The Labour leadership election - and I get to vote!

Hell yeah!

To be honest, I'm not really in the mood for an election right now, in the same way that when I last contracted the noro virus I didn't fancy visiting a carvery.  I feel uncomfortable, know there is nothing I can do about it and it means I will have to face a lot of shit.

Comparing the Tories to diarrhea?  Always a good start to a blog.

But now I have the opportunity to vote for the future leader of the Labour party.  Didn't see that one coming.  Mainly because I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Labour party.

As well as sounding like a statement from McCarthy era America, it also doesn't make much sense.  How can I vote for the Labour party leader if I'm not a member of the Labour party?  Well, that's because I'm a member of a Trade Union that is affiliated to the Labour party, and as such have the option to vote.

As a Socialist to the left of Labour, I argue that Unions should not be affiliated to the Labour party.  Instead, they should democratise their political funds, and then back indivdual MPs who back the work the Union do.  Most will be from the Labour party, but not all.

However, whilst I argue this is the right position it is not one that has been won within my Union at this time.  As such, if money is going from the Union to the Labour party, I am happy to exercise my right to have a say in this election.  After all, in a tiny way, I'm helping to pay for it!

The leadership debate, coming as it does immediately after the crushing general election defeat of Labour, is centred around the question "what went wrong?"  Unsurprisingly the core of leadership candidates all seem to think that Labour did not appear right wing enough to connect with a core of the electorate who can decide an election.

Needless to say, I don't agree.  The main problem they had is that what they presented just was not inspiring - they didn't seem to offer an alternative at all.  Really, they campaigned to say they would do the same as the Tories, just slightly nicer and slightly better.

Austerity lite, it has been referred to.

But that's just not good enough.  As is often the case, they lost right wing votes to Tories and UKIP, and left wing votes to Greens, SNP and the other big party in this election - Non of the above!

In some areas, such as the North East, I think there are still working class ties to the Labour Party.  Young people voting for the first time still have an understanding from their families as to why you vote against the Tories.  But elsewhere, it is evaporating.

The right wing in the Labour Party are worried by the emergence of the UK Independence Party (UKIP).  Ostensibly a party that campaigns for Britain to withdraw it's membership of the European Union, it is broadly speaking a nasty, populist, hard right, racist organisation.

They have taken votes away from the Tories, that's for certain, but it appears they have also taken votes from Labour.  Most concerning about this is that they appear to have taken young peoples votes from Labour.

Is this because they are racist?  I don't think so, although a majority of the population are taken in by the mainstream lie that immigration is a major problem.  What you can say though, is that this is a section who will consider voting away from the big two mainstream parties.

UKIP may seem unpleasant, and they are, but they at least represented an alternative.  It was the youth vote that meant the Lib Dems won two previous terms in an area of Manchester with a large student population.  Needless to say, as happened nationally, that vote evaporated.

What also happened though, is that it became clear that left wing, anti-austerity politics did have an audience.  In Scotland the Scottish National Party (SNP) wiped the floor with their opponents winning 56 from a possible 59 seats.

If anything, you have to feel sorry for the 3 SNP candidates who didn't win.  I mean, seriously, they must have been rubbish!

The SNP stood on a clear platform against austerity, and they clearly found their audience.  Mind you, there is more to this than meets the eye.

I would love to say this means that if a party stood with the same message across the UK they would also win a landslide, but that's not the case.  In England the biggest player in disseminating political ideas is the media.  The bulk of the media barons who own the newspapers support the Tories.  They control the editorial line of their newspapers, so the only stories that are printed are those that harmonise with that individuals viewpoint.

Of course, that is true throughout the UK, and indeed the world.  However, in Scotland, they recently had a process which meant that anti-austerity politics had a very real platform to break beyond that stranggle hold - The Independance referendum.

It was such a massively significant question being asked of the Scottish people that the vast majority had no choice but to engage.  The 'Yes' campaign lost in the end, only gaining 45%.  However, translate that percentage into mostly just one party standing in a 'first past the post' system election, and you get a landslide.

Great if you're Scottish, although it means that now you are still ruled by Tories from England.  Also, the SNP is not really that radical a party, with no traditional roots in the organised labour movement, so ultimately are unlikely to deliver real change.  But still, way to get your voices heard!

As part of the election campaign I saw a lot of videos online from celebrities such as Steve Coogan and Martin Freeman discussing why they were going to vote Labour.  They went to great pains to show they were being genuine, even in the filming of the ads themselves (showing make up being applied, etc, so you didn't get the idea that you were being fooled by a flashy campaign.  "Of course this is being filmed by a professional crew, and we know you know that").

