by Jack J.
War and austerity serve the interests of the British establishment, and are contrary to the vast majority of the UK population. If we define ‘war’ as the bombing and invading of other countries plus the threat of annihilation through nuclear arms and ‘austerity’ as the roll-back of the welfare state we can divide the political forces of the UK into establishment and anti-establishment.
Establishment Forces
- Tory Party
- UKIP
- Lib Dems
- The Blairites
Anti-Establishment Forces
- ‘Real Labour’ i.e. Jeremy Corbyn backed by a growing number of MPs and MSPs.
- The SNP
- The various Green Parties
- Plaid Cymru and Sinn Fein
Both sides are further divided by:
- Europe
- Scottish Independence
Membership of the EU divides the establishment forces: UKIP and various Tories are against being part of the EU whilst most Tories plus the Blairites and Lib Dems are in favour. All of them are very much against Scottish Independence.
In contrast, Jeremy Corbyn and ’Real Labour’ are against Scottish Independence, whilst the SNP and various other nationalist and Green parties are in favour. All these anti-establishment parties and politicians backed Remain.
However, Corbyn is a life-long euro-sceptic (for reasons entirely contrary to Johnson and Farage) who was forced to side with Remain in order to maintain party unity (which was already threatened, and has since been broken). Meanwhile, the SNP, as a pro-independence party could hardly have sided with Brexit, given that EU membership was highly popular in Scotland and hence presented them with their best opportunity for independence yet. So, in very different ways, the Remain stance of the anti-establishment forces (i.e. Corbyn and the SNP) was never optional in practice.
(Moreover, no opposition party is likely to favour handing more power to their opponents, even if they have various valid reasons to view of EU membership as a hindrance should they be in government.)
What looks likely in terms of timing is that article 50 will be activated early in 2017 (see link 1) and that INDE. II will happen in the subsequent 2-year period (see link 4).
What is of great interest is how Real Labour, after Jeremy Corbyn wins a second leadership contest, will go about:
- Appealing to the 52% of English and Welsh voters who voted for Brexit (including 1/3 of Labour voters) whilst maintaining support of the 2/3s of Labour voters who voted Remain. (The former is key to winning over the long-term disenfranchised Labour voters at risk of voting UKIP, whilst the latter is key to preventing/reversing desertion to the Lib Dems/ Greens/ Blairites (if they form a new Party).)
- Opposing Scottish Independence: Jeremy Corbyn will be expected to play a leading role in opposing it, even though in many ways it will play into ‘Real Labour’s’ hands by a) dealing a fatal blow to the Trident Nuclear Weapons, which is the issue the Blairites have chosen to distinguish themselves from Real Labour, and b) dealing a grievous blow to the Tories (due Scottish INDE. being a direct result of them holding the Brexit referendum), all in the run-up to 2020.
With regards to A I believe that Corbyn’s ‘sceptical Remain’ was the right thing to do and puts him in a position to reach out to both Brexit and Remain voters once the ChickenCoup has finally flopped, although it is certainly no easy task.
With Regards to B, I believe Corbyn will somehow find the right stance again, based more on opposing austerity and raising living standards etc. than on the constitutional matter as such, although I do fear that Smith has a point (see link 6) in that Corbyn perhaps underestimates or misunderstands the progressive nationalism of the Scottish Yes Movement. (I’m glad Smith has raised this actually.) The weight of Corbyn’s intervention is a big question as it might be enough to actually prevent Independence: his anti-Iraq anti-trident stance carries a lot of weight in Scotland.
Best case scenario: Scotland goes about writing a progressive constitution circa 2019 and Corbyn goes onto to win 2020: happy progressive neighbours going about reforming Britain, and perhaps the EU. Worst case, Scotland remains in the UK and Corbyn loses 2020, or is deposed beforehand: status quo austerity and war. If Scotland doesn’t get INDE. and Corbyn wins the next election then all is well enough:
It’s all certainly to play for.
