[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


 No.481737

Sunak came out and declared they're on for July 4th. Corbyn's now running as an independent. Andrew Feinstein is running against Starmer, and maybe he'll knock him out of his seat - who knows?

Are you excited, /leftypol/?
>>

 No.481739

Corbyn's a joke at this point, I'm more interest in Galloway's workers' party.
>>

 No.481741

>>481739
I don't think Galloway's gonna run anyone against Corbyn in Islington North.
>>

 No.481744

>>481737
starmer might be a sock puppet for tony blair
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/05/tony-blair-and-his-associates-are-waiting-in-the-wings-to-seize-back-power-in-the-uk.html

>>481739
>Corbyn's a joke at this point
Corbin stuck to his Palestine solidarity position during the massive zionist smear campaign, and now that the Zionreich did a genocide, he's been vindicated. So he might do better than expected.

>Galloway's workers' party.

Galloway isn't necessarily competing against Corbyn.

The UK's electoral system produces a binary polarization pattern. So far it's been
neo-liberal economics with liberal social values
and
neo-liberal economics with conservative social values

Corbin and Galloway could both replicate this pattern and both do soc-dem economics with liberal social values and conservative social values respectively.
>>

 No.481746

How fitting they're doing it on Treason Day.
Labour will be rigged to sweep. Who the fuck wants the Conservatives except the most soulless monsters?
>>

 No.481747

The left showpieces won't amount to much. I figure Corbyn would win because he sat in that seat forever, but he's just going to warm the seat and collect his paycheck.
>>

 No.481755

>>481744
>Corbin and Galloway could both replicate this pattern and both do soc-dem economics with liberal social values and conservative social values respectively.
Based
>>

 No.481756

>>481744
>Blair is also far from a neutral voice on the issue of selling NHS health data. TBI’s principal donor is Larry Ellison, the world’s fourth-richest man and owner of the Silicon Valley giant Oracle which aspires to become the world’s most important online medical data company using its cloud technology. In 2022, Oracle bought the US electronic health records giant Cerner last year for $28 billion. The company’s ultimate goal is to build a united national health database amalgamating thousands of separate hospital databases.

Hoo boy…
>>

 No.481757

>>481746
It's looking more like Labour's victory will be milquetoast. Didn't the Greens gain a bunch recently? Labour will most likely beat the Tories, but might still not do that well, Starmer has really shot them in the foot.
>>

 No.481804

>>481757
I don't think you quite understand how utterly disgusting the past two Tory Prime Ministers have been. Not popularly elected, pushed horrifically unpopular agenda items because they had a free hand and knew Britbongs were mentally broken, and the guy they wanted was a hardline eugenist Trump parody from Eton.
>>

 No.481811

>>481804
I know, but Labour could still see mid results. Starmer's a piece of shit and everybody knows it.
>>

 No.481815

>>481811
Doesn't matter. Normal pieces of shit are valued more than extremely disgusting pieces of shit, and "normalshit" seems to be the political brand of the 2020s.
>>

 No.481843

>suspend own party member for bullshit reasons
>launch an investigation
>keep saying the investigation is ongoing 5 months after it concludes
>>

 No.481844

>>481815
He's not normal, he's a racist Dalek with a sinus infection.
>>

 No.481846

File: 1717071765960.png ( 89.86 KB , 1000x1239 , starminate.png )

>>481844
>he's a racist Dalek
lel, that is so true
>>

 No.481847

>>

 No.481873

>>

 No.481900

>>

 No.481933

Owen Jones on last night's debates.
>>

 No.481991

Early on in this debate - it's difficult to believe that "you're too scared to push the nuke button" isn't a planted argument.
>>

 No.481992

>>481991
>a planted argument.
Yeah definitely planted. These are not skilled debaters if they can be lead on by a poisoned premises. Any skilled debaters would have replied
<vote for me, unlike these morons i'm not going to get everybody killed in a nuclear war.
>>

 No.482180

Voting Labour. Simple as.
>>

 No.482181

Is it wrong to vote for whoever gets my dick hard?
>>

 No.482182

>>482181
And who is that?
>>

 No.482191

>>482180
Wasted vote.
>>

 No.482192

>>482182
George Galloway.
>>

 No.482195

>>482191
This. Why even bother making the effort to go to the polling station if you're just going to vote Labour?
>>

 No.482257

Workers Party of Britain Manifesto Launch with George Galloway
>>

 No.482289

>>

 No.482297

>>482195
Because I don’t want the Tories or Reform to win
>>

 No.482298

>>482297
What about the pro-Israel politicians in the Labor Party?
>>

 No.482299

>>482297
Luckily the outcome of this election was decided in a Masonic lodge several months ago. Your vote isn't going to change anything :)
>>

