Yes, I said about 5 pages ago they were not socialists , but they were Labour. Without the Labour support mechanisms, propganda machine ( remember Campbell) ,Labour funding ( unions) and Labour voters your New Labour would simply never have existed. It was a product of Labour, utilised to get power.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
We were discussing the theoretical situation in an Automated Society remember? not the current situation.
Thank you confirming that it was like Brexit a coup that hijacked the power of the Labour Party, just as the Brexit lobby are going to do with the Tories.
History repeating itself, but much, much worse.
Another Right wing plot successfully carried out is what History will record.
automation is to profit the rich who can invest. Do you expect they would pay the poor for doing nothing?
Neither I or Wikipedia claim there was a party called New Labour, there wasn't. That's why Tony Blair was a member of the Labour Party.
But he was never a Labour Prime Minister, he just used the Labour party as a vehicle to campaign for and become a New Labour Prime Minister. For that reason and as I've pointed out already, Wikipedia carefully avoids saying he was a Labour Prime Minister, because he never was, pursuing policies at odds with the usual Labour aims as he did.
A Prime Minister does not have to have a party, just as Emmanuel Macron in France didn't have to have a party to stand for and become French President. These posts can be held by individuals, just as anyone can stand as an independent MP and act individually. Macron created a party later to ensure he got enough support, Blair didn't bother since he already had enough popular support to get away with misusing the Labour party for his ends.
That may have fooled you into believing he was truly Labour, but many of us were never fooled. It took the Iraq WMD saga for the rest of the population to realise his true dishonest nature.
.
What an amazing explanation. Probably on a par with turning water into wine albeit not as useful. Or in your case wine into water?
Last edited:
I would have thought the opposite, he was the best Labour PM in my lifetime.
For once, Labour leaning taxpayers could vote for someone who would not tax them to become unemployed.
I still could not believe how easy it was for Momentum to take over the labour party.
Ok.lets assume the £90billion or even £50billion is correct....there is no way that TM is going to get that through our parliament,even £10billion is going to have Redwood and Rees-Mug throwing their toys out of the pram.
So what happens then?
If by Art50 we have to leave,if we crash out,what is going to be the legal and trade situation between the UK and EU. Not just talking about tariffs,what about the aviation'open skies' agreement,what about standards,what about service trade.
Dont want to sound too much like the grim reaper but the body language from Davis suggests he doesn't care. The lack of urgency suggests to me that the government and the EU have some scenario that suggests to the Brexiters that we are leaving but we are not really leaving,but what that conjuring trick will look like I just dont know.
We have a prime minister who never really wanted to Leave,just wanted the job and the EU dont want us to Leave,they need our money. Its very difficult to negotiate a Leave deal that neither side really wants.
The exit bill could be the start of the Remain (in style,not name) to stop the direction of Brexit.
KudosDave
So what happens then?
If by Art50 we have to leave,if we crash out,what is going to be the legal and trade situation between the UK and EU. Not just talking about tariffs,what about the aviation'open skies' agreement,what about standards,what about service trade.
Dont want to sound too much like the grim reaper but the body language from Davis suggests he doesn't care. The lack of urgency suggests to me that the government and the EU have some scenario that suggests to the Brexiters that we are leaving but we are not really leaving,but what that conjuring trick will look like I just dont know.
We have a prime minister who never really wanted to Leave,just wanted the job and the EU dont want us to Leave,they need our money. Its very difficult to negotiate a Leave deal that neither side really wants.
The exit bill could be the start of the Remain (in style,not name) to stop the direction of Brexit.
KudosDave
Momentum is the labour party of Keir Hardy, they didn't have to take it over since it was already their heritage, the trade union based party that Hardy founded in 1900.
It was never the property of Blair's New Labour, it was he who took it over for his own ends to create New Labour.
.
I think both sides will settle for £35 billions plus 3 years at £10 billions in the transition period, totalling £65 billions.
We want in return a deep deal similar to EFTA. Cash is king, we'll get there.
Both sides have to put up a fight to justify their salary.
In the scheme of things, it's chicken feed.
Last edited:
No argument with you there, but you do seem to have rather more shades of grey to distinguish between right and wrong, or even left or right than some of us on here.
They actually believe they are doing that already to keep the peace
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
So you are now saying Blair was a product of the right wing propoganda machine? Even though his predecessor ( Think it was Smith but don't quote me) was saying similar things...ie Labour needed to move towards centre to get power...Blair was a product of Labour. You have spouted some daft stuff OG but claiming Blair was somehow the product of Tories is the biggest load if BS yet..
Blair got all the traditional labour supporters, most of the floating and some of the tory...his first victory was a massive majority...( I think around 160)...Amazing how all these folk now claim they didn't support him..
Blair started the con the public...helped by Labour..
Last edited:
Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, PC, FRS, FRIC was a British stateswoman who was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979 to 1990 and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1975 to 1990. Wikipedia
It seems Wikipedia make same claim for Thatcher..by your argument she wasn't a Tory Priminister...
Answer this Flecc. Would Blair have got into no 10 without the Labour party..(Probably yes, if he,d been a plumber ir burgler)
Its the daftest argument on entire thread. Blair was obviously Labour.. ( Or perhaps he was a Tory as OG suggests)
Its simply a futile attempt at rewriting history in order to keep Labour's record clean. In reality MP,s from that side of house ( normally the opposition) are just as self serving as the rest..As Blair, Campbell, Brown proved only too well.
Last edited:
Yes, but I knew what I was saying!
As for the investors abusing the public, that's a bit rich and just a little disjointed. There again if you really think that you were so wrong in not understanding Human Greed, to then somehow link that with 'slave labour' in the Far East. Why did the Germans, amongst others, pile in to China, meanwhile we were left behind albeit we did take in many of the displaced Europeans to help run our under pressure businesses. In some ways, many ways, the Industrial revolution is well over and that surely is a good thing, for the workers? Pity your Think Tank didn't come up with some answers and they will surely be needed in the near future.
His think tank were missing some essential equipment... Bet they were lovely meetings !!! Think tank..would have been 4 folk sat around a table having disjointed arguments, all letting off self esteem...sounds familiar..
But when viewed correctly through fullness of information, not so much shades of grey as black and white. Do you really think Blair's New Labour administration was remotely like Keir Hardy's trade union based Labour one? James Callaghan's was much nearer the mark and radically different from Blair's New Labour.
.