Saturday, 8th and Sunday, 9th June 2019

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:12 am

Good morfternoon.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 9:23 am

Interesting

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... abour-goal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour will replace social mobility as a goal with social justice.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 9:24 am

Oh and good morfternoon!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 9:48 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Interesting

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... abour-goal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour will replace social mobility as a goal with social justice.

Yes - I think it's about time it was ditched - I've never been a fan of the concept. I've been struggling to find the words to express why (or to remember the form of words I usually use) but, as a very poor "something to be going along with for now" reason - I think it smacks of a) snobbery, and b) get-rich quick schemes - rather than a well-being thing. Not a good recipe for social cohesion.

Edited - too many "being"s

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:00 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Interesting

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... abour-goal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour will replace social mobility as a goal with social justice.

About bloody time.

This is what we need. Populist policies like renationalizing the railways are fine as a means to getting elected but if you want to succeed in government you need to change the narratives, you need to have broad goals that reflect your socialist values and you need to embed those goals in the public consciousness as something worth striving for.

The Tories use social mobility as a means to suppress standards of living for those at the bottom and to justify inequality. New Labour introduced policies that helped people at the bottom, such as the minimum wage and tax credits, but they failed to counter the social mobility narrative thus enabling the ensuing Coalition to rapidly undo the practical policies Labour had brought in without challenge.

This is much more encouraging from Corbyn, an ambitious gambit to change the political discourse and a practical proposal to form a commission to underwrite it.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:20 am

PorFavor wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Interesting

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... abour-goal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour will replace social mobility as a goal with social justice.
Yes - I think it's about time it was ditched - I've never been a fan of the concept. I've been struggling to find the words to express why (or to remember the form of words I usually use) but, as a very poor "something to be going along with for now" reason - I think it smacks of a) snobbery, and b) get-rich quick schemes - rather than a well-being thing. Not a good recipe for social cohesion.

Edited - too many "being"s

When I think of "social mobility" I think of a pyramid with a few lucky people at the top and the majority of people at the bottom groaning under the weight.

It's the American Dream. We're told it's a great system because anyone can make it. Yet even if social mobility were real and the already wealthy didn't have an inbuilt advantage it would still be a shit system because although anyone may be able to make it to the top, we can't all make it to the top and certainly not all at the same time.

The goal of a socialist is to flatten that pyramid, to reduce inequality so being at the bottom doesn't look very different from being at the top. Everyone deserves a decent quality of life and the day we collectively started to begrudge a temporarily unemployed person on benefits a drink down the pub or a disabled person on ESA a meal out with friends was the day we turned into a really shitty country.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:26 am

Willow904 wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Interesting

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... abour-goal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour will replace social mobility as a goal with social justice.
Yes - I think it's about time it was ditched - I've never been a fan of the concept. I've been struggling to find the words to express why (or to remember the form of words I usually use) but, as a very poor "something to be going along with for now" reason - I think it smacks of a) snobbery, and b) get-rich quick schemes - rather than a well-being thing. Not a good recipe for social cohesion.

Edited - too many "being"s
When I think of "social mobility" I think of a pyramid with a few lucky people at the top and the majority of people at the bottom groaning under the weight.

It's the American Dream. We're told it's a great system because anyone can make it. Yet even if social mobility were real and the already wealthy didn't have an inbuilt advantage it would still be a shit system because although anyone may be able to make it to the top, we can't all make it to the top and certainly not all at the same time.

The goal of a socialist is to flatten that pyramid, to reduce inequality so being at the bottom doesn't look very different from being at the top. Everyone deserves a decent quality of life and the day we collectively started to begrudge a temporarily unemployed person on benefits a drink down the pub or a disabled person on ESA a meal out with friends was the day we turned into a really shitty country.

Thanks. I can give my brain a bit of a rest!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:37 am

The social mobility concept was the love-child of Peter Mandelson and Margaret Thatcher, with Tony Blair as god-parent.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:47 am

Oh I think you were spot on with "get-rich quick schemes".

Our whole society is like a warped version of pyramid selling. Only the people who start them at the top get any money, the rest of us just end up getting ripped off and it's the same with our current tax and spend. We all pay in but increasingly those at the bottom are getting less and less back because those at the top are demanding more and more.

And those with nothing to put in end up on the streets or in jail. This isn't a society or proper government. It's just one giant ponzi scheme and it's running out of new punters to rip off.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 10:49 am

PorFavor wrote:The social mobility concept was the love-child of Peter Mandelson and Margaret Thatcher, with Tony Blair as god-parent.

Its an updated version of "meritocracy".

