The Mail suggested that Miliband’s father’s politics were important…their legacy damaging to this country, its democracy, its society.
Today you have an example of why a bit more credence should have been given to what the Mail had to say.
Miliband has had a reshuffle in his shadow cabinet….and out went three Blairites…..all three of whom had been given the ‘blackspot’ by Len McCluskey, Unite’s dinosaur union baron, a year ago calling them and Ed Balls the ‘four horsemen of the austerity apocalypse’.
McCluskey, Miliband’s pay and puppetmaster, gave them their marching orders and Miliband sent them on their way….the Brownite Balls excepted.
Earlier this year McCluskey gave the Ralph Miliband Lecture in which he said some notable things and laid out his political philosophy…..he wanted to follow the vision of Ralph Miliband…..
So let me start on my subject, working-class politics in the contemporary world, with a quote from Ralph Miliband:
“All concepts of politics, of whatever kind, are about conflict──how to contain it, or abolish it.”
So if we are on a march towards “one nation” and ultimately “one world”, it is a road that leads through struggle and conflict.
We are taught to believe that democracy is the cornerstone of a modern civilised society; but our Lords and Masters want to define democracy, limiting us to an ‘X’ on a Ballot Paper every 5 years.
This is not my definition of democracy.
They tell us strike action, civil disobedience, direct action and protest are all somehow unpatriotic.
Our history tells us they are not.
Whatever the upshot of electoral politics, working-class politics must grow and develop, based on the socialist education Ralph Miliband called for.
In the midst of an unending economic crisis, with what Ralph would have called a discredited ruling class at the helm, it is past time for the working class to step forward with its own vision and alternative.
The Conservatives responded to Labour’s reshuffle with a press released titled “Len McCluskey gets his dream team”. It says: “Ed Miliband has yet again backed down to his union paymasters and sacked or demoted moderate Blairites”. It goes on: “If Ed Miliband is too weak to stand up to Len McCluskey, he’s too weak to stand up for hardworking people.”
Maybe the BBC should take a more considered look at what Ralph Miliband’s ‘Vision for Britain’ was before declaring him a national hero.
When you consider that McCluskey is aiming to pack Labour with his own union members, already having many ‘Unite MPs’, Miliband himself only being leader due to McCluskey’s support, and take control of policy, what he says and does, and where he gets his inspiration from, might be worth taking a look at.
Its like the 70′ never went away. Minus the fashion of course.
Miliband is he’s name,
His father’s exactly the same;
He’s Red not Blue,
And that is quite true.
But he’ll never let on what’s he’s game.
The BBC is fine with leftists dismissing democracy with a shrug and a ‘whatever’ – literally in this case – because the BBC feels the same way. What better example of McKluskeyism is there than a requirement that everyone in the country be required to pay a tithe to the left’s broadcasting company, even if they’d rather watch paint dry.
We are taught to believe that democracy is the cornerstone of a modern civilised society; but our Lords and Masters want to define democracy, limiting us to an ‘X’ on a Ballot Paper every 5 years.
This is not my definition of democracy.
They tell us strike action, civil disobedience, direct action and protest are all somehow unpatriotic.
Our history tells us they are not.
Sounds a lot like something supported by the BBC rank-and-file, and not by management. No wonder the BBC spent a week making a fuss the Mail’s critique. It hit too close to home. It’s not so much that they all want to support Miliband and Labour, it’s that they really see it as the Mail telling the Beeboids that they hate their country.
‘They tell us strike action, civil disobedience, direct action and protest are all somehow unpatriotic.’
And it’s kicking off everywhere!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2447357/DOMINIC-LAWSON-My-question-panel-DOES-BBC-partisan-audiences.html
McCluskey is a fantasist. He asks us to believe that somehow the “working class’ will throw up the leadership,brains and drive that will enable this country to compete with the rest of the world .
Absolute rubbish and the tragedy is he doesn’t realise it.
Maybe the liberal elite do. But they will keep quiet and keep on railing at the free market and so called rightwingers.
Idiots the lot of them.
Why do they think the KGB and Gorbechev dumped communism in the old USSR?
it is the oldest trick in the book.the socalist workers party and other far left middle class groups boast on there blogs that they target question time on bbc 1 and any questions on radio 4 by making block applications to be members of the audience,hence you get rentamob every week shouting down and howling down any politician with conservative or ukip opinions,my solution to this is simple,i dont believe in positive discrimination at all.its wrong and illegal,but i do believe the time has come for question time and any questions to introduce a quota system where supporters of the torys and ukip get afair crack of the whip in representing the question time and any question audience,this to me will end this weekly farce of leftie rentamob dominating the question time and any questions audience.
