there is no danger of Britain having a Marxist government. There might be a possibility at the next GE of a bit of a swing to the left - and that is fair enough."
---

Do you believe that a ' possible' future Chancellor of the Exchequer who states ' I am a Marxist', called for 'Insurrection' , openly says his economics are based on 'Das Kapital' , believes in overthrowing Capatism , 'feted' Chavez and Modurro and thought 'WE' could learn from their Socialist Government , that worked out well didn't it!

McDonnell /Corbyn et al , certainly Corbyns ' Inner Circle' like to let it be known their liking of Mao Zedongs Little Red Book as well as Das Kapital so why would Labour under the Labour/Jeremy For Leader / Momentum party not be a Marxist Government? It may take biting their tongue for a while but when their feet are well and truly under the table it will be too late .

I will agree with one Mao quote and I fear we are seeing the seeds planted and growing at a pretty fast pace since the formation of the Corbyn /Jeremy For Leader/Momentum party :-

' A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery... A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another'.

And yes - sweet dreams Day6

Well, it is and it isn't like 100 years ago.

Of course there isn't the same poverty as then with short life expectancies. And the vast mass of people now are literate and healthy.

But there is job insecurity, homelessness, child poverty, debt to make ends meet, and hunger.

(The infamous Marx of course pointed out that poverty is relative and in our increasingly unequal society poverty is increasing.)

So the above are the problems that still need sorting out.

As regards Labour - what is in their program that looks like the dreaded Marxism? Public control of the utilities and railways?

Marxism implies control of the whole of the means of production and that would pay for the solution to the problems.

In the meanwhile we could recover the back tax from evaders, cancel Trident, and ensure that the building firms get on with construction! That should be a good start!

Students have been reading Marx and Engels since publication. Very few have ever successfully masterminded a communist revolution. There is no need to worry.

Signed, a mastermind of going to the pub

Fennel, if Corbyn/Momentum win they will have 5 years, he can do quite a lot of damage in that time

Put a ‘virtual’ tenner on it Fennel

As I've said before, if labour are elected they will have to tone down some of their more extreme policies or they will soon lose the support of the electorate.
That's my bet anyway - I would put money on it ( if I had any!)

As do I GrannyGravy

Facist thought police? I worry more about Marxist and Communist indoctrination in our colleges and universities.

You lot! Maizie ,

So jura do you consider Mrs May ‘ a fascist’ ?
Fortunately, although there are many fascist parties in other European countries, we don’t have them here.

Again- fascism is not a very good option either.

If Corbyn got into power in the next few years, whenever we have an election then you would have a Marxist government..... something that one or two on GN fail to understand.Not a Marxist Parliament but a government.