 No.482301

>>482298
>What about the pro-Israel politicians
You mean the Starminator ?
Yeah that one's a zionist sympathizer too.
>>

 No.482387

I heard Feinstein may have more campaigners in Starmer's district than Starmer does.
>>

 No.482391

File: 1719219882692.jpg ( 39.48 KB , 1200x1200 , thinks you think.jpg )

https://twitter.com/kennardmatt/status/1803705328124547222
"Jeremy Corbyn says during a meeting with the Parliamentary Labour Party Committee he was confronted and asked to give assurances that as Labour leader - and potentially prime minister - he would automatically support any military action Israel undertakes"
>>

 No.482394

>>482391
>he was confronted and asked to give assurances that as Labour leader - and potentially prime minister - he would automatically support any military action Israel undertakes"
They basically asked him whether he would commit high treason, by handing over military command to another country.
>>

 No.482556

>>

 No.482564

>>482556
So what the neo-liberal anti-democracy infiltrators ended taking over is now an empty husk ?

Can this be turned into a general strategy that defeats neo-lib take-overs ?

The neo-libs are power-brokers, they infiltrate organizations and capture important positions in order to sell-out the functions of their position to the highest bidder. So if the democratic people periodically dump the old org, and regroup in a new org, the neo-lib infiltration process will get interrupted and they will have to begin from scratch. By making democratic organization a moving target, will it become less vulnerable ?
>>

 No.482567

>>482564
>So what the neo-liberal anti-democracy infiltrators ended taking over is now an empty husk ?
Not quite, but let's hope it gets there.
>The neo-libs are power-brokers, they infiltrate organizations and capture important positions in order to sell-out the functions of their position to the highest bidder. So if the democratic people periodically dump the old org, and regroup in a new org, the neo-lib infiltration process will get interrupted and they will have to begin from scratch. By making democratic organization a moving target, will it become less vulnerable ?
In a sense, yes.
>>

 No.482576

3 days
>>

 No.482586

>>482576
W-what happens in 3 days?
>>

 No.482594

I will be voting for my town's independent candidate
>>

 No.482595

>>482586
You know what's happening.

>>482594
Which flavour of independent? Vaccine schizo, old bloke kicked out of the Tory party for racism or local muslim leader running on freeing palestine and the ummah?
>>

 No.482621

Starmer's hotly competing for worst sitting PM before he's even been elected. Definite prime minister material.
>>

 No.482624

>>482595
None of those, he's mostly just pledging to put more money into local infrastructure and also to put half of his paycheck into it, which I think is nice. I wouldn't put him anywhere on the left/right spectrum
>>

 No.482627

>Read Bunkerchan and Greenandpleasant
>Everyone just seething at Starmer being completely in line with the general public on trans issues.

Holy shit what is it with the British left and caring far more about Identity fetish AGP Trans shit over actual leftist policy and politics?
>>482594
Torn between CPB or Workers Party. CPB have the better platform, but Workers Party are more likely to make gains across British politics.
>>

 No.482628

>>482627
Officer, it is no longer Bunkerchan but Leftychan.net and Leftypol.org..
>>

 No.482630

>>482624
>put half of his paycheck into it, which I think is nice
That's good of him. He might actually give a shit then. If you vote for him at least he stands a better chance of getting his deposit back even if he doesn't win.

>>482627
You're lucky to have both CPB and Worker's Party standing in your constituency.
>>

 No.482636

>>482624
>actual leftists take the reactionary position when it's popular
yeah okay
>>

 No.482655

>>482636
The media is owned by billionaires and corporations, leftists should always be doing the opposite of what the media says.
>>

 No.482664

TODAY
>>

 No.482665

>>482655
>>482636
Ok, first off, I've gotta stop both of you.

First off, what exactly is the "reactionary position" >>482636 was referring to?
I'm trying to figure how any of the premises in this back-and-forth even make sense to begin with.
>>

 No.482667

>>482665
>I'm trying to figure how any of the premises in this back-and-forth even make sense to begin with.
I don't know it's got nothing to do with me. I just wanted to interject and remind you that the media is controlled by your enemies. You want to eat the rich but all you do is eat their propaganda
>israel war
>ukraine war
>covid
>global warming
>inflation
>banker bailouts
>iraq war
>afganistan war
>….
What if they lied about all of it. For profit. Because the corporate media is owned by corporations. Crazy idea I know.
>>

 No.482677

Galloway's lost Rochdale.
>>

 No.482678

>>482667
What if they lied about lungs? What if air doesn't exist?
What if up is down? What if clean is dirty? What if lead is nutritious?

