I think it very rare that history ever repeats itself. But echoes do undoubtedly resonate, which is why this is so horribly uncomfortable today:
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Labour has got rid of its communists.
It is now culling its socialists, most especially if they also happen to be women of colour, it seems.
They already hold trade unionists in near-complete contempt. The direction of travel is obvious.
Thereafter, they will not go for Zionist Jews, of course. But woe betide those who might support Palestinians, or who think the very idea of Israel is anti-Semitic, as some Jews do.
And woe betide the migrant, the person on a low income, the carer and the cared for and anyone else who might be vulnerable, because it is very clear right now that Labour is very firmly of the opinion that there should be no one left to fight for them.
Who will represent the voice of the person the state should be there to protect when we get a government that is determined that all who might speak for them should be silenced? That is the question I want to ask.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
You make fair points for the prosecution. I will come in on the side of the defense.
LINO is power hungry – after 14 years on the outside it will do anything – jettison any principle to get re-elected.
The role of the media in the country has been well covered, endlessly. The Daily Wail is owned by a French passport holder, etc. The BBC is Sotty or Sweep with the gov of the day Harry Corbett. The commentariat have ALL the same background. Thus one needs their approval to get into gov. You MUST have that.
Over the past 40 odd years, the Thatcher-Hayek-neo-libtard project has, inevitably squeezed all empathy out of the country and driven all parties to the raving-loony-right, politically, economically, ethically. Given this – appearing human and showing compassion is wasted – on large parts of the electorate (= those that vote & have I.D).
Bolt on to that that the English are conservative with a small c and you have: Ragged Trousered Philanthropists for the middling 21st century.
The forces ranged against any sort of rationale discussion on any subject are formidable. The Guardian & who controls it has been well profiled by this blog. It is part of the establishment, it does tokensim & it censors everthing (I did a comment on the incoherent Mazzucato article yesterday – it was booted off – can’t have the rabble showing Mazzucato up).
Adding: a total incapacity for the ruling classes to even find out about the lived reality of most people & ……… you have the slo-mo march to authoritariaism & ultimately fascism.
LINO will claim that it needs “disicpline” to win the election – watch as it claims it needs the same to govern.
Of course: there is a choice. Don’t vote tory (natch), don’t vote LINO (natch) – & be careful with the Lib-Dems. try & vote tactically – but not LINO.
Yes Mike, the irony of claiming that “comment is free” and then censoring wrongthink seems to have escaped the Guardian. This afternoon, I posted a comment under a Polly Toynbee article which had claimed that “it was risky to expel the former leader – but he was extraordinarily lucky that Corbyn, with characteristic obstinacy, chose to rule himself out by refusing to accept the overall verdict of the EHRC.” I pointed out that:
“Firstly, Corbyn’s expulsion from the Labour Party was a breach of the 1998 Human Rights Act. According to the EHRC report on antisemitism in the Labour Party: “Statements by elected politicians have enhanced protection under Article 10 (of the Act) … Article 10 will protect Labour members who express their opinions on internal party matters, such as the scale of anti-semitism in the party.”
Secondly, Corbyn issued a second statement on November 7th 2020. He said: “To be clear, concerns about antisemitism are neither exaggerated nor overstated. The point I wished to make was that the vast majority labour party members were and remain committed anti-racists deeply opposed to antisemitism.” This statement was followed by an NEC ruling that there were no grounds for Corbyn’s suspension. By overruling this decision, Starmer ignored another of the EHRC’s key recommendations: that the party’s disciplinary process should be free from political interference – and thus ensured that his involvement in every stage of Corbyn’s suspension amounted to “unlawful indirect discrimination” under the terms of the 2010 Equalities Act.”
I’m used to having my comments removed by the Guardian’s moderators, but this time I was quite shocked that they should find these observations so alarming.
That is really bizarre….
Civil unrest looms large before us then, and given the shortage of prison spaces, there’s not a lot the govt can do about it.