Some Links:
- Merkel backs May on extra time for EU exit talks https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/134439
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon sets out her five Brexit demands for Scotland that may determine possibility of second independence referendum http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14639406.Sturgeon_sets_out_her_five_Brexit_demands_for_Scotland/?ref=mrb&lp=1
SNP moves away from ‘land of milk and honey’ vision of independence http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14629224.SNP_moves_away_from__land_of_milk_and_honey__vision_of_independence/
- Alex Salmond sets out prompt timescale for second Scottish independence referendum Any vote would have to be within the Brexit timetable, the former first minister said http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/alex-salmond-sets-out-prompt-timescale-for-second-scottish-independence-referendum-a7154781.html
Irish PM opens door to reunification vote https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/134404
Owen Smith says Jeremy Corbyn doesn’t understand patriotism and national identity http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/owen-smith-says-jeremy-corbyn-8493150
Anyone who puts UKIP (swivel eyed Loons and Fruitcakes according to Lib Lab and Con) have lost their marbles.
… In the pro-establishment pile… Sorry mis-clicked.
On the contrary, it is not loony to believe that the best funcioning democratic unit is the nation state. It is perfectly possible to believe that and to support the ‘establishment position’ in all other respects. Let us not forget that only twenty years ago we were told that only loonies opposed UK entry into the Euro, which thank God never happened.
I am in agreement with you. I am trying to point out that those Establishmentarians did not and do not consider UKIP one of their own.
They consider them a fringe outlier group of the above mentioned fruitcake clown variety. Which makes me suggest that the person writing this is trying to make a point towards a specific agenda.
To the extent that it is possible to distinguish the voting record of UKIPs MPs/MEPs (there arent many) they are a) pro-war and b) pro-austerity. Nothing in their policies suggest they have any intention of voting otherwise. This makes them establishment according to my criteria. (I.e. whether the traditional establishment tells us that they ‘think’ that they arent is irrelevant as far as im concerned: its just a ploy to tap into the ‘protest vote’.)
Could we have some specifics, please? Your comment implies that you have closely studied UKIP MPs and MEPs and their voting records. So please share those details with us.
Here we go:
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11621/douglas_carswell/clacton/votes
I am in agreement on the first part… The second part well they are a 1 issue party. Its to early to tell where they lie on the spectrum.
(Sorry about the odd postings I’m suffering from some serious pain and its making me less than thorough… Difficult to complete my thoughts)
I also have to say that I find some of this analysis somewhat fanciful wishful thinking on the part of the author.
Some pertinent stats in this piece from UK blogger John Ward on the likelihood of [r]UK ever voting for a genuine socialist: link
I am no socialist, but I think Corbyn is a decent enough guy, but absent some cataclysm, how is that meant to change enough for a genuinely socialist platform Real Labour victory in 2020?
Thanks for the link. Regards 2020, Labour were approaching the Tories in the polls before the ChickenCoup started: I think they would be ahead right now without it. Corbyn needs to see off this challenge and put the members firmly back in control of the party. If he can do that, I think he can win the next general election. Admittedly, thats a big IF.
J Jack, with respect, you are miscalculating, misconstruing.
you say 52% of engand and wales voted ‘leave’. wrong.
52% of the whole uk is the right fugure. in fact, i don’t know why is it that you are not quoting 34% of the scots who voted ‘leave’? please get your stats in order and maybe not overfantasise while trying to appear all mathematical and logical, because your piece is not a good example.
Dear Ib,
England = 53% Brexit (I stand corrected)
Scotland = 38% Remain (seems like you were off by a bigger margin, perhaps you might consider taking your own advice?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results
but why did you exclude scotlad from your initial calculation? why? sctotland is still part of uk and people there have voted in the same referendum which was worded exactly the same..why exclude them? if it is because on the whole that region voted remain, then you could exclude london who also voted remain and your breakdown would go in for some time..london would not count as englad according to your logic?
p.s. thatnk for correcting. means even greater percentage of scots voted ‘leave’.
p.p. s. by the way i am in london and voted ‘out’ like endless number of other people i know..but what matters is the overall UK result, not breakdowns by regions, boroughs etc.
not according to nicola and you i suppose.
i wish scotland all the luck as an ‘independent’ state if they can get their act together and next time vote ‘the right way’. you ask me, scotland will never split away from the uk.
it’s only if they could make sure they carry on getting funding both from westminster as well as eu. not at all likely.
their leadership delusional – they seem to think they can stay part of both uk and eu.
a bunch of whackos if you ask me.
Because Corbyn needs to win in England (and Wales). He needs to beat the Tories in England. He needs more MPs in England. Scotland has a social democratic party of its own now, and even if he wins a few back in scotland, he still needs a majority in England in order to be able to put together a workable administration.