Inane. Absolutely inane. And what in the fuck did either of those responses have to do with >>482624?
This is what I asked. Are you capable of answering a question?
>>

 No.482679

>>482677
It's so fucking over
>>

 No.482680

>>482679
I fuckin hate it
>>

 No.482681

Corbyn's won in Islington North
>>

 No.482710

>>482677
Lefties all celebrating it because he didn't want to run the Workers Party as the LGBT lobby party. The British "left" are so fucking shit it's unreal. Unironically the most "pozzed" political group on earth after VBNMW Democrats.
>>

 No.482711

>>482710
I think SPD is worse as an outsider mutt looking in
>>

 No.482713

>>482677
How did he lose? He seemed quite popular there.
>>

 No.482714

>>482713
You suspect foul play ?
>>

 No.482715

>>482713
Labour mounted a more effective campaign and he was a mediocre MP for the month or two
he had the job.
>>

 No.482722

>>482710
I haven't seen any lefties celebrating it.
>>

 No.482723

>>482715
Mediocre how?
If I had to bet, I'd guess he was disadvantaged by how soon the election was after his initial election, particularly since the Workers' Party had only just been established, and much of the energy had gone into his initial win. I'm curious what he could possibly have done to alienate his base in that area in only 2 months, though.
>>

 No.482728

File: 1720356722826.png ( 570.61 KB , 533x799 , ClipboardImage.png )

2029
>>

 No.482730

>>482728
Unlikely.
>>

 No.482731

What would be a reason not to do accelerationist voting?
>>

 No.482776

>>481746
>Labour will be rigged to sweep. Who the fuck wants the Conservatives except the most soulless monsters?
The last time you had a Labour government they lied about WMDs to start an illegal war which killed 1.000.000 Iraqis. If they pick a fight with Russia this time there is no way you won't have a draft. Think of it like CoD but with no respawns. But hey, at least the billionaires who own Reddit and The Guardian won't call you a "soulless monster" for voting against their interests, that's the most important thing.
>>

 No.482778

>>482776
>If they pick a fight with Russia this time there is no way you won't have a draft. Think of it like CoD but with no respawns.
Hopefully Labour stays true to their pledge for greater gender equality and drafts women into the army too. But personally I'm not too worried about the draft because I will be made exempt due to my hidden disability.
>>

 No.482779

>>482776
>If they pick a fight with Russia this time there is no way you won't have a draft.
With what would the UK pick a fight with Russia ? Decades of Neo-liberalism have eroded the UK's industrial might to the point where it can't even replace the weapons they chucked into Ukraine.

The Starmer government doesn't have popular democratic support, his government evaporates if he tries to draft people for a war.
>>

 No.482782

>>482779
>With what would the UK pick a fight with Russia ?
I'm sure your cousins across the pond will lend you some equipment **at interest*.

>Decades of Neo-liberalism have eroded the UK's industrial might to the point where it can't even replace the weapons they chucked into Ukraine.

You don't have industry because you let the trade unions run wild in the 70s and 80s and then jacked energy prices through the roof because of your global warming panic. You (with the help of KGB agitators) basically burned down your own industrial capacity in the hopes of provoking a soviet style revolution but then you got Thatcher instead.

>The Starmer government doesn't have popular democratic support, his government evaporates if he tries to draft people for a war.

It doesn't really matter because once war is declared nobody will go back on it.
>>

 No.482787

>>482782
The US also failed to match Russian industrial out-put in war materials. So…

The fact is that the bourgeois in the UK chose to divest from the industrial sector and as a result they no longuer can generate imperial hard-power. You can't blame labor unions or the KGB for the things that the capitalist in UK did.

In general, not just for UK conditions, energy prices would be really low if there had been sufficient investment into nuclear power. That's another thing the neo-liberals fucked up, they could have kept the energy sector in public hands, where it would have been possible to invest into nuclear. Or they could have worked out a way for private investment into nuclear, but they didn't do that either.

I don't think the neocons would be capable of manufacturing a war between the UK and Russia. The Russians don't want that, and the UK population will not comply.
>>

 No.482802

>>

 No.482803

>>482776
>The last time you had a Labour government they lied about WMDs to start an illegal war which killed 1.000.000 Iraqis.
You say this like the Tories aren't also pro-war. They voted in favor of invasion by an even higher margin than Labour, the Lib Dems were the biggest party to vote overwhelmingly against it. Blair was Labour's turn towards Thatcherism, if anything the mistake is thinking that the conservatives and Labour are materially different in any way. Although maybe Starmer will be able to take the country to new lows - I could believe that.