Both terms turned into silly caricatures by the right.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 11:30 am

Blair adhered to the idea of a basic standard of living that also underpinned the Thatcher and Major eras, though. It may not have been generous under any of them but it was there, keeping them the right side of the line that earmarks a civilised society. The concept that there is a minimum amount someone needs to live on, that it's government's job to ensure everyone has that bare minimum and that the amount needs to go up with the cost of living is an important one and it was fractured by Osborne when he cut the link between benefits and inflation and has subsequently been completely shattered by the malfunction of universal credit and the ideology behind sanctions.

What Cameron and Osborne did during the Coalition wasn't a gentle, natural progression of a continued ethos. It had the speed and brutality of an ideological revolution. While Labour has been sitting on the sidelines talking about the need to reform our neoliberal society, I fear it's already being reformed - into something far, far uglier.

It's going to be a long road back, but the concept of social justice is a great place to start.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 11:35 am

Osborne at the same time blatantly bribed the pensioners, showing beyond doubt that it was never really about "not having enough money".

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:04 pm

I would argue "social justice" is a contested concept and equally capable of being "caricatured" (or even more so).The left is equally capable of easy fit categorisatioms /creating of bogeypeople Such easy fit categorisations are the enemy of sensible and fair policies,,dare I say any concept of social justice that neglects such things for convenience/part of political machination or even worse uses them ie exactly the same tactic bemoaned isn't any better because from the "left".

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:05 pm

Osborne eased off the actual austerity towards the end of the Coalition (as opposed to the state shrinking and redistribution of wealth from poorest to richest) in order to allow the economy to recover enough to be able to win the 2015 general election but it was very tight. Only a short-lived (and suspiciously convenient) price war between the big supermarkets dropping inflation at just the right time allowed them to go into the election saying wages were rising.

Horrible, horrible person. But he just wanted to slash benefits generally, across the board, to raise the cash he needed to splash on Tory voters. The DWP hoopla of conditionality is something else altogether, born of a dark twisted psyche that seeks not only to take all the money for the privileged few but to actually justify it as somehow fair by proving poor people deserve to be poor.

Changing direction economically could prove rather easier than unpicking the cultural damage of these poisonous ideas.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:07 pm

He did that cheered on not just by most of our media, but even certain "Labour" people.

Let's not forget that.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:11 pm

Suspending parliament should not be ruled out, says Dominic Raab

Tory leadership contender says dropping widely criticised idea would weaken UK negotiating position
(Guardian)

No parliament is better than . . .

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... minic-raab

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:45 pm

HindleA wrote:I would argue "social justice" is a contested concept and equally capable of being "caricatured" (or even more so).The left is equally capable of easy fit categorisatioms /creating of bogeypeople Such easy fit categorisations are the enemy of sensible and fair policies,,dare I say any concept of social justice that neglects such things for convenience/part of political machination or even worse uses them ie exactly the same tactic bemoaned isn't any better because from the "left".

As long as your goal is to ensure everyone, regardless of circumstance, has a reasonable standard of living (which includes the odd pint down the pub) and to reduce inequality (ie, flatten that pyramid) and you're willing to be held accountable if you fail against those objective and measurable outcomes, you won't go far wrong.

That's what I'm looking for in a potential government, what I felt I had found in Ed Miliband. A true and unwavering commitment to achieving good outcomes and a willingness to be held accountable (hence the much maligned Ed stone). So often we are told "x" will achieve "y" so we'll do "x" and governments are lauded and supported for doing "x" regardless of whether "y" is ever achieved and you're right, this can be true of the left as well as the right.

But I still feel a counter narrative to the social mobility con is important. It's not that social mobility or meritocracy has been caricatured by the right. It's a fundamentally flawed concept. It's just another way of dividing people into the deserving (privileged) and the undeserving (poor). If no one's poor (either in money or life enrichment) or rich (in wealth or standing) we don't need a system (whether that's birth, race or academic ability) to work out who deserves what. Because we all deserve the same. Not just the same chances but the same outcomes, ie good ones.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 12:48 pm

Hear hear!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 2:15 pm

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... ners-wrong" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Everything you think you know about Leavers and Remainers is wrong
A new study reveals that Remainers care much more about remaining than Leavers do about leaving — and it could have grave consequences for Labour and the Tories.

The take out from this is that there isn't a version of leave that's going to make a majority of Tory supporters happy, let alone Labour ones if the opposition happened to be in charge of Brexit.

Which could make a confirmatory vote on some kind of deal, or even no deal, rather more decisive than generally expected.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 2:41 pm

Although I'm confident that David Cameron had taken all of this into consideration before he made the decision to hold the referendum.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:06 pm

As evidenced here on a regular basis the "left" narrative is equally capable of bile filed easy fit categorisation,stereotype etc ;reliance on creation of bogeypeople and othering especially on a fake basis is not conducive to judicious policy.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:15 pm

HindleA wrote:As evidenced here on a regular basis the "left" narrative is equally capable of bile filed easy fit categorisation,stereotype etc ;reliance on creation of bogeypeople and othering especially on a fake basis is not conducive to judicious policy.

