Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[P.D.]

I think he’ll lose the by-election and that will be the end of his political career, which will be no bad thing imo. I don’t trust him at all. It’s always appeared to me that his main interest is Andy Burnham.



John Curtice said this week that the ‘decline’ in the Reform vote overall needs to be treated with caution as the vast majority of seats up for grabs in the council elections were in areas which are traditionally Labour, whereas in the previous election the results are being compared to this wasn’t the case.

I think he wins but I agree he's definitely a chancer, stops being an MP during the bleak opposition years then just wants to swoon back in when there's a chance to be PM. If Starmer was more popular or the Tories were still in no way he's be clamoring to come back.

I'm not sure why he's considered the savior, he's already lost 2 leadership elections and didn't seem like a master planner when he botched his takeover at the last Labour conference.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

I think he wins but I agree he's definitely a chancer, stops being an MP during the bleak opposition years then just wants to swoon back in when there's a chance to be PM. If Starmer was more popular or the Tories were still in no way he's be clamoring to come back.

TBF he was encouraged by Labour at the time to run for Mayor

 

[glasgowspur]

Honestly? I don’t think anything does. Because I think they can’t grasp that the problems in their lives aren’t rooted in the existence of others.

Let’s just say for a second that they get what it SEEMS like they want (and I am potentially misrepresenting here but trying to be open about that).

Let’s say Reform ‘stop’ immigration (they can’t) but let’s say in this ideal world of a lot of people at this march, there is no more immigration, perhaps even large numbers of people are deported.

I think what would happen is that these people would realise that actually things haven’t got better, they still don’t have the money in their pockets they thought they would have, and they still don’t have great access to services such as the NHS, or housing.

So what do I think they would do next? I think they would blame someone else. Immigrants would be gone so I reckon it would be women, or people on benefits, or “the left wing” …but I don’t think they would ever sit there and say “we might have been lied to here you know”. There will always be a group to blame.

Whatever they think their end goal is, I don’t think it’s something that can happen, and therefore I think they are now in a never ending cycle of “it’s someone else’s fault”.

What happens now next, that's easy, they blame someone else, because it can never be their fault.

 

[thfcsteff]

That's exactly my point, and is my underlying response to @SissokoWasGood (BoL) & @thfcsteff (both brilliant replies - thank you both).

In the information age we all have access to those skills in our pocket.
It's a choice not to do so - but all life choices come down to values and, more pertinently, what we are prepared to lose; that can loss of face, loss of social circles, loss of argument etc etc.

All of those people have made a choice to continue on their path and a choice not to explore an alternative, despite having the tools to do so. To do so is hard - it's hard and scary to be vulnerable and challenge one self; but to not do so makes you a coward.

We can point to upbringing, education, social media algorithms all we want - but they are all just noise and excuses for the decisions we make, and we all make them.
(Would any of us give up enough of our comfortable western lives created by the crimes of empire to help people poorer countries have similar living standards? No, we wouldn't. We'll make changes and reductions, but no one would go far enough)

Those people have made value judgements and have to own them. If you are on a far right rally you either know what it means and agree with it and promote it, or you haven't bothered to understand it but you are still promoting it for a reason positive to your life.
I'd argue the latter is worse than the former; at least the former is truthful.
Both require full ownership, and there are no excuses based on circumstances, only choices based upon circumstances.

I think circumstances and context are vital before evaluating the choices people make. I think your conclusions with regards to choice and personal responsibilities are far too binary. And this comes from someone who believes very much in the concept of personal responsibility and ownership.
You are IMO too casually dismissing desperation, manipulation, and a lack of education.