>>482782
>You don't have industry because you let the trade unions run wild in the 70s and 80s and then jacked energy prices through the roof because of your global warming panic.
Pants-on-head retarded take. The UK has been neolib for 40+ years now. Unions aren't the problem, trying to undercut unions through aggressive "outsourcing" is, which is why the 4 decades of union-busting and financialization in the US wrecked the industrial sector here, too. It wasn't le ebil commies who scrapped our industries for parts, sold off our infrastructure, destroyed our public services while continuing to spend insane amounts on foreign wars, etc., but perhaps they wish they'd thought of it, because neoliberalism has done infinitely more damage to the stability of capitalism than trade unionism or Keynesianism ever could.
>>

 No.482813

>>482787
>The US also failed to match Russian industrial out-put in war materials. So…
Ukraine is not lacking equipment they are lacking men. The average age on the Ukrainian front is 40-something now. All the young men has been slaughtered. If they don't accept Putin's peace terms then they will need fresh bodies to throw into the meatgrinder. That's why Zelenski is desperate to pull NATO into the war.

>The fact is that the bourgeois in the UK chose to divest from the industrial sector

No they were ""forced"" to divest because constant trade union agitation in the 60s, 70s and 80s made it completely unprofitable to run any kind of factory in the UK. And now energy prices are so high they can't come back even if they wanted to. You tried to force a socialist revolution and it failed and this is the result. You did this not the "capitalists".

>energy prices would be really low if there had been sufficient investment into nuclear power.

Pretty sure that shit if your fault too with all your global warming bullshit. Remind me was it Johnson or Corbyn who wanted to shut down all the nuclear reactors.

>neo-liberals fucked up

Pretty sure Thatcher was pro-nuclear. You've only got Blair and New Labour to blame at this point.

>>482803
>You say this like the Tories aren't also pro-war.
Please tell me which wars the Tories have started since …. *check's notes* … 1982.

>Blair was Labour's turn towards Thatcherism

Yes I know everyone you don't like is a secret Tory. That's definitely how it works. It's funny how similar this is to talking to a nazi who thinks everyone is either a jew or a jew puppet.

>The UK has been neolib for 40+ years now.

Whatever you think "neolib" means your industry started collapsing 50-60 years ago so clearly Thatcher wasn't the problem. Thatcher was just a symptom of the problem your trade unions caused in a dim witted attempt to destabilize the British economy, force a soviet style takeover with Michael Foot, Ken Livingston and Jeremy Crobyn at the head and take the UK out of the cold war (which is what the KGB infiltrators ultimately wanted). But it didn't work, you're like toddlers who destroyed his own toys in anticipation of getting better ones for xmas but now you have nothing and it's all santa's fault.
>>

 No.482814

>>482813
>""forced""
How do I do bold in your fake gay vichan clone.
>No they were forced to divest because constant trade union agitation in the 60s, 70s and 80s made it completely unprofitable to run any kind of factory in the UK.
>>

 No.482816

>>482813
You are correct about the huge human losses caused by the neocon proxy-war in Ukraine. However you are wrong to downplay the industrial production weakness of the west, it's so blatantly obvious that even with ideological blinders on max, it can no longer be denied.
You are correct that the best course of action is to make peace with Russia. However you are wrong that the alternative would be a NATO escalation, the alternative to seeking peace will be the Ukrainian state collapsing, and the Russian victors dictating what happens then.

You are trying to scapegoat the trade unions, the socialists, and so on. But it is a capitalist economy and the capitalists are the one's that decide where the surplus of society gets invested. Nobody but them can be responsible. The capitalists decided to de-industrialize the west to chase after low-wages in the periphery. The result of that is that the west is now de-industrialized and it's no longer possible to maintain the imperial system. The capitalist chose short term profits over long term sustainability of their system. They have nobody to blame but them selves.

The high energy prices were caused by neo-liberal economic doctrine, they could have chosen to have a public energy sector that invested into nuclear power. The cost of energy would now be to cheap to meter. I suppose that you could also blame the investors for failing to invest in nuclear power, there was nothing stopping them from doing that after-all.

BTW some of the rise in energy cost is price-hiking. They could hand over controle over the energy sector to socialists, energy costs would go down. All the industrial socialist states managed to have very cheap energy after-all.

It sounds like you are accusing me personally of having caused global warning. That's obviously nonsense.

>Pretty sure Thatcher was pro-nuclear. You've only got Blair and New Labour to blame at this point.

The fact is that investment into nuclear power plummeted during the time the neo-liberals controlled economic doctrine. Almost everywhere not just in the UK. There is a systemic problem with neo-liberalism that prevents it from making rational choices. They didn't just fuck up the energy sector, you know.

Unique IPs: 37

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome