General British politics discussion thread

MrMusician18

10000maniacs wrote: »

Nothing to do with Johnson whatsoever. These "shock" results are all about Brexit and immigration.

I think both of those issues are rather an effect rather than a cause. Brexit, anti-immigration and results like this are a result of what can best be described as workings out of the culture war. Labour have firmly aligned themselves with the SJW pc position which voters in these former industrial towns do not identify with.

10000maniacs

PommieBast wrote: »

Maybe I should have mentioned where I was from. Last local elections the only reason the Conservatives were not wiped out in my hometown was because the other parties did not put up enough candidates.

It's still a pretty safe Tory seat at 50% in 2019.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

He may well have, but he was pre Thatcher.

By the way, Milton Keynes has no connection with John Milton, the poet, nor with John Maynard Keynes, the economist. It was just the name of the village that was in the middle of the area chosen for the new garden city.

Yep, I lived there for a while, you will also find Milton Keynes in the domesday book, a great question to catch people out in the pub quizes.

Arthur Daley

partyguinness wrote: »

Capping emigrants is ideologically at odds with the Tories. They are free market libertarians so capping emigrants amounts to an interference with the “free market”- that ship sailed decades ago.

I could never see Maggie or Sir Keith Joseph letting in such huge numbers of migrants. Free marketers believe that migrants would be better building up their own communities rather than travelling half way around the world on the basis of some shaggy dog story about the paths of Rotherham being paved with gold.

Britain had a strong border at that time, but London was still a multi cultural city in parts. Within limits. That is all anyone is asking for

PommieBast

10000maniacs wrote: »

It's still a pretty safe Tory seat at 50% in 2019.

That's my point. They can take the hit. In fact they could even lose a bunch of seats like this, which as the FT reports is a major worry of southern Tory MPs.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

Clive Lewis, a Labour high profile person on the BBC. He just doesn't get it.

He said Labour are the only "progressive" party, which in effect means that the Tory voters are not progressive.

It's this self righteous language that just irritates the working class when they are constantly talked down to. In order to win elections, don't use language like "progressive". The Tory candidate who won the seat is the first female MP for the area! Isn't that "progressive"?

The Labour MPs need to get off Twitter.

Similar to self-righteous language that refers to "the working class"?

Where's that kettle?

partyguinness

Arthur Daley wrote: »

I could never see Maggie or Sir Keith Joseph letting in such huge numbers of migrants. Free marketers believe that migrants would be better building up their own communities rather than travelling half way around the world on the basis of some shaggy dog story about the paths of Rotherham being paved with gold.

Britain had a strong border at that time, but London was still a multi cultural city in parts. Within limits. That is all anyone is asking for

We will never know. The world is completely now so it is moot.

MrMusician18

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Similar to self-righteous language that refers to "the working class"?

Where's that kettle?

The working class isn't the same. If you're not with the "progressives" then you're backward. And your certainly not going to vote for people who think that if you.

Sierra Oscar

Poor day for Labour all round really. Some significant losses in England and Wales. Some votes gained in Scotland, but that looks more to do with unionists tactically voting and not splitting the vote in certain constituencies. Disastrous for Stamer really. They're already blaming Corbyn. Bit of a dead horse at this stage.

breezy1985

hotmail.com wrote: »

Clive Lewis, a Labour high profile person on the BBC. He just doesn't get it.

He said Labour are the only "progressive" party, which in effect means that the Tory voters are not progressive.

It's this self righteous language that just irritates the working class when they are constantly talked down to. In order to win elections, don't use language like "progressive". The Tory candidate who won the seat is the first female MP for the area! Isn't that "progressive"?

The Labour MPs need to get off Twitter.

As a member of the working class what really irritates me is people who feel they can speak for the working class. I do think the Tories are not progressive and I voted and even became a signed up member of labour thanks to Corbyn and the progressives.

