Post just arrived and don't WPB the stuff from the Labour Party as it has the NEC ballot inside. But don't expect to be inspired by Gordon's New Labour message .
"So this is the essential position of new Labour under my leadership. Fairness means, yes, we will address poverty. But fairness also means we are always on the side of aspiration and ambition. " ( ie the rich )
It gets worse:
"Building real fairness in Britain is also about people playing by the rules and government enforcing those rules. This is why over the coming months we are rolling out our Australian-style points-based system for immigration to make sure that only those who can contribute to Britain can come in." In other words, if you are an asylum-seeker, poor, defenceless, financially vulnerable, forget it.
Brown's enthisiasism for public sector reform and punitive welfare reforms complete this disgraceful betrayal of the values on which the Labour Party was founded. Gordon, whatever happened to your socialism
Posts
11 comments:
So only the rich can have aspirations and ambitions in your view. Perhaps you should talk to some people who aren't rich.
Strangely enough your view that only the rich have aspirations and ambitions is very common among many on the right.
Of course people can have aspirations but New labour Speak uses "aspirational" to excuse all manner of policy from privatisation to introducing means-testing and an unfair taxation system. I am reminded of Neil Kinnock:"I warn you not to be poor, I warn you not to be sick, I warn you not to be old" Other buzzwords ? "Choice" "flexibility"
So whatever GB says you will read a different meaning into it - and then insult him even further by applying Kinnock's warning about Thatcher.
In your previous post you said we need to avoid being sectarian - perhaps you might want to explain why this doesn't apply to those of us who think the Government has a good record on many things over the last 11 years - but does apply to fascist appeasers like Galloway and his ilk.
Dear Susan,
We're 20 points behind in the polls.
Everyone tells me I'm a gonna.
Challenges. International turbulence. And my kid just told me this morning: "Daddy, you're a first-class pooh".
We must remain resolute in these difficult times which for your benefit, Susan, means get a decent hair cut and shut up.
I hate this stuff about 'the rules'.
Parliament makes the rules, and should make them to serve the disadvantaged.
Head office need to learn some politics. And stop sending out these emails in politician's names.
Do you remember Charles Clarke's terror 'questionnaire'?
I think GB's meaning is absolutely clear. The only immigrants to be allowed into Britain will be those with high-earning potential.A points-based system is a disgrace . How reactionary can you get.
Why should I shut up? Are we supoosed to accept these anodyne, insulting messages from high as gospel. They are not. They do not represent the views of thousands of Labour Party members. And, anonymous, do you REALLY think Brown's words ( or whichever wonk wrote it) are vore-winners. Clearly not. The only hope for Labour is to start being Labour and for us to get rid of New Labour.They have brought us to the brink of annihilation at the next General Election
I always thought 'aspirational' meant very right wing voters in places like essex who the workerist right of the party thinks are more loyal to the labour party than Guardian readers, even though those 'aspirational' voters have voted labour once and once only.
"Aspiration", in and of itself, isn't a bad thing, but it's New Labour's utterly narrow-minded and unimaginative conception of "aspiration" here that's the problem. Collective aspirations, in the workplace or locality or other campaigns, aren't part of Gordon's vision. He knows that and we know that.
And the stuff in that pamphlet about immigration was vile - you might expect an attempted justification of controls and fairness and the like but to not even mention the other side of the story, or the basic fact that Labour should stand against racism and xenophobia, was horribly embarrassing.
This is where directionless, power-hungry triangulation gets you. Gordon wanted power for all these years, but why? Christ alone knows.
Susan, I agree with the sentiment expressed in this post and comments more than anything you've ever posted.
Well, Tom, that's a start!
To argue, as you do, that only the rich are aspirational and ambitious is rather silly.
Whether you intend to or not, you imply the poor should accept their lot.
Post a Comment