None of us are perfect.

But if one has to choose, it is better to stereotype the rich and powerful rather than the poor and weak.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:20 pm

And I don't view "radical" as in itself necessarily good,you preserve,return tweak what remains that is good IMHO.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:21 pm

I know,making "conversation".

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:30 pm

Far from the rich and powerful that get's slated.Not fitting in/refusal to the "oppressed,hard done to etc when life has been rather good ,perhaps I have differing insight.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:32 pm

Devil's advocaat.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:37 pm

I touched the Daily Mail, earlier ,of course that makes me a right wing bigotted pensioner leaver,if not prior to definitely by contamination.FACT.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:42 pm

Thoughtful stuff. Don't have much to add except thanks for the great posts

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:49 pm

That's me facing expulsion from the realtruepropernofakeshereLabour Party

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:51 pm

I'm all for intolerance of the intolerant,as long as the right intolerance,obviously.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:53 pm

HindleA wrote:I touched the Daily Mail, earlier ,of course that makes me a right wing bigotted pensioner leaver,if not prior to definitely by contamination.FACT.

Did you wash your hands afterwards?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 3:55 pm

HindleA wrote:That's me facing expulsion from the realtruepropernofakeshereLabour Party

"PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON'T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT PEOPLE LIKE ME AS A MEMBER". (Groucho Marx)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 4:01 pm

Chopped my hands off and replaced as per regulations.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 5:09 pm

suzanne moore
@suzanne_moore
As night follows day. ..

Tory leadership hopeful Andrea Leadsom admits smoking cannabis

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 5:12 pm

...and...

James O'Brien
@mrjamesob
·
13m
This tragic Tory trend is going to do more to put kids off drugs than any campaign in history.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 5:16 pm

Maybe the "field of wheat" thing was a cunning diversion after all.......

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 5:47 pm

My MP Thelma just in with

"As a backbencher I have only strayed as far as paracetamol"

Post by **refitman** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:12 pm

I see Toby Young has been his usual offensive self. The brilliant timing of railing against the "persecution" of cis-gendered, the day after the homophobic attack in Camden.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:13 pm

This is just awful.

Justin Edinburgh dies aged 49: Leyton Orient boss and former Tottenham defender passes away

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48568007" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Leyton Orient manager and former Tottenham and Portsmouth defender Justin Edinburgh has died aged 49.

Edinburgh was taken to hospital on Monday after falling "ill unexpectedly" and had been in Madrid for the Champions League final two days before.

Did so much for my club since he took over.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:29 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Maybe the "field of wheat" thing was a cunning diversion after all.......

Actually, I've wondered if what Theresa May's "worst" act is, is a little-known euphemism, used only in Conservative circles, for something very depraved.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:32 pm

@refitman yes widely ridiculed on Twitter

@RoT sorry

@PF hopefully not involving any parts of a dead pig

Post by **refitman** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 7:54 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:@refitman yes widely ridiculed on Twitter

@RoT sorry

@PF hopefully not involving any parts of a dead pig

He's tried to justify himself. It's going as well as you would expect.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:00 pm

refitman wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:@refitman yes widely ridiculed on Twitter

@RoT sorry

@PF hopefully not involving any parts of a dead pig
He's tried to justify himself. It's going as well as you would expect.

Just poured a beer only missing the

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:09 pm

What does the Toad actually mean when he uses the word "woke"?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:33 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:What does the Toad actually mean when he uses the word "woke"?

What did he say, please? I'm not on "Twitter" and I can't find anything via "Google".

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:48 pm

With regard to "woke", I can't say without the context - but I know it's used for "aware of" "consciousness" and the like. I know he likes to pose as being en vogue.

Edited - typo

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:52 pm

I presume regarding this in Spectator?

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/b ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:56 pm

HindleA wrote:I presume regarding this in Spectator?

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/b ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ta, muchly.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 8:59 pm

I wonder what the public reaction might be if Boris is voted in as PM by a tiny minority of that public?

Catherine Philp
@scribblercat
·
Jun 7
Extraordinary. New YouGov poll puts ⁦
@RoryStewartUK
⁩ ahead of ⁦
@BorisJohnson
⁩ as public’s choice for PM out of all the Tory leadership contenders.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 08 Jun, 2019 9:03 pm

This explains it better than I did (especially with regard to Toby Young)! -

Woke
A word currently used to describe "consciousness" and being aware of the truth behind things "the man" doesn't want you to know i.e. classism, racism, and any other social injustices. The term comes from a genuine place but is becoming overused. People mainly use it to sound like deep thinkers when they are really just following a trend. (Urban Dictionary)

Edited to add

PTO