So please stop self righteously telling the working class what they think like we are a hive mind

breezy1985

Arthur Daley wrote: »

I could never see Maggie or Sir Keith Joseph letting in such huge numbers of migrants. Free marketers believe that migrants would be better building up their own communities rather than travelling half way around the world on the basis of some shaggy dog story about the paths of Rotherham being paved with gold.

Britain had a strong border at that time, but London was still a multi cultural city in parts. Within limits. That is all anyone is asking for

That is pure and utter fairytale stuff. That Britain and that Thatcher only exist in your head and the heads of other rose tinted Brexiters

Arthur Daley

breezy1985 wrote: »

That is pure and utter fairytale stuff. That Britain and that Thatcher only exist in your head and the heads of other rose tinted Brexiters

Is there any evidence that Thatcher allowed mass migration into Britain while she was in power?

partyguinness

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Is there any evidence that Thatcher allowed mass migration into Britain while she was in power?

Mass migration is not allowed into Britain today either except in the world of the Daily Mail and Express.


The world is a totally different place from 40 years ago. Mass communication and cheap travel is open to everyone and anywhere.

breezy1985

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Is there any evidence that Thatcher allowed mass migration into Britain while she was in power?

Is there any evidence that she allowed way more or less. Her policy on immigration seemed to be pretty in line with general UK policy.

Absolutely nothing she done suggests she or anyone involved with her believed in leveling up the communities that immigrants traditionally came from

Arthur Daley

breezy1985 wrote: »

Is there any evidence that she allowed way more or less. Her policy on immigration seemed to be pretty in line with general UK policy.

I'd say very few people believe that mass migration into Britain was going on in the 70s, 80s and even the 90s.

If our societies were so multicultural then, we wouldn't have minority groups on the left trying to reform them, would we.

Trying to reform them against the will of the majority, I might add. Hence the trouncing Labour and the Lib Dems keep getting (Jo Swinson anyone?), and the subject of the debate.

Strazdas

The bizarre thing about large scale immigration to the UK is that it is treated as an aberration and unwelcome development by the press and the Tory voters.

Britain has a population of 65m people and is a wealthy country. It's only natural that people would want to move there to live and work. Every developed country in the world sees large scale immigration, be it France, Germany, the US, Canada, Australia etc.

Somehow it's seen as almost 'unnatural' and something that needs to be stamped out by the British.

It would be like people in Dublin being shocked and rather put out that people from rural Ireland might want to move to the capital.

breezy1985

Arthur Daley wrote: »

I'd say very few people believe that mass migration into Britain was going on in the 70s, 80s and even the 90s.

If our societies were so multicultural then, we wouldn't have minority groups on the left trying to reform them, would we.

Trying to reform them against the will of the majority, I might add. Hence the trouncing Labour and the Lib Dems keep getting (Jo Swinson anyone?), and the subject of the debate.

What decade exactly do you think the Indian community came to England or the Caribbean or Irish ones. The 3 biggest immigrant communities in the UK all arrived long before the 21st century so you are talking pure bulldog and spitfires nonsense

hotmail.com

breezy1985 wrote: »

As a member of the working class what really irritates me is people who feel they can speak for the working class. I do think the Tories are not progressive and I voted and even became a signed up member of labour thanks to Corbyn and the progressives.

So please stop self righteously telling the working class what they think like we are a hive mind

Good luck winning elections with the term progressive.

Some on the Left live in their own little bubble.

breezy1985

hotmail.com wrote: »

Good luck winning elections with the term progressive.

Some on the Left live in their own little bubble.

Progressive was the term used in the post I was commenting on. It's not a term I ever use myself and I never hear it from anyone I know who would also be put in the "progressive" bracket.

In fact the only people who seem to throw the term around are the same sadsacks who use terms like SJW or fringe left

MrMusician18

breezy1985 wrote: »

Progressive was the term used in the post I was commenting on. It's not a term I ever use myself and I never hear it from anyone I know who would also be put in the "progressive" bracket.

