I prefer to think of it as reasonable and evidentially based,
Of course if you have evidence to support your supposition and/or own personal prejudice towards millions of people, I would be more than happy to read it.
As for the Labour party still "representing the working man" I prefer to think that they represent all of us, regardless of our lifestyles or our skin colour sexuality etc etc, unlike the Tories for example, who time and time again have clearly demonstrated that they favour certain sections of society above others.
Ther are two things I have to say:
1) If it were a Tory MP or candidate posting images as Emily Thornbury did mocking a working class household, then you and other left leaning individuals on this forum would be kicking up merry hell over this. As it is a Labour MP caught in the act then it is somehow acceptable and excusable, or "no offence was meant". I really would of liked to of seen yours and others comments it if were a Tory representative posting such images and comments.
2) Whether you like it or not Labour are definitely divided. One on hand you have the traditional working class Labour supporter, whilst on the other the better off "metropolitan" Labour supporter. Both share little in common and their views are generally miles apart. The "metropolitan" end claim to "know" or "understand" the other when they do not have a clue in reality, as many have never been working class or poor themselves.
No, I don't as it happens, Because I think it's quite clear and self evident, do you see any point at which he says "Tories" and "Tory supporters and voters"?
he quite clearly says "the Tory Party"s.[/?
Is a political party not made up of its' members? If there were no members it would not exist.
THE UK Independence Party has overtaken Labour as the party for ordinary people, a poll showed today.
Nigel Farage's anti-Brussels movement is seen as more in touch with white working class concerns, YouGov found.
Asked which party was most in touch with the views of white working class people, 27 per cent of people named Ukip compared to 21 per cent who pointed to Labour.
Just nine per cent identified the Conservatives and two per cent the Lib Dems, although 29 per cent said none of the parties was in touch.
Among white working class people, the margin was even greater, with 29 per cent saying Ukip understood them best and only 20 per cent Labour.
Labour are now the party of the middle class metropolitan liberals, the Tories are now liberals, the Lib Dem's are liberals, you know what the problem with this country is, too many liberal politicians.
No, I don't as it happens, Because I think it's quite clear and self evident, do you see any point at which he says "Tories" and "Tory supporters and voters"?
he quite clearly says "the Tory Party"
he was a very intelligent man, and I am certain that had he meant to include every single member of the public who vote for them, or if he was making that comment based only on the action of one single member of the Tory party, he would have made it quite clear.
he was obviously speaking about the party as an entity in it's own right, it's philosophy the things that motivate it, it's history of it's ideologically motivated suppression of the 'lower classes' etc etc,
what he certainly was NOT doing was attacking the Tory party and everyone who votes for it]
I never claimed he was attacking everyone who votes for the Tory party. He was, however, clearly attacking the members of the party rather than the party itself, which is obvious because he used the words THEY ARE as opposed to IT IS.
So you support my "right" to my opinion and yet call it "laughable" ?
No, I called your attempts to paint Bevan's quote as anything other than an attack against the members of the Tory party as laughable. Because they are.
I have made it clear enough, that there is a huge difference between condemning a political party because you strongly and passionately disagree with what it stands for, what it represents, and it's history,
and attacking a political party and everyone who supports it, based on nothing more than the ignorant behaviour of ONE individual
Nye Bevans beliefs about the Tory party, which were based on hundreds of years of history and the ideals and the philosophy behind those ideals, is in no way even remotely close to what some people in this thread have been saying about Labour and their supporters based only on the pathetic actions of one stupid bloody woman.
Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?
Oh, OK then. So, on the basis of the 1997-2010 government's record, it's OK with you if I describe the entire membership of the Labour Party as hypocritical, conniving, iniquitous, warmongering, self-serving filth, is it? You're fine with that, are you? You'd only have a problem with it if I said I formed that opinion because of Tony Blair?
Yeah, right. As I said before, you're fooling nobody.
It seems Emily does have one champion in labour.....step forward Diane Abbott
I wonder what these two could possibly have in common ..oh thats right they are both educationalist hypocrits. Abbott campaigned against anyone being able to send their child to a fee paying school then did send her own son to one. Thornberry campaigned against Selective schools then sent her children to a selective school.
But they're not lone parents, are they? Don't their spouses get a say in where their children go to school?
Labour are now the party of the middle class metropolitan liberals, the Tories are now liberals, the Lib Dem's are liberals, you know what the problem with this country is, too many liberal politicians.
That is precisely why the UKIP have suddenly become so popular - the Lab/Lib/Cons have become interchangeable and a significant section of the population have essentially found themselves disenfranchised for all intents and purposes. I don't like many of UKIP's polices but am rather tired of being told not to vote for them by smug middle class brats on Facebook. People who are struggling to make ends meet, are tired of being told the economy is doing well by overpaid politicians who don't even pretend that this so-called prosperity will ever filter down to their level.
White working class voters would beg to differ, that's why they're deserting labour in droves. Perhaps they have all seen the "evidence" they don't represent them, and
perhaps you have the same view of them as Emily Thornberry and her pals have?
If people want to vote for a smug elitist party which doesn't even pretend to represent their interests they already have the tories and the libdems :cool:
Comments
Ther are two things I have to say:
1) If it were a Tory MP or candidate posting images as Emily Thornbury did mocking a working class household, then you and other left leaning individuals on this forum would be kicking up merry hell over this. As it is a Labour MP caught in the act then it is somehow acceptable and excusable, or "no offence was meant". I really would of liked to of seen yours and others comments it if were a Tory representative posting such images and comments.
2) Whether you like it or not Labour are definitely divided. One on hand you have the traditional working class Labour supporter, whilst on the other the better off "metropolitan" Labour supporter. Both share little in common and their views are generally miles apart. The "metropolitan" end claim to "know" or "understand" the other when they do not have a clue in reality, as many have never been working class or poor themselves.
Is a political party not made up of its' members? If there were no members it would not exist.
Labour are now the party of the middle class metropolitan liberals, the Tories are now liberals, the Lib Dem's are liberals, you know what the problem with this country is, too many liberal politicians.
No, I called your attempts to paint Bevan's quote as anything other than an attack against the members of the Tory party as laughable. Because they are.
Oh, OK then. So, on the basis of the 1997-2010 government's record, it's OK with you if I describe the entire membership of the Labour Party as hypocritical, conniving, iniquitous, warmongering, self-serving filth, is it? You're fine with that, are you? You'd only have a problem with it if I said I formed that opinion because of Tony Blair?
Yeah, right. As I said before, you're fooling nobody.
But they're not lone parents, are they? Don't their spouses get a say in where their children go to school?
That is precisely why the UKIP have suddenly become so popular - the Lab/Lib/Cons have become interchangeable and a significant section of the population have essentially found themselves disenfranchised for all intents and purposes. I don't like many of UKIP's polices but am rather tired of being told not to vote for them by smug middle class brats on Facebook. People who are struggling to make ends meet, are tired of being told the economy is doing well by overpaid politicians who don't even pretend that this so-called prosperity will ever filter down to their level.
If people want to vote for a smug elitist party which doesn't even pretend to represent their interests they already have the tories and the libdems :cool:
Surely not in Lefty Liberal families where feminism is dominant.:D