One thing they, and many others said, was "I trust Labour with the NHS".  All politicians know that the NHS is sacrosanct to the British public, and is a very real concern to them that it is protected.

Many don't necesarily know recent immigrants to this country, so they can more readily believe lies about them.  However, everyone gets sick, so the NHS is not something you play with quite as easily.

One of the leasdership candidates, Andy Burnham, spent the last government as shadow health Secretary.  He has spoken very well on the issue, including against aspects of privitisation brought through by the Tories.  However, when Labour were in power he was involved in the awarding of the very first PFI contract.  He was there when Labour started the rot.

So do I trust Labour with the NHS?  No.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly trust them a hell of a lot more than the Tories.  But then that's a bit like needing a child minder last minute and having to chose between a drunk you found in the gutter outside LIDL, or Freddy Kreuger.

And that also highlights another problem - if I do vote in the leadership contest, who would I vote for?

All the candidates seem so similar, determind to drag Labour further to the right.  That is, until Jeremy Corbyn announced his intention to stand.

Jeremy Corbyn

There are a number of good MPs in the Labour party, but it's fair to say that no one is better than Jeremy Corbyn.  He's been an MP since 1983 and has consistently been right on everything.

No, really.  He was campaigning against Saddam Hussein before anyone in the West cared about him, but then was a passionate advocate against the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  He knew that Saddam was bad, and that the UK should not back him, but he wasn't suckered in to thinking that the invasion would bring anything than what it has - death, turmoil and terror.

So I'm not intending on joining the Labour party anytime soon, but as a member of a Trade Union that does give funding to the Labour I know who I will be voting for!

Student life, then and now

This week I had an article published online with Now Then Magazine, an arts, culture and politics magazine in Manchester.  In this article I look at the impact of the student population returning to the city, and reflect on how my experience coming to the city in 2001 would compare to today.  Enjoy!

http://nowthenmagazine.com/manchester/issue-13/student-life/

What exactly is militant Liberalism?

The militants lair

Comedian Andrew Lawrence caused something of a minor shit-storm in comedy circles last week by posting on Facebook criticism of comedians appearing on BBC programs such as Mock the Week.  The general gist was that there are a lot of comedians making cheap jokes about UKIP, and he blames a liberal elite within the corporation, and the laziness of comics.

What could have been a contribution to a debate, however incorrect, was somewhat mired with statements bemoaning

"...moronic, liberal back-slapping on panel shows like Mock The Week where aging, balding, fat men, ethnic comedians and women-posing-as-comedians, sit congratulating themselves on how enlightened they are about the fact that UKIP are ridiculous and pathetic."

I think the part that particularly annoyed many was the concept of "women-posing-as-comedians."  It feels almost like he is imagining a producer with a need to fill quotas desperately searching for any woman he can find.  Eventually the char lady has powder applied and, bewildered and blinking under the studio lights, is sat next to Hugh Dennis and told not to break anything.

Contained within the entire statement are a number of breath-taking examples of foetid nonsense.  However, I don't intend on writing specifically in response to Andrew Lawrence, as plenty have already taken up that challenge.

What I will do though is pick up on one particular gem from it all.  He accuses the BBC of "deeply ingrained militant Liberal politics."

What exactly are militant Liberal politics?

The campaign against library closures steps up a notch

For a start I can't imagine an armed struggle being waged by a political faction in the name of liberalism.

A sniper assassinating government advisers on drug policies in a bid to further the aim of de-criminalising marajuana; "Outrage" kidnapping The Queen and forcing her to marry a Lesbian; a "No to page 3" activist pretending to go in for a topless photo shoot only to reveal under her blouse a bomb vest, taking out half of Fleet St.

Doesn't seem too likely does it?

Complaints about the BBC being too Liberal are not uncommon.  We hear it all the time from the likes of the Sun and other right-wing newspapers.  But then, complaining about bias of the corporation against a political position is not just the reserve of the right.

At the height of the anti-war movement against the invasion of Iraq we were always amazed at how you could get so little coverage of demonstrations, despite 10,000's people taking to the streets.  Thousands marching on any subject should surely be newsworthy?

When Israel stepped up it's murderous campaign against Palestinians, activists were again complaining about a pro-Israel bias.  But at the same time Zionists and other supporters of Israel were complaining that it instead had a pro-Palestinian bias!

What that suggests is that while it may not be perfect, and will always make mistakes, maybe the BBC is pretty unbiased after all.

Anyway, the suggestion that UKIP could complain about bias against them from the BBC is ridiculous.  Can anyone remember an episode of Question Time that didn't feature one of their members on the panel?  Whenever immigration is mentioned in any capacity in the news, there always appears to be a UKIP spokesperson on hand.