I posted this earlier today ,on my way to ‘making me myself free’, I’m not sure where now but its worth repeating
Its from comments on spectator article
‘Shinsei1967
• 3 days ago • 201 2
As someone tweeted last night:
“If the Question Time audience was representative of the UK electorate then Neil Kinnock would currently be serving his sixth term as Prime Minister.”‘
As someone tweeted last night:
“If the Question Time audience was representative of the UK electorate then Neil Kinnock would currently be serving his sixth term as Prime Minister.”
I read it somewhere else a few days ago. Might have been The Spectator, but I’m not sure. I remember because I thought it summed QT up rather well.
Through his EU tenure, Kinnock probably got longer in power than a UK prime minister, at treble the salary.
Everybody say ” yeaaahhhhhhhh” .
Ah the memories of that victory rally ( not)
Remind me again – was it Sheffield or Nuremberg?
we’re aaalllwwwiiiggght sticks in my mind – thank goodness for Sheffield
And dont forget the cash the rest of his family has trousered.
As a symbol of all that’s wrong with our political system, you can’t do much better than a failed politician whose family has become very rich from our taxes.
With barely a murmur of disapproval from the BBC, of course.
I don’t want the BBC to “approve” or “disapprove”. All I would want is the BBC to inform its listening/viewing audience that Kinnock + family has enormously enriched themselves at (solely) public expense. Quite legally of course but, as we know, “legal” is no defence when the BBC disapproves and chooses to big up a Labour hypocrite.
Indeed, corporations who obey their legal OBLIGATION through their fiduciary duty to shareholders to LEGALLY minimise their tax bill and only pay what is legally required to pay, are treat like disgusting criminals by the BBC.
Funny how the BBC excempt labour MPs, Unions and their own staff (who do the exact same thing though) from any criticism for it though!
And the Garudain if I remember rightly.
“End the far left middle class block vote” – like it.
Blockhead vote more like…not an open mind between them…but lots of empty heads!
Answer is to end the shows. They are both boring predictable rubbish.
Put on old movies instead.
I suggest old movies such as “I’m All Right Jack”.
“All concepts of politics, of whatever kind, are about conflict──how to contain it, or abolish it.” For “conflict” read “Opposition” and that is something all Socialists are determined to contain and then abolish. Just look at their threatening and bullying behaviour over the last week or so both by some Labour individuals and as a Party.
Here’s a suggestion for Alan; start a blog about Ed Miliband and his Da. Because these posts have nothing to do with the BBC.
Unless you can point to where they’ve described Ralph Miliband as a ‘national hero’. I hazard that you can’t.
Nonsense!
When Al JaBeeBa pump up the volume against the Mail in suppport of MiniMeMiliband it is perfectly reasonable to question their motives. It’s not as if they hadn’t got form, is it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subtext
Not hard. Plus there was the whole “every single discussion piece on this topic has been heavily slanted in favour of Miliband and against the Mail” thing.
Dear Fritz, when we want your permission for what is posted here we’ll ask ok?
Until then fuck off.
Miliband ,Hobsbawn, Laski, EP Thompson and Chomsky?
Are you telling me that these plaster medalled saints of the perpetual revolution are NOT lionised by the BBC in their “good rebellion”?
The likes of Marr love these Hampstead rebels…ike Benn and Toynbee thay talk the revolution but keep their kids in media jobs, in safe parliamentary seats..and of course dodge their inheritance taxes by way of deeds of variation etc, blind trusts etc…Margaret Hodge stylee!
These are the safe rebels…who always end up top of the pile, yet stay strangely virtuous and always deserving of their state salaries and uni tenures sine die.
Yet you don`t see it Fritz?…take off that beret, open those ears and watch the likes of Miliband talk up a revolution like his dad…but keep the safe tenures and Notting Hill houses, same as they ever did in Mitfords time.
It`s called hypocrisy Fritz-the left excel at it…and it`s still a sin even to t5he lefties(which is why they don`t like being accused about it..Toynbees, Benns especially so I understand)
Camp Norman Smith, covering the press regulation story, told viewers this morning that the Mail/Milliband spat had hardened the public’s attitude for more press regulation – he didn’t say where that “fact” came from
Norman got it wrong here. Obviously the
how to lie to the public and look “impartial”propaganda lessons at the BBC College of Churnalism weren’t as thorough as they should have been. What Norman meant to say is that “the attitude of some has hardened”: “some” being the usual descriptor for the BBC and its cadre of “journalists” together with those holding opinions of which the BBC approves.Like you will, I`ve noted that the BBC choose to blame the Mail/Miliband spat as due reason to nobble the press a la Belaurus.
“You made us do it…we now only think this way because the atmospherics are newly tainted by nasty Paul Dacre”.
So went Newsnight and their house pet go-to guy for all things media…Kevin Howlett….of Howlett Media Productions…who has done very well out of BBC commissions ever since Birt was around Saviles laundry hamper with his gold nosepeg!
