Totally agree with this. How the fuck does “controlling the means of production” work in 2020? Are Corbyn and Galloway going to to nipping in to call centres and telling them all not to answer the phones on Friday’s? Jesus fucking Christ.Name a single 'true socialist' who has led the party to victory?
Truth is, labour is a broad church. It has never been a socialist party in the true sense.
Socialism as a term is so antiquated, it is so 19th Centuary. The whole vocab of the socialists is out dated. 'The Workers' etc means bot all in todays work place. The global economy is very different to the manufacturing base that drove socialism. It is time to reframe the focus and update the terminology. The targets can be the same but the methods need to change. A broad church is required to achieve this.
I’m guessing you’re posting this from an iPhone or a Samsung smartphone?Until we dismantle this broad acceptance of capitalism and create a new narrative then Labour will never be in power. Capitalism is failing, but even now even many on the right of the Labour party cling to it as it is some sort of magic bullet. It is isn't it needs new ways of thinking and under Corbyn Labour started to address that. As long though as capitalism and the market are seen as the only way then the Labour party may as well not exist.
The definition of true Socialist, depends on how you view Socialism. There is not a single strand of must do and musnt do to be one, but the overarching belief has to be that society is organised in a way that benefits the majority not the minority who are the owners of capital. If that means the workers controlling the means of production, then so be it, if that means a National Health service then good, if that means a Nationalised transport system all the better. Even Lenin appreciated that their is room for some capitalism on a small scale as in small businesses, corner shops etc, but how the fuck does the owners of Capital like Branson expect his losses to be socialised, whilst his profits are privatised. That does not benefit the man on the street, it doesn't benefit the nation at large, because Capitalism benefits individuals not society.
We had the banking crash, but socialised the debt, we have private rail but socialise the losses, we have universal healthcare but the owners of capital sniff profit and if it goes wrong they will expect the losses to be socialised. What we currently have is Socialism for the owners of capital and the populace meekly accept the status quo and doff their caps to them. And even now, the right of the Labour party accept that because they want power. Power without principle is worthless in my opinion, you have the chance to change the world and instead just pander to those who already have it all.
Call centres, all they resemble are the mills of the 18th century, workers exploited by greedy bosses, why accept that? What is wrong with expecting a fair days pay for a fair days work, not a zero hour contract where you are a slave to the whims of the owner. Unionise, demand better pay, better conditions like the mill workers did. You don't have to go in and control them, you have to give them the opportunity to control their own lives not be at the beck and the call of the owners of capital.
Its hard though, since Thatcher and Reagan we have had getting on 50 years of neo-liberalism, we have seen the breakdown of the post WW2 social consensus and the right wing think tanks and media have skewed debate in their favour until now its meekly accepted that its the only way. Its not the only way, but we need leaders with vision to create a new way of thinking , a new narrative for the UK where everyone has a chance in life, everyone has a home, we have good jobs, people pay fair taxes and those with most pay there share. We need a society where we are judged on how well we treat those with the least not on how well we treat those with the most, we have one chance at this life and under the current system most of us will fail because the few will be the winners. That must be Labours mission and under Starmer I just do not see that happening because he is not one of us.
Corbyn was not a pure Socialist, he is a Social Democrat, there is a difference.A Social Democrat is comfortable with a mixed economy, a Socialist wants a Command economy. A tory lite person in charge would not implement Socialist policies such as control of the means of production because the tories believe in a free market economy and are wedded to it ideologically. Blair was happy to allow the free market to reign free and Starmer will do the same because neither were/are Socialists. Starmer and Blair show with their pro EU stances that they are not Socialists as they are comfortable with the neo-liberal economy of the EU. For the UK to become a Socialist country we have to leave the EU, the red wall, the former Socialist heartlands voted to leave the EU not because those who live in red wall constituencies are racist or anything, but because they have seen the damage that neo-liberalism has caused to their towns and cities. Labour under Starmer does not get this, he is part of the metropolitan elite, he is pro EU, he was the architect of the disastrous EU policy that Labour made under Corbyn which in my opinion cost the party the election and gave the country the biggest laziest, most narcissistic, lying **** in our history the keys to number 10.
I’m guessing you’re posting this from an iPhone or a Samsung smartphone?
Are you seriously suggesting that the driving force behind the Leave vote was a mass block of voters coming to the conclusion that the means of production need to under state control?
Whether you, me or a lot of voters agree with the policy, it is clearly not the reason for the Leave vote.
You have mistaken the dog whistle 'take back control' slogan of right wing opportunists and distorted it through your own prism into a socialist inspired movement.
If you believe Cummings and Johnson to be the architects of a socialist triumph, I don't know what to say.
"Take back control" was not designed to appeal to socialism.
There is genuine (soft) public support for some nationalising (e.g. railways) but your reading of the influence of the Leninist desire to "own the means of production" on the EU vote is way off.
The Leave vote in left behind Northern towns turned towards the modern day heirs of the architects of that destruction not towards Socialism. They were very wrong to do so and were cynically duped by people acting against their interests (In my opinion) but that doesn't change that this is what happened.
Indeed. You only have to look at the class system these days. There’s not really any such thing as Working Class anymore.Name a single 'true socialist' who has led the party to victory?
Truth is, labour is a broad church. It has never been a socialist party in the true sense.
Socialism as a term is so antiquated, it is so 19th Centuary. The whole vocab of the socialists is out dated. 'The Workers' etc means bot all in todays work place. The global economy is very different to the manufacturing base that drove socialism. It is time to reframe the focus and update the terminology. The targets can be the same but the methods need to change. A broad church is required to achieve this.
In the end, maybe. But leaving the EU has been a Socialist ideal for decades and hasn’t been a political issue in just the last four years.Are you seriously suggesting that the driving force behind the Leave vote was a mass block of voters coming to the conclusion that the means of production need to under state control?
Whether you, me or a lot of voters agree with the policy, it is clearly not the reason for the Leave vote.
You have mistaken the dog whistle 'take back control' slogan of right wing opportunists and distorted it through your own prism into a socialist inspired movement.
If you believe Cummings and Johnson to be the architects of a socialist triumph, I don't know what to say.
"Take back control" was not designed to appeal to socialism.
There is genuine (soft) public support for some nationalising (e.g. railways) but your reading of the influence of the Leninist desire to "own the means of production" on the EU vote is way off.
The Leave vote in left behind Northern towns turned towards the modern day heirs of the architects of that destruction not towards Socialism. They were very wrong to do so and were cynically duped by people acting against their interests (In my opinion) but that doesn't change that this is what happened.
Government issued communication device from The Institute of Technololgy?
Absolute and utter fucking bullshit.No, I am suggesting leaving the EU was an outcry against the neo-liberalism of the EU that resulted in people being left behind, only Socialism can redress that balance. That they voted leave should have been a huge wake up call up to the likes of Starmer and all the other pro-EU Blairites, its OK, it works for them, it does not work for Labours traditional northern heartlands. Leave was very much a left wing cause, highjacked by the far right for nefarious reasons and used to stoke up fears against the EU without providing the answers, Labour needs to find the answers, but it wont under Starmer because he is Pro EU and the party has been hijacked by the FBFE lunatic fringe.