There is every possibility you may be reading that last bit of criticism of UKIP thinking "but you would say that, you're a Liberal"  To which I would say "get stuffed, I'm not a Liberal!  I'm a Socialist!!"

You can't argue with facts

A liberal wants to gently tweak the already existing Status Quo, where-as I want to change the entire system because it's the system that's at fault.  Agree with me or not but you would have to admit, that's militant!

A few comedians on Mock the Week suggesting Nigel Farage looks like a muppet?  No, that's not militant.  I understand in that context why supporters of right wing parties might complain about their treatment.

I mean, thank God no-one ever mentions Ed Miliband's appearance... oh, wait...

My, my, isn't everything sh*t?

Ever wondered what a shaved Muppet would look like?

Isn't life just grand at the moment?

The Scottish population voted no in the referendum, Ebola has taken countless lives, IS have chopped off a charity workers head and UKIP have their first MP.  Oh, and to top it all off I've had a cold.  Who doesn't love the feeling of waking each morning like a fairy has sand-papered the back of your throat and stuffed your sinuses with wax?

Oh no, wait... that feeling is horrible!  This fever must be going to my head.

International news and politics can seem troublesome at the best of times but gosh, doesn't it all just feel particularly crappy right now?  I had very much nailed my colours to the mast in favour of a Yes vote in the Scottish referendum for a start (as detailed in this POST).

Unfortunately, I had also predicted that the No campaign would win.  Why?  Because despite the campaign being utterly negative, it was the easier thing to do.  The mass of people are not arseholes on purpose, they just go for what they see as the most balanced option.

People want to be balanced.  They want to be fair.  They want to exist in the middle ground, and hate anything they consider to be "extremism".  Unfortunately the centre ground is not a nice place, and the agenda set is not of our making as much as we think it is.

The morning after the referendum result I put on breakfast television to see Nigel Farage.  That's enough to ruin anyone's Corn Flakes.  He was saying, and has been joined by quite a chorus of right wingers since, that now we had the debate around Scottish independence, it was now time for the debate around English independence.

Yes Scotland, you had forgotten about UKIP hadn't you?  They hadn't been mentioned for a few weeks in the hope it would slip your memory that THIS is what being in the Union entails, but tough, they do exist!

Urgh...

What's worse, with the help of the media bosses, they are dragging the centre ground in their direction.  Immigration really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things for the financial fortunes of this country and it's population, but people think it does, and that's enough.

The Labour party should of course be arguing against UKIP's lies, but the truth is that it's the minority who think they sit in the centre that decide elections.  It's not the richest voters or the poorest voters that ultimately effect elections (although the richest always come out on top in this system anyway).  It's the swing voters.  In America it was Ohio, in Britain Tony Blair dubbed this voter "Lexus Man".

Unfortunately, Lexus Man is a dick.

Sure, he's had to tighten his belt as economic pressures have taken hold.  But where-as the poorest are having their benefits cut, being robbed through the bedroom tax, and having to rely on food banks, Lexus man is having to reconsider his holiday plans this year.

The poorest know the Tories are bastards, but Lexus Man swallows everything he reads in the paper and thinks immigrants are to blame.  Added to that he is genuinely scared about Islamic "extremism", so this only furthers his distrust of "others".

Unfortunately, in the current system, Labour know they have to rely on his vote.  That's why they talk tough on immigration.

UKIP will take Labour votes, but no-where near as many as people think.  In the Middleton and Heywood by-election the UKIP vote increased by 36%, placing them second and within just 600+ votes of Labour, who won.  However, the Labour vote actually went up by 1%.

The Tories votes went down by 15%, and the Lib Dems 18%.  This is where the UKIP vote came from.  However, Labour are hoping to win over Lib Dem voters in the next general election.  If a large portion of that vote goes to UKIP, they might well struggle.

But, and this is very important, whenever the main political parties try to "out-UKIP" UKIP, it back-fires.  You cannot simply steal their clothing.  By arguing their agenda, you push their agenda, and it is only UKIP who ultimately win.

Not a real worker, or British - an Irish actor.  Oops.

Of course there will be working class voters who will vote UKIP.  But the most significant part of the traditional Labour vote is being torn apart by the Tories austerity measures.  Don't forget, UKIP are basically the party that look at the Tories and think that they are "too soft"!  Just five minutes reading up on their plans for the NHS is enough to give even the most hardy horror movie fan the shivers.

If Labour want to succeed perhaps they could try displaying principles.  The kind of principles that I know the mass bulk of their membership have.  Perhaps if they argue against the bigoted nonsense of UKIP they can drag the agenda back leftwards, towards the centre again.  Perhaps then Lexus Man might realise that UKIP are just a bunch of "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists".

After all, Lexus Man hates extremism, doesn't he?