Tony Blair claptrap

[red devil]

What Loz said, someone has to speak up for the 48%. The closeness of the referendum doesn't warrant a hard Brexit (or worse), yet that is what the Gov is delivering. There's an obvious reason why Brixiteers like Gove don't want a vote on the final deal. For them it's a case of getting out of the EU at any cost. And we all know who will have to pick up those costs, and who will be hit the hardest.

Re. Blair, I don't see it as self-promotion, he's clearly passionate about this. If only Corbyn had been...

[titch juicy]

Even Nicola Sturgeon's reluctantly on board

Nicola Sturgeon ‏@NicolaSturgeon 2h2 hours ago

More

Not his biggest fan, but there's a quality of analysis & argument in Blair's speech today that has been totally lacking from Labour to date

[Jeremy]

Let's face it... Blair had many qualities which are currently lacking in Labour.

[Louisa]

Blairs intervention won't change the result of the referendum, nor will it encourage sensible moderate debate. What it will do, quite successfully IMO, is further isolate northern heartland voters who wanted 'OUT', and potentially lose Labour two by-elections in the coming weeks. Blair can't resist sticking the knife in, when it comes to the Labour Party.

Louisa.

[DulwichFox]

Blair destroyed The Labour Party when he created NEW Labour. Like he was ashamed of the OLD Labour Party.

A former supporter of CND and World Peace, he soon got very hungry for War and the 'Thrill' of killing.. almost to the extremities of mania and obssession..

DulwichFox

[JohnL]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blair destroyed The Labour Party when he created

> NEW Labour. Like he was ashamed of the OLD Labour

> Party.

>

> A former supporter of CND and World Peace, he

> soon got very hungry for War and the 'Thrill' of

> killing.. almost to the extremities of mania and

> obssession..

>

> DulwichFox

It's being alleged this was in fact Paul Nuttall.

#PaulNuttallFacts

[rendelharris]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blair destroyed The Labour Party when he created

> NEW Labour. Like he was ashamed of the OLD Labour

> Party.

>

> A former supporter of CND and World Peace, he

> soon got very hungry for War and the 'Thrill' of

> killing.. almost to the extremities of mania and

> obssession..

>

> DulwichFox

To be fair to Blair (which sticks in the gullet but never mind) the New Labour project did manage to get Labour elected for the first time in eighteen years and four general election losses, which is hardly destroying the party. Absolutely agree with the second part, he blew it, but the hope and relief (for many of us) of 1997 shouldn't be forgotten or negated just because the man is now a messianic bellend.

[Jeremy]

I think he was just a pragmatist who realised that a centrist party in power was better than a left wing party in opposition. It's not an unreasonable position, even if you don't agree with it.

But yeah, obviously the war thing... for most people that cancels out any good he did (and then some)

[Louisa]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think he was just a pragmatist who realised that

> a centrist party in power was better than a left

> wing party in opposition. It's not an unreasonable

> position, even if you don't agree with it.

>

A pragmatist to a degree, also a self interested career politician to an even greater degree. He wanted his moment in the sun and place in history, the failings of the Iraq snuffed those objectives out.

Louisa.

[keano77]

Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the people but amassed a huge property portfolio and now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit and for advising dictators among others.

When will people learn?

[Loz]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at

> Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the

> people but amassed a huge property portfolio and

> now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit and

> for advising dictators among others.

As soon as you have to revert to playing the man and not the ball, you are pretty much admitting you don't have a counter argument to what he said.

[red devil]

...and Farage, Gove, Johnson et al are hardly poor, destitute souls. You've been mugged right off keano...

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at

> Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the

> people but amassed a huge property portfolio and

> now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit and

> for advising dictators among others.

>

> When will people learn?

I hold no brief for the public schools, having been state educated myself, but Clement Attlee who is surely the greatest Labour Prime Minister ever went to Haileybury... to castigate a person for the school to which their parents chose to send them is as silly as putting somebody down because they went to a comprehensive.

[Louisa]

Whilst I agree that people can't be held responsible for where they were schooled, what that individual chooses to do afterwards with that education,is the key difference between Attlee and Blair. Attlee was the father of the welfare state, a decent principled man who helped a war ravaged nation back on its feet. Not even a whiff of career based narcissism about him. Blair took a very different path, courting spin doctors and adopting Tory light policies to win numerous elections. For me, politics is about using your education to better the greater good of the masses, and not self indulge your own interests.

Louisa.

[rendelharris]

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Whilst I agree that people can't be held

> responsible for where they were schooled, what

> that individual chooses to do afterwards with that

> education,is the key difference between Attlee and

> Blair. Attlee was the father of the welfare state,

> a decent principled man who helped a war ravaged

> nation back on its feet. Not even a whiff of

> career based narcissism about him. Blair took a

> very different path, courting spin doctors and

> adopting Tory light policies to win numerous

> elections. For me, politics is about using your

> education to better the greater good of the

> masses, and not self indulge your own interests.

>

> Louisa.

Yes of course, Louisa, that was kind of the point I was trying to make, that a public school education can produce someone as praiseworthy as Attlee or as loathsome as Blair ? so just using it as a catchall insult as was the case above is meaningless.

[Louisa]

And Blair isn't alone in that aspect. Many of the pro leave Tories also fall into this category.

Louisa.

[Alan Medic]

Blair was elected wasn?t he? Democratically. People voted for him and his party. They thought they were doing the right thing at the time. As with every government, they eventually get thrown out as the people decide to try something else. I wish him success in whatever it is he tries to do to change opinions about Brexit. I don?t have to like him, but someone needs to speak up. I am sick to death of hearing it?s the ?will of the people?. These are the same people who change governments every so often. At least that chance occurs every 5 years. Brexit is for good. I can?t help thinking this country will regret it big time.

[JohnL]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blair was elected wasn?t he? Democratically.

> People voted for him and his party. They thought

> they were doing the right thing at the time. As

> with every government, they eventually get thrown

> out as the people decide to try something else. I

> wish him success in whatever it is he tries to do

> to change opinions about Brexit. I don?t have to

> like him, but someone needs to speak up. I am sick

> to death of hearing it?s the ?will of the people?.

> These are the same people who change governments

> every so often. At least that chance occurs every

> 5 years. Brexit is for good. I can?t help thinking

> this country will regret it big time.

They cheered him and slapped his back as he walked up

Downing Street.

It was a new beginning.

[Loz]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at

> Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the

> people but amassed a huge property portfolio and

> now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit and

> for advising dictators among others.

>

> When will people learn?

How about the person that attended Harrow School, opposed votes for women, regularly slept till noon, used opium in college, suffered severe depression, agreed to use his parliamentary influence to raise issues in return for money, drank whiskey every evening, plus devised a disastrous campaign in WW1 that cost over a quarter of a million lives and lost him his military job.

Oh, that would be Winston Churchill.

When the right person turns up at the right time with the right argument, their past is a bit irrelevant, no?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Things can only get better 😉

[JohnL]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Things can only get better 😉

If you believe the papers, every year they play this

at the Labour party conference evening do, and every

year Corbyn storms out.

[KