news & archives

it's said that the labour party is over - no, it isn't

"But let's take them at their word. Let's assume that they really do mean what they say, and that a Labour Party led by Burnham, Yvette Cooper or Liz Kendall really would be pro-business, radical on welfare and take an axe to public spending."

The author, though generally correct, makes the grave error of believing anything a socialist says. Tony Bliar was always prepared to say anything for power while remaining a dedicated socialist.

All that the latest candidates are doing is exactly what Bliar did, except maybe Liz Kendall who is either a better liar even than Bliar, or who is in the wrong party.

"Most Labour politicians, for all their current frantic ditching of the party's policies, think the point of power is to push people around in whatever way politicians think best.

"That's in their DNA and it's not going to change. It's why they join the Labour Party. "

Precisely.

"Which is another way of saying the Labour Party's entire future is now in doubt. Because it's just not what people accept now. The era of cap- doffing, take-what-you're-given, do-what-your-elders-and-betters-tell-you died with the rise of consumerism."

Not as long as there remain so many fools that still naively believe what a socialist says,instead of attending to what he or she does.

"That is a damning indictment for any party. But Blair did, of course, win three landslides for Labour. The first and only time that a Labour government has lasted for at least two terms. And he did that by running as an explicitly centrist party – a leader who happened to be in charge of the Labour Party, but who floating voters and Conservatives could support.

"He was only able to do that for two reasons. First, the Conservatives had vacated that centre ground."

Exactly, they moved left under the leadership of John Major! This was the only reason Tony Bliar won 3 elections, or even one! People preferred the real thing to the pretences of the Cambridge  mafia, and their front man, Socialist Johnny.

The result was that real Tory voters stayed away in their millions. That is why Bliar won;not by getting more voters.

"But secondly, the Labour Party let him. That's why Labour's current straits are so dire. Because the contempt in which so many Labour members hold Blair – the man who won them three landslides! – shows how hopeless a task it looks for Labour to make itself electable."

What else can they say in order to keep the loons onside? As said above, they can only get power by lying.

It is a grave error to teach children that they can believe what most people say. It merely trains them to be gullible, a trait often to be seen in the electorate.

"Labour dreamed of emulating the success of France's socialist President Francois Hollande. The Party could do worse than follow the lead of another French politician Nicolas Sarkozy, who, like the Labour Party, is trying to regain power.

"Yesterday, he ditched the name of his Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) for the more voter friendly The Republicans. Perhaps it is time to bury the name of Labour Party along with the 'Ed stone' and replace it with something more voter friendly."

Ah, another name change on the packet. The writer really does not get the core problem, socialists regard lying as a legitimate political weapon.

The end justifies the means.

Meanwhile, the pattern in France follows the pattern that has a long history in the UK. Socialst President François Hollande has an approval rating often below 20%, and soon enough will be gone.

"With the Liberal Democrats a busted flush."

No they're not, they are a natural an honest political movement. They will return, as long as they discipline or eject their leftists.

A hundred years ago, the Liberals split. Part became known as the State Liberals(!) and they eventually drifted to the Labour/Socialist parties.

Bliar has supervised a great state centralisation. He is a socialist to the core. e is just a better liar than most of them.He managed a vast increase of dependence on the State.

That is why the country was damaged to so great an extent, as is every country invaded by the catastrophic Socialist cult.

The name on the packet does no't matter a damn to Socialists. What matters to them is a one party centralised state.

advertising disclaimer

email email_abelard [at] abelard.org

©abelard.org, 1 june 2015


all rights reserved

the address for this document is https://www.abelard.org/news/deconstruction10.php

x words (including quoted text)
prints as x A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)