Rakosi posted:

Shy Tories wouldn't be a thing if people could interact with them as if they were living breathing people with thoughts and ideas.

Ultragonk posted:

Abolishing statutory maternity pay? Wouldn't that suggest the Tories hate families? Wasn't that a thing that UKIP wanted to do?

quote:

In so far as machinery dispenses with muscular power, it becomes a means of employing labourers of slight muscular strength, and those whose bodily development is incomplete, but whose limbs are all the more supple. The labour of women and children was, therefore, the first thing sought for by capitalists who used machinery. That mighty substitute for labour and labourers was forthwith changed into a means for increasing the number of wage-labourers by enrolling, under the direct sway of capital, every member of the workman’s family, without distinction of age or sex. Compulsory work for the capitalist usurped the place, not only of the children’s play, but also of free labour at home within moderate limits for the support of the family. [38]

The value of labour-power was determined, not only by the labour-time necessary to maintain the individual adult labourer, but also by that necessary to maintain his family. Machinery, by throwing every member of that family on to the labour-market, spreads the value of the man’s labour-power over his whole family. It thus depreciates his labour-power. To purchase the labour-power of a family of four workers may, perhaps, cost more than it formerly did to purchase the labour-power of the head of the family, but, in return, four days’ labour takes the place of one, and their price falls in proportion to the excess of the surplus-labour of four over the surplus-labour of one. In order that the family may live, four people must now, not only labour, but expend surplus-labour for the capitalist. Thus we see, that machinery, while augmenting the human material that forms the principal object of capital’s exploiting power, [39] at the same time raises the degree of exploitation.

quote:

“The numerical increase of labourers has been great, through the growing substitution of female for male, and above all, of childish for adult labour. Three girls of 13, at wages of from 6 shillings to 8 shillings a week, have replaced the one man of mature age, of wages varying from 18 shillings to 45 shillings.” (Th. de Quincey: “The Logic of Political Econ.,” London, 1844. Note to p. 147.) Since certain family functions, such as nursing and suckling children, cannot be entirely suppressed, the mothers confiscated by capital, must try substitutes of some sort. Domestic work, such as sewing and mending, must be replaced by the purchase of ready-made articles. Hence, the diminished expenditure of labour in the house is accompanied by an increased expenditure of money. The cost of keeping the family increases, and balances the greater income. In addition to this, economy and judgment in the consumption and preparation of the means of subsistence becomes impossible. Abundant material relating to these facts, which are concealed by official Political Economy, is to be found in the Reports of the Inspectors of Factories, of the Children’s Employment Commission, and more especially in the Reports on Public Health.

quote:

The Daily Telegraph is reporting that the re-drawing of constituency boundaries "to lock Labour out of power for decades" is a priority for the new Conservative government.

The paper says senior Tories see this as "unfinished business" because the Lib Dems blocked such changes during the last parliament.

Rakosi posted:

It's nothing at all about being sympathetic, it's about strategising to appeal to left-leaning Tories. Sympathy is a luxury for the left at this point.

EvilHawk posted:

I believe he's talking about losing Scotland in the sense of independence. That would be a massive black spot on the record of any Prime Minister.

Lt. Danger posted:

What does this mean, exactly? How should you disagree with a Conservative?

Rakosi posted:

It's nothing at all about being sympathetic, it's about strategising to appeal to left-leaning Tories. Sympathy is a luxury for the left at this point.

pisshead posted:

doesn't have to give them another one.

Adar posted:

The Tories are basically pro business Clinton-esque Democrats. About half of them are also some flavor of social conservative but this is the country where the head of the church says he has moments he doesn't believe and no one cares, so that's relatively mild.

quote:

The exceptions are:
-everyone hates the Other and everyone has a different conception of what the Other is but it includes people in the next town and certainly those fucks with accents (this is pretty much everyone in Europe, though)
-everyone hates the other social classes and everyone has a different conception of what they are but it includes people who do / do not have relatives who were famous 600 years ago, sometimes but not always regardless of current social standing (this ties in with the accent thing)
-London is mostly Really Good, as opposed to Really Bad (these are the only two options available to anyone in England)

pisshead posted:

Except he won the referendum and doesn't have to give them another one.