PS scotland is a country, not a region.
scotland the country, or call it a continent if you wish, scotland is not independent of westminster.
The Zionazis will NEVER allow Labour to escape their clashes. The Blairite swine, such exemplary liars and hypocrites, are nearly all proud members of ‘Labour Friends (ie Slaves) of Israel’. The attacks on Corbyn were spear-headed by a vicious, if familiar, campaign of false accusation of ‘antisemitism’, joined in even by Sacks, the Chief Rabbi of the UK. The litigant in the court case to prevent Corbyn even appearing on the election for Party leadership was Foster, a Jew, who declared that his hundreds of thousands of pounds in ‘contributions’ somehow gave him greater rights in the Labour Party than tens of thousands of little people. He also declared that Jewish contributions to Labour had ‘dried up’ and would stay so until Corbyn was gone.
Naturally the MSM either does not report this naked assertion of supremacy by rich Jews and totally ignores the fact that many ordinary Jews support Corbyn, and discussion of the power of rich Jews is, naturally, utterly verboten as ‘antisemitism’. And, of course, a similar situation could explode in any Western slave state if any Party dared deviate from TOTAL subservience to their Israel First Fifth Columns. Corbyn’s great, unforgiveable crime is to have dared side with the Palestinians in their immense, unending, suffering, and for that he WILL be gotten rid of -one way or another.
Interesting info, MM, thanks.
Good piece on Corbyn and Labour over on Off-Garudina:
https://off-guardian.org/2016/07/29/the-originis-of-labours-civil-war/
The egg timer has turned in ‘Northern Ireland’. Statistically, Catholics will be a majority within the next 12 months. The ceasefire agreement in 1998 stipulated that Northern Ireland could secede from the UK when a majority wanted it. Now that doesn’t mean that every Catholic is a Nationalist, but the writing is on the wall.
When the IRA was fighting the SAS and British Army, Republicans/Nationalists were pretty much secluded and not part of the infrastructure. Now they have taken over local councils, businesses are being bought out by Protestants who can’t afford to run them any longer by Catholics, they’re taking over the police. All key sectors that necessitate a successful secession.
Even if there was no Brexit, Northern Ireland was already on a trajectory to leave. Now that Brexit has happened, this has been hastened.
Thank God.
Either that or a boat to Scotland – anything to get away from from the prior “exceptionals” aka “the Brits”
Irish passport applied for in any case.
The link section above is meant to look like this:
1. Merkel backs May on extra time for EU exit talks https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/134439
2. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon sets out her five Brexit demands for Scotland that may determine possibility of second independence referendum http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14639406.Sturgeon_sets_out_her_five_Brexit_demands_for_Scotland/?ref=mrb&lp=1
3. SNP moves away from ‘land of milk and honey’ vision of independence http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14629224.SNP_moves_away_from__land_of_milk_and_honey__vision_of_independence/
4. Alex Salmond sets out prompt timescale for second Scottish independence referendum Any vote would have to be within the Brexit timetable, the former first minister said http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/alex-salmond-sets-out-prompt-timescale-for-second-scottish-independence-referendum-a7154781.html
5. Irish PM opens door to reunification vote https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/134404
6. Owen Smith says Jeremy Corbyn doesn’t understand patriotism and national identity http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/owen-smith-says-jeremy-corbyn-8493150
“over 50 percent of Scottish voters are currently against independence, a new YouGov poll revealed, showing little change in opinion since before the Brexit vote.”
sputnik published earlier today..
if it’s about polls and statistics
Sputnik also has a piece on “Alternative Labour”:
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160730/1043783442/labour-corbyn-contest.html
What desperate planet are they living on? They just can’t accept what their party wants. Just leave! Why should they be able to take the money and name. De-select the lot.
Here is the link to the you gov poll:
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160730/1043781376/uk-brexit-scotland.html
So Nicola and the SNP are not in touch with the public……..
(last link sections was me!)
Just to let you know SNP is seriously Pro-EU.
Corbyn was not forced to join the Remain side. He chose the Remain side. Whatever excuses now proffered, whatever his reasoning, he made the choice (his choice) freely. For that he can and should be judged. He is and remains an opportunist politician who’ll sell out on any principle and sell out any person, or persons, should he make the calculation that it is beneficial to his personal interests to so do. Never forget what professional politicians ultimately are.