In fact the only people who seem to throw the term around are the same sadsacks who use terms like SJW or fringe left

You won't win people over calling them sadsacks either. And that's the problem for the progressives, you are either with them and must buy into all their causes, or against them.

This is labours problem - they have lost touch with the voters. People in northern England don't want their progressive policies. And until it abandons the progressive left it won't get elected anywhere outside wealthy liberal urban areas.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Go to somewhere like Denmark and you'll see the Danish flag everywhere, in England you rarely see the flag, NI is not Britain, they are territory marking up there.

The US is exceptional with flags

Having been all over the UK for years. I've yet found it difficult to find an English flag hung up. Not the union jack an actual English flag. I'm unsure where you are looking frankly.

hotmail.com

breezy1985 wrote: »

Progressive was the term used in the post I was commenting on. It's not a term I ever use myself and I never hear it from anyone I know who would also be put in the "progressive" bracket.

In fact the only people who seem to throw the term around are the same sadsacks who use terms like SJW or fringe left

You said the Tories aren't progressive.

Their voters see this as insulting.

breezy1985

MrMusician18 wrote: »

You won't win people over calling them sadsacks either. And that's the problem for the progressives, you are either with them and must buy into all their causes, or against them.

This is labours problem - they have lost touch with the voters. People in northern England don't want their progressive policies. And until it abandons the progressive left it won't get elected anywhere outside wealthy liberal urban areas.

So become the Tories to win. What would be the point in Winning if it's not using the politics you believe in.

I also don't think the SJW progressive fringe spouters can be won over by anything labour do

breezy1985

hotmail.com wrote: »

You said the Tories aren't progressive.

Their voters see this as insulting.

Wouldn't be the first or last time insulted Tories and certainly not the harshest thing I have said

listermint

hotmail.com wrote: »

You said the Tories aren't progressive.

Their voters see this as insulting.

The Tories aren't progressive. Neither are their voters. And their voters don't find that insulting because they aren't voting on progressive policies.

Where have the Tories said they were progressive over this campaign? Can you elaborate

MrMusician18

breezy1985 wrote: »

So become the Tories to win. What would be the point in Winning if it's not using the politics you believe in.

I also don't think the SJW progressive fringe spouters can be won over by anything labour do

The takeover of Labour by the "progressive left" is a relatively recent innovation and really is just the outworking of the culture war -Tories on one side, Labour on the other. The problem for labour is that the UK electorate has a cohesive voting minority (enough to win fptp elections) that sits firmly centre right. And has done for decades.

If labour wants to win elections then it has to move to the voters, or the voters have to move to them. The latter is not going to happen. Basically labour has to become more like the attitudes of the people they need to vote for them.

If it wants to remain pure, it can do so, but it will do so in opposition.

O'Neill

listermint wrote: »

The Tories aren't progressive. Neither are their voters. And their voters don't find that insulting because they aren't voting on progressive policies.

Where have the Tories said they were progressive over this campaign? Can you elaborate

I would imagine they wear it as a badge of honour also.

hotmail.com

listermint wrote: »

The Tories aren't progressive. Neither are their voters. And their voters don't find that insulting because they aren't voting on progressive policies.

Where have the Tories said they were progressive over this campaign? Can you elaborate

You won't get a job as Director of Elections by insulting large sections of the population.

MrMusician18

O'Neill wrote: »

I would imagine they wear it as a badge of honour also.

If the party in government is wearing a badge of honour that is effectively "we are the exact opposite of labour" and manages to get elected in Labour heartlands in a by election contest that wasn't within an asses roar of being close, what does that tell you about how well liked Labour, their policies and personnel are?

listermint

hotmail.com wrote: »

You won't get a job as Director of Elections by insulting large sections of the population.

But that wasn't what you were upset about. It was about the term progressive.

So are you now in agreement that the Tories didn't run a progressive campaign.