WMain00 posted:

WMain00 posted:

CoolCab posted:

I was being serious before, if anyone has any advice on the process for mature students I would be extremely grateful. I'm a citizen, lived here for a decade, hold a lovely NVQ lv 3 in Business Admin and have a decade work experence; what would I need to start a degree in the field?

Nonsense posted:

Cameron played Scotland like a fiddle.

Nick Robinson made that point as well.

CoolCab posted:

if i'm going to retreat into academia for a few years i'd rather the full experence tbh

Rakosi posted:

By not telling them they should kill themselves or something like that, I guess.

Oberleutnant posted:

No, you've got it all wrong. Believers in the free market love families!




(Naturally these need ever so slight adjustments for modern forms of work, which are not primarily industrial in nature, but the point stands.)

Regarde Aduck posted:

. Are they going to send people to prison forever?

big scary monsters posted:

Any ideas what sort of areas Tory backbenchers would be likely to revolt on?

big scary monsters posted:

Any ideas what sort of areas Tory backbenchers would be likely to revolt on?

Nonsense posted:

Cameron played Scotland like a fiddle.

Nick Robinson made that point as well.

Dabir posted:

No you wouldn't, students are arseholes. That's partly why I dropped out.

Rakosi posted:

Cameron is turning out to be a genius at political maneuvering.

big scary monsters posted:

Any ideas what sort of areas Tory backbenchers would be likely to revolt on?

CobiWann posted:

Got it. It's like the GOP - moderates/Tea Party/social conservatives.

With that said, what are the "wings" in the Tory part," if there are any?

Dabir posted:

Basically, there's the right wing.

And then there's the wrong wing.

Rakosi posted:

You dropped out of higher education, potentially sabotaging career prospects and getting student debt, because you don't like students? You my friend are a good poster.

Lt. Danger posted:

Okay, but what should you actually do?

We've seen people in this thread actually try to challenge Tory talking points on the economy with actual Conservative voters and it didn't get very far. They just doubled down on their original view. I think some other people later said that saying things like "the economy doesn't work like that" and "immigration isn't actually the root cause of your problems" is condescending and dismissive.

So how do you appeal to 'left-leaning' conservatives?

J_RBG posted:

I highly doubt that - he stayed put while Labour and Lib Dem's votes were eaten away.

WMain00 posted:

quote:

Before the election, some Tories had suggested that their promises to cut welfare by another £12 billion might be watered down in a coalition deal with smaller parties, not least because the cuts could prove highly controversial.

But without the need for such a deal, the Conservatives may now have to go through with the welfare cuts plan.

Some Tories have privately questioned whether the party leadership ever intended to go through with all the policies it promised during the election, suggesting some were deliberately offered to be sacrificed in power-sharing talks.

Rakosi posted:

With a better, more transparently costed, more concrete vision for a government; Ed didn't sell this. He trucked out plenty of gimmicks though, like that stone tablet. Cameron did too, but he's incumbent and has less to prove; for alot of people the country didn't self-destruct in the last 5 years, and memories of the recession still lingering make voting for a risky-looking opposition unattractive.

Status quo might be considered a dumb and stupid argument by everyone here but obviously it has an effect so it's about time the Left took it seriously.

Silly Hyena posted:

Aye, let's take the status quo effect seriously. While we're at it, why not try appeals to nature and gambler's fallacy?

WMain00 posted:

Cameron did gently caress all, as I pointed out earlier. He just sat back and let Labour be its own destruction in Scotland.

Nick Robinson can gently caress off.

Silly Hyena posted:

Aye, let's take the status quo effect seriously. While we're at it, why not try appeals to nature and gambler's fallacy?