It is amazing how so many white people fall for creatures such as this political entrepreneur. Why is it that so many of you seek a leader to lord it up over you? Why do you live in abject need of a totem or icon to worship, to believe, to project your trust, nobility, decency, honour, courage, principle, integrity and other virtues onto? It is strange this neediness. It leads to the strangeness of so many people spending their lives on their knees wishing and praying at the cankerous feet of politicians and their cronies. It is most unseemly and quite perverse. As has been well noted, you get what you deserve the morning after.
Siotu
@ Siotu:
I agree with most you said, except for the part of him being a self-serving career politician.
To me, he comes across as too non-committal to be even self-serving (unless is all an act; ala back-stabbing Sanders)
Personally; I think he was too comfortable with his role of backbencher, perpetually against all Blairite “Labour” policies, while at the same time not attracting too much attention to himself whilst securing his constituency loyal voting-base.
Kind of the opposite of someone like Galloway, for example, when he was in Labour.
That was his comfort-zone; being a soft spoken, mild contrarian while at the same time not being in a real position to do anything about the things he spoke about (nice gig if you can get it, isn’t it? :/ )
But now, that by popular vote, he has been given the reigns of the party, he has no idea what to with them. Of course it doesn’t help that the Blairites (the majority of Labour MPs) are in full mutiny-mode against his leadership, but that doesn’t excuse him for his apparent lack of conviction and/or lack of leadership skills.
Imagine someone like Putin in Corbyn shoes! Heads will roll.
Remember the pen episode?
Vladimir Putin Rage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjrlTMvirVo
–
And probably that’s the main issue with Corbyn; he doesn’t command respect from his peers or exude the level of assertiveness that is desperately needed in the situation he’s finding himself in at the moment.
^ Having said all that; does that mean I want this phony, Labour leadership opponent, Owen Smith [who is stealing all his talking-points from Corbyn, and/or Farage, and/or the working-class too, and/or anybody who’s been even remotely linked to Socialist causes]… taking up the lead of the Labour party?
Hell no!
This Smith character is just as bad as the opportunistic Michael Gove stealing all the anti-EU talking points from Farage and UKIP :/
As I’ve said before; I wanna see Corbyn staying-put, remaining exactly where he is now, and the chances for that are rather good; the popular vote will win again and he’ll stay as Labour leader despite the ‘weeping and gnashing of teeth’ of the Blairites.
If the Labour party members are duped (just like Sander’s supporters were duped) and they vote Smith instead this time around [because they were promised the earth by this duplicitous shyster]…
Well… they’ll only have themselves to blame for that, as far as I’m concerned.
-TL2Q
Hi TooLegit2Quit
Yes. I do remember the pen episode. What was amazing about that was the guy directly lied to Putin about signing the agreement and got caught in his lie immediately. He was asked by Putin if he had signed and he said he had. Putin then went on to explain that he could not see the signature and asked him to sign, offering the pen. Busted! Once the man had indeed signed, demonstrating he’d lied and is a dishonest man, he tries to take Putin’s pen away with him. Putin has to demand its return. If the guy had ANY integrity and did not want to sign he ought to have argued his case to Putin then and there. He needed to say, “I do not sign” and state his reasons. Instead he lied. Checkmate. Now he has no case to argue as he is but a common liar. Putin didn’t even have to tell him off or castigate him. He promptly got the signature and continued with the meeting agenda, telling off the group as a whole. Job done. Notice how Putin was careful not to waste focus solely on an individual but rather focus on the situation and its immediate solution. As a demonstration of complete control of a meeting, effective use of time, clear focus, cutting directly to the problem at hand to drive to solution it is as good an example as any I’ve seen.
In regards to Corbyn, you mentioned, “That was his comfort-zone; being a soft spoken, mild contrarian while at the same time not being in a real position to do anything about the things he spoke about (nice gig if you can get it, isn’t it? :/ )”.
Indeed for him it provided the experience of a nice gig. It is exactly the sort of thing a self-serving politician with his personality type would find comfortable. One asks the obvious question, why change the habitat? The answer is found by understanding these sorts of political creatures are terminally stupid (that does not make them harmless though). That is, as a class of person they rate themselves far above their intellectual capability (which is modest to poor to begin with). Reality proves it out time and again. In this instance the subject has let himself slither into the leadership role, a role to which he appears completely unsuited. Ah, such are the traps of hubris. As was once said by a famous actor, “A man has got to know his limitations.”