Camps. “A State of Denmark” lays out one particular track the Uk could take.
Raymond’s?
Starmer’s brutal dumping of Dr Faiza Shaheen after all her years of work in the Chingford constituency seems even worse than the Diane Abbott mess. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/30/labour-diane-abbott-candidate-selections-general-election
The point seems to be to make visible to all – that arbitrary power can and will be exercised. He seems to think this will show that he has ‘changed Labour’ – (ie turned it into and authoritarian one-faction party controlled by a small ruling faction), and can therefore be trusted to change the country in the same way. .
It is difficult not to agree with Richard and M Parr and others that we are witnessing 1984, the State of Denmark – before our very eyes. And I am still a member of the LP
I was really shocked by this.
Faiza is a such a great person.
Starmer isn’t, though.
Doubtless after the Diane and Faiza debacles many former “loyal” Labour members will either “grin and bear it” or use their conscience and leave the party. Hopefully many will join a more humane alternative whether Green , Plaid, SNP or support a sane independent.
Hello again Richard. You have been educating me since the 2014 IndyRef, and I make a small monthly Paypal contribution (only on a pension).
I am trying to write an Indy Song aimed at Scots who are as ignorant as I was 10 years ago.
This is the draft verse on Starmer.
Would you have any problems with the last 4 lines and their links, or suggest more effective words or links?
Many Thanks
Bill
STARMER U-TURNED ON HIS PLEDGES P U C
and won’t reverse Brexit or Tory Laws B
So Labour and Tory policies are alike F R G
What has Starmer “pledged” to Scotland? S
Professor Murphy of “Funding The Future” shows
100 Billion Pounds of Tory “Rich Benefits” R S
could fund his pledges, WITHOUT NEW TAXES! R M
Why is “Socialist” Starmer ignoring this? S S
The links on the last 4 lines are
R https://taxingwealth.uk/2023/09/13/the-taxing-wealth-report-2024-recommendations-to-date-and-their-suggested-value/
S https://taxingwealth.uk/2024/02/10/rishi-sunaks-tax-for-2022-23-a-taxing-wealth-report-2024-case-study/
R https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/02/09/labour-is-claiming-that-28-billion-of-investment-in-climate-change-a-year-is-not-possible-but-thats-not-true-thats-starmers-choice/
M https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/05/30/multiplier-effects/
S https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/27/starmer-im-a-socialist-and-progressive-who-will-always-put-country-first#:~:text=Keir%20Starmer%20has%20insisted%20that,the%202020%20Labour%20leadership%20race.
S https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/28/is-starmer-really-a-socialist-and-what-will-happen-if-labour-wins-election
You are welcome
And lyrics are definitely not within my comfort zone….
Our model of what a political leader ought to be is hopelessly flawed, and SKS very rigid approach is
symptomatic of that.
He really is a bully, but his henchmen are dire. His nuBlairite technocracy are as bad as the worst left factional hard men of the 80s.
Weak characters often seem to need to assert faux tough authority when a strong character can tolerate, even relish differences, because they do not automatically feel threatened.
It won’t end well, just as all of the last tranche of PMs have been fatally flawed.
Machiavelli’s analysis of corrupting power is still relevant, though the last thing we need is 21stC Medicis.
I am severely disabled & chronically ill, so please forgive me if what I state has been previously pointed out, as I am only able sporadically to keep abreast of events.
Are folk aware that a keir is a vat for bleaching cloth. It seems to me that he is attempting to bleach the party of everything that might even cause the slightest offence to the so-called right.
Someone above commented that Brits are conservative (LC c), but time and time again, as I think RM highlighted t’other day, the majority support so-called left-wing (essentially socialist in its broadest sense) policies. The Green’s policies (I am non-partisan) are backed by majorities, but the electorate is in the main reluctant to take a chance on something new. In this latter sense the electorate is deeply conservative.