Rakosi posted:

Erm if voters are shown to actually vote along these lines then yes, you should. If the electorate is voting illogically it's kind of tough and the Left need to approach that.

quote:

To all my Labour friends here, having watched it all go to poo poo in Donny last night here's my take.
1. There's an inbuilt asset-rich, middle class liberal conservative majority in England. Its an imperialist country with massive bloated rentier class. Only the working class of London, northern England, Wales and Scotland have the social weight combined to outvote it, and defy its control of the media. True in the 1890s, true today.
2. New Labour rode the upswing of the neoliberal era. Economically it papered over the cracks of deindustrialisation, financialisation, and the creation of an underclass with tax credits and a lot of public sector jobs that have been fairly easily cut without society falling apart. It had no idea about how to cope with the downswing. Hence Brown's floundering.
3. 25 year of neoliberalism have been devoted to destroying the old working class; it's been successful. So if you want a progressive left government in Britain it has to be a coalition of identities that sit badly together: the old, white working class, increasingly worried about its identity (the only thing it has left) being destroyed by globalisation and migration; the new salariat and networked individuals; and the new radical identities being formed around Scottish and Welsh nationality.
4. The only way you're going to unite white, traditional workers, individualist young salariat people, urban ethnic minorities and that part of the true middle class that is progressive is - it's obvious - radicalism. You have to construct a story where the different material interests are subsumed in a radical narrative.
5. Labour under Miliband had no idea how to do this because it was, effectively, just a peace pact between two factions of neoliberalism who had big personal differences and minor political ones. If you want a textbook example of who knows how to do this - and it is never easy - there are now three: Syriza, Podemos and the SNP.
6. Scottish Labour dug its own grave, for specific reasons. It was the most Stalinist, pro-war, tribal, thuggish part of Labour. It never listened. It missed completely the rise of a positive leftist, internationalist separatism and thought it was all about austerity, or all about nationalism. Then, it tied itself to the mast of unionism. Then, after being taught a harsh lesson on 18 Sept in the Indyref, it reinforced all its negative tendencies by suppressing the left, and any pro-autonomy voices, and imposing Murphy.
7. There may not be a way back for Labour. Just as the modern structure of the workforce is designed to leave no way back to closed shops, collective bargaining, mass union action, the modern structure of neoliberal Britain is designed to prevent a Labour government except in extreme circumstances.
8. If a British Syriza/Podemos emerges it will be out of the disillusioned left new joiners of the SNP, the RIC in Scotland, the Greens - who are doing well - and what comes out of Labour when, almost inevitably, a Murdoch inspired Blairite take-over happens. I know the Times was organising some Labour right wingers to cross the floor if Miliband formed a quasi coaliton with Sturgeon. That's not necessary now but is shows how heavily the actual ruling elite in Britain have penetrated Labour - and at the same time how no section of the ruling elite really needs Labour anymore.
9. But the huge obstacle facing the emergence of a radical left in Britain is the bolshevik grouplets currently acting like re-enactment groups of the 20th century; and the Stalinism of the union bureacuracy. the SNP built a left radial force because it was able to be free of both these forces; Podemos too has been able to largely sideline the Stalinists; in Greece the far left has self-sidelined into groups that can/ will never break out of 1% electorally, but play a useful wider role because they in practice know how to organise and act, not just re-enact Leninist fantasies.
10. In saying all this, I don't discount the possibility of an interesting debate inside Labour about how to revive to meet the needs of this disparate alliance of dispossessed people. But unless it starts with federalising the Labour Party, forming a strategic bloc with the SNP and Greens (as per CDU/CSU), and actually learning from the way people like Stella Creasy work, and Caroline Lucas, it will go nowhere.
A final word. I saw first hand the Doncaster Labour mafia applaud Miliband when he said they would fight to keep the union. It was like watching dinosaurs applaud the asteroid hitting the earth. Don't just blame the Labour leaders, the party is full of people insulated from austerity by their position in the Labour-controlled public sector, who've learned nothing, and who will select first a Blair, then a David Miliband, then an Ed Miliband, and next who knows, but who have no idea that anything mentioned from 1-10 above is happening. The demographic contrast between the Labour activists - male, grey, over-50, manual background - and the 300 mainly female, clerical, salariat who counted the vote, was very clear.