The Smith character looks to be yet another self-serving professional politician, although of different flavour. He is no better than Corbyn and likely quite the worse. The hubris is there. It is merely that it is of a slightly different nature.
You state, “If the Labour party members are duped…….. etc.” The implication is, you are concerned they may be taken in by a con, a fraud and fall for a dishonesty. I don’t doubt you in your analysis. My question is why so many white people appear to need the self-serving politician as a totemic icon to worship, to project their virtue on to. Why is it that so many of you throw away your humanity, your civilisation and your individuality to follow such creatures? They lead to so much badness.
A point of clarification here: socialist causes. These have resulted in much needless suffering. They are an intellectual illness related to the weird worship of politicians already mentioned. It is far preferable to be an individual and seek to perfect your own life as priority, rather than attempting to erect vast systems of coercion to extort and steal value from the lives of others, doing violence upon any who do not comply (as well as many who do).
That Smith is using the talking points of socialist causes demonstrates that he knows to harvest the notions already implanted in the dreamy notions of the edumakated. This is an expression of the self-serving con you are concerned about. Those fooled by it demonstrate the lazy dishonesty of people who refuse to carefully examine what they have been taught to worship, instead exhibiting intellectual passivity, mindless neediness, a strangeness.
Quoting, “Well… they’ll only have themselves to blame for that, as far as I’m concerned.”
Yes. True. The trouble is that the rest get to experience the consequence as well.
On that cheery note it is now time to start travel, off to the friends for yaqona.
Siotu
This analysis may be missing ‘potential’ changes. Brexit post-Tories and especially Brexit post-Labourites have no love for the Elite Establishment run from Brussels. This new aggregate forms a faction best described as Brexiteers, and is not captured by “status quo ante” mapping.
The new faction of Brexiteers will do whatever it takes to make sure that the UK does better than the EU. If the Brexiteers see anti-austerity as necessary to pump Sterling vs. Euro, the Brexiteers could easily wind up there despite being 50%+ legacy Tory.
Brexiteers are inherently against EU expansion, and for EU humiliation. The EU wants to expand to include Turkey. I can imagine no more pointed humiliation to the Wahabbi/EU than the US (if Trump wins), the UK, and Russia conducting joint anti ISIS air missions out of Tartus.
I know…. this smacks of optimism and perhaps naivety…. But, is it so unreasonable to see a possible alliance among Christian nations? Russian Orthodox, Church of England, and US Evangelical?
Is there a historical precedent for what you ask? I can’t speak with any great knowledge on the subject, not being a Christian, but I belive that you shall find your answer in history. It is unlikely to my mind that a Church that was established in order to destroy monasteries will ally with those who preserve the tradition.
Scripture teaches us that history has resonant echoes. By my limited and irrelevant understanding the first alliance between Muslims and Christians will indeed be the same as The Last Alliance.
All good Christians are allies of each other, as they are with other good people who share faith in god (whether they know it or not. And Corbyn is a great or excellent example of this, which is why he is sincerely welcomed by people off faith when he visits their churches, temples, mosques etc. which should help to further explain why he is such a threat.)
I think this article is an excellent summary. Thank you to the author.
One can only hope that all the believers in that false creator would remove themselves from the equation by finally annihilating themselves. The world would be better served if all those in need of a savior would finally meet him and the earth could return to Her true expression. I especially like the notion of US evangelicals being excised from the American mind. However, those of us who haven’t any fondness for any of the professed religions are seldom, if ever, considered in the discussion. We have had to remain pushed to the fringes of this human experiment with mental parasitical infection run amuck and the need for narcissistic suffering.
The one comforting grace that remains, even in the face of potential nuclear destruction, is that the earth will remain. It is my great desire that the earth Herself will decide the outcome. In a great and wondrous expression of true and majestic power that has faded from the memory of modern man. Perhaps, once again, man will cower and cry for refuge from the corrective hand of a Mother applying discipline to Her wayward and insensitive children. And the god of Abraham, made mute and powerless to stop it. Knowing full well he had no part in the doing of it.
It quick glance at the historical record from the twentieth century would suggest that you are either being economical with the truth or have chosen to simply act without grace dignity or intelligence (or historical accuracy).
Fortunately for the people of the uk Corbyn is not a bigoted fool.