The BBC love these water cooler consensus moments that plug the end of a free press, more Marx, more quotas, more laws..don`t they?
And we pay for these office bitching musings, as the crumbs from the never ending buffet ger dropped for us if we`re good!
Belarus?…no need to go now…it`s coming here!
“Sew Paul Dacre’s mouth up with iron thread” rhymes with “Rupert Murdoch should be shot dead” (BBC-NUJ guide to Approved Cockney Rhyming Slang ©).
Let’s not forget that the Dockworkers, Steel Workers and Miners Unions all have one thing in common. They participated in, influenced and ultimately were responsible for the decline of the industries in this country that their memberships relied upon for their livelihoods and survival.
Why should we allow Mckluskey and his cohorts, who seem to include the BBC, to do the self same thing on a much large scale?
Funny, but knowing how the corporatist mainstream establishment is working, (neither socialist, nor capitalist, but the bastard offspring from both inheriting the worst aspects of both), towards a much less free and democratic future… I may be donning a rather fine article of silver foil milinery here, but given the media barons are all Bilderberg members, and the establishment really only have one agenda, regardless of which of the liblabcon parties are in Downing street, but… it seems to me that this row has been orchastrated to give the establishment the exact reasons they needed to come down on the freedom of the press like a ton of bricks.
The Daily Mail even publicly defended the BBC a few short weeks ago, so appears that there could be much going on behind-the-scenes to facilitate a grubby stitch up, to deprive the press of the freedom to publish information which could inflame sentiment against the British “Establishment” OF which the mighty BBC sits at the centre.
The BBC’s agenda is to push, promote, propagandise on behalf of greater centralisation of power, the cashless society, more corporatism, less free market capitalism, less competition, less choice, the restriction of free opinions to “acceptable thoughts”, the end of the nation state, greater EU and globalisation, the aims of Agenda 21 and more paternalism.
Any of the political parties who step out of line on that agenda are ruthlessly attacked by the BBC.
Labour are much more naturally in tune with that agenda than the tories, hence why the BBC needs to repremand labour a lot less than the tories, and so appears baised in favour of labour and appear to be labour’s propaganda wing.
Actually, labour are much more loyal puppets of the BBC’s preferred agenda than the tories. Although, under Cameron, the tories are being pulled into line with that same “third way” agenda.
It is not inconceivable that the Daily Mail/Miliband spat had been dreamed up behind closed doors to give the establishment exactly what they need by way of an excuse to moderate the press and protect the establishment from an angry population, who are increasingly understanding how they have been ripped off and lied to for decades by that establishment.
The Hegalian Dialectic at work. Problem, Reaction, Solution.
It’s just a thought.
Additionally, this is coming at the same time that Cameron is looking into restricting and requiring people to pre-register and inform on themselves to the state to receive online information. NOT just online porn, but a whole list of categories of website will require you to register to be able to receive them, including esoteric websites (political)
Funnily enough, a lot of kids at the schools I work in tell me plenty about the Illuminati that they look up on Youtube etc.
Some of it a bit silly, but I reckon that the likes of Beyonce, JayZ, Beckhams, Oprah Obama, DO represent something quite creepy in their global reach and supreme uselessness save for being rebels or wannabes…and(of course) being the beautiful ones.
You`ll note I`ve only named five of them-I see it as a perfect, gender balanced team of media junkies rewarded and adored beyond any purpose.
Ken Clarke? Russell Brand? Nelson Mandela?…take your pick!
Just a bit of fun, as Rob Brydon says(not one of the Golden ones…yet!).
If you were an Illuminati Buff you would recognise the power of 5 – and 3.
And if we add Rob Brydon to yourself we get 2. The other Illuminati Number.
They are everywhere.
The Cognoscenti will destroy the Illuminati one day – with no horse’s head in the bed warning, either.
You can recognise a “cult” from its “idols” & Brand & Mandela are “good” examples. You can also recognise it from its “devils”. UK television, especially BBC, has its own rituals, sermons and censorships. There is absolutely no question about the “leftist” stance and infiltration of the BBC. I started collecting evidence of this in the 1960s and over the years filled several boxes with notes and cuttings on programmes & personnel, with no interest ever being shown in this material by MPs, organisations or critics. Unfortunately a few years ago very heavy flooding destroyed these papers in their storage lock-up, but since then the situation has got worse than in the days of South Vietnam and South Vietnam, as the cultural-marxists and “Guardianistas” have established their broadcasting nomenklatura with the aid of the institutionalised state-ideology of “equality and diversity”.
I meant “South Africa”.
Ralf was not a Marxist – that is the floppy, BBC-friendly face of his stance – he was a total, full-blown Communist. The facts bear this out, but the B-BBC will say the Taliban are terrorists before they admit it.