Sorry, I couldn’t get past your categorization of UKIP as an “establishment force”. As a member of UKIP who very much agrees with its declared goals and policies, I find that quite intolerable.
UKIP stands for Britain’s independence, partly because it has shown itself (for about 1,000 years) to be not only viable but extremely successful. But also partly because larger political units become more corrupt and tyrannical. And also because many of today’s prized freedoms were pioneered in Britain, and we want to keep them: representative democracy, the division of powers, trial by jury, the presumption of innocence, Habeas Corpus… the list goes on and on. Moreover, British people pioneered those freedoms because they wanted them – and in that precise form. Others may pay lip service to “human rights”, but we know that Habeas Corpus is better in practice.
UKIP has been regularly and savagely attacked by all the other political parties, and by all parts of the political spectrum. Do you think that is because it represents the establishment? On the contrary, it is run very much in the interests of ordinary people. When it comes to war, UKIP wants Britain to be well defended, but does not favour unnecessary wars of aggression. It feels no particular animosity to Russia or China, with whom we should be trading partners and cultural friends.
Please don’t fall into the trap of believing what you read in the MSM – they are the establishment’s “presstitutes”. The main reason why Nigel Farage and other UKIP leaders get so mercilessly attacked in the media is that they are NOT run-of-the-mill political psychopaths; they don’t necessarily have good hair and teeth, smirk and ingratiate, say different things to different people. Instead, they tend to explain the facts and figures in a fairly blunt and unapologetic way – rather like Russians, in fact.
Check out this article, by Peter Oborne, one of Britain’s most balanced, objective, and respected journalists. It will give you a far more accurate picture of Nigel Farage and UKIP – the party he created from virtually nothing. Then ask yourself: does this sound like an establishment puppet?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3715544/PETER-OBORNE-Lefties-loathe-truth-man-changed-history.html
Incidentally, all that UKIP wants is for Britain to remain independent and be run in the interests of the British people as a whole – not just the idle rich.
Isn’t that exactly what ordinary Russians, Chinese, Iranians and Syrians want for their countries? Russia has been involved in setting up all manner of trading and self-defence communities. But I don’t see it accepting someone else’s currency or agreeing to be ruled from elsewhere. Do you?
Your comment implies you have evidence of UKIP’s track record or intentions regards Britain being run for the interests of the majority of the UK population.
Could you please provide us with the rational or research which would substantiate these claims?
Jack J
What is your evidence to the contrary?
Siotu
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11621/douglas_carswell/clacton/votes
Hi Jack J
So does that MP’s voting record demonstrate evidence of UKIP’s track record or intentions regarding Britain being run for or against the interests of the majority of the UK population?
Also, what about if the majority of the UK population are wrong?
Siotu
Deeply regret to inform the readership that there is a giant, stinking elephant in the room which, at the time of writing this submission, hasn’t been mentioned at all; neither by Jack J in his article, nor by the commenters. Lots of speculations about Scotland, Corbyn, UKIP, but not one mention of the diabolical crime syndicate of NATO. As far as the author is concerned, that’s an omission which borders on plain dishonesty. It’s highly instructive to look at the Zionazi MSM for an ‘uplifting’ comparison. There, we have hordes of presstitutes who are very vocal about the crucial importance and holiness of unending Western imperialist war-mongering and blackmail. Therefore: If these swine and scum are able to connect the dots, then so should everybody else. Letting NATO off the hook by keeping silent on its role in the service of Oligarchy is indefensible.
In my view, the irrefutable, truly ultimate, litmus test to be applied to any single person or organization in the West claiming “anti-Establishment” credentials is to demand a clear cut answer to the question:
How should NATO be finished off once and for all?
If this crucial, carefully silenced, subject is added to the greater Brexit “puzzle”, it immediately becomes evident what it all boils down to. It isn’t that different, at bottom, to what unfolded in Greece a year ago. Tsipras and Syriza never ever wanted to break ranks with the West in spite of the accelerating rot and Greece’s own spectacular social disintegration. They successfully sold the romantic message “EU without austerity” to the sheeple who were very ready to believe in it except out on the fringes (Golden Dawn and the Communist KKE).
Likewise, in Britain, “Remain” and “Leave” have no tacit meaning of “Remain in/Leave the West”. Both camps are Western loyalist to boot. But a notable difference to Greece is that, in Britain, the EU was never perceived as something inevitable, or even needed. Brussels was “good enough” hosting the NATO HQ and so was London with the financial swindlers in The City. This assessment is more or less what the entire political class in Britain (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland) has as its fundamental credo. British EU loyalists such as the Blairites and the SNP have their own special interests, most certainly in the form of lucrative business deals in the former case; EU bribes and hand-outs in the latter.
But to all interested parties in the Brexit turmoil, NATO shall remain firmly in place. Otherwise, the imperialist “oxygen” won’t last for long meaning plummeting Western living standards.
You are quite right about the importance of NATO. Strangely, unlike the EU, it is not in issue that divides the establishment forces, whilst the anti-establishment are on the whole very quiet about it. My opinion is that it is something that will quickly come to the fore once Scotland has independence or once Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. Until then it is simpler for them to denounce specific wars on the one hand and trident on the other.
I want to be cynical and say that Corbyn will never be allowed to be PM.
However: https://mobile.twitter.com/RichardBurgon/status/759491723445886976/video/1
No media coverage. Or support. Of his campaigning. These past thirteen months. Yet here all can see how many people support this man. And this re-election could really backfire for his opponents and allow him another social media and word of mouth campaign that will further spread and increase his support. As it did last summer.
Tony Benn told all who wanted to listen that it wasn’t the control of the media, it wasn’t smears, that won Thatcher her elections, it was the divide and conquer of the Labour Party. As the Sake reminds people The Great Deceiver deceives so often through the same old trick. And we fall for it every time. Here,there and everywhere.
The recent attempt to split the Labour party (again) was predictable, and predicted.
Therefore I would kindly advise those describing Corbyn as a “sell out” to put their thinking caps on. And to do some thinking. It would be equally absurd to say that Syria and it’s people were sold out by those who support them. Let’s try to be real please. IMO the only institution that has ever truly represented English civil rights at the table, that has represented the true values of good people in the uk as transmitted down the centuries, values which have their root in faith, it is and has been the Labour Party in spite of our knowledge that it was a labour government that yielded to the IMF (who believed the nonsense about brexit, when it cannot give you independence? Who was deceived?) in the mid-seventies after the oil crisis and the birth of the petrodollar. There’s plenty of evidence for that simple understanding.
Sure even if JC is elected the wider regulations and the looming trade deal can and will tie his hands, which I am sure he is aware of better then most here, but if Corbyn’s movement can be observed to have this level of public support even after all these attacks then if he is elected he’ll have a very strong mandate to…?
Regardless of the above in my humble opinion the recent Trident vote was of far greater significance and importance then the unbinding referendum.
Any party that supports EU is not part of the anti-establishment.
Jeremy Corbyn and the SNP are both part of the system. By being part of the EU, there is no possibility to implement alternative economic policies because neoliberalism is enforced through EU rules (“4 freedoms “).
Therefore, both the Corbyn’s Labour party and the SNP are either naive, stupid or liars.
An “independent” Scotland inside EU will be a truly disaster for Scottish economy…..
Mmmn…not very thought provoking. No mention of the rural working class that has been decimated by cheap migrant workers. These people have been totally abandoned by Labour and form the backbone of the anti-Labour anti-EU vote in non-metropolitan Britain.
Labour is finished as a political entity in the UK and forever will be as long as Trident takes precedent over basic working conditions for the poor white working class that used to be the backbone of Labour support.
No mention either of the Nationalist vote. All the UK political parties mentioned are in truth Establishment parties…follow the money…their incomes all derive from major Establishment sources.
The only truely non Establishment political parties are the Nationalists like the BNP, Britain First and a few smaller political entities who are all self financing but kept out of parliament by the totally corrupt political process in the UK.
There is only one truth: Labour are dead in the water…a bunch of out of touch, arrogant, self opinionated champange socialists.
We need proportional representation, legally binding referendums and the outlawing of political lobbyists and their money.
Labour, just like all the other parties mentioned in this article, want retention of the status quo. This proves that all these various factions are actually representative of the Establishment and not of the people.
We need root and branch reform of the political sham in the UK. As Ken Livingstone, one time mayor or London said, “If voting changed anything they would outlaw it”.
It does not look like Brexit will change anything much…especially representation of the people…it will be just the same as before: we will be economic slaves to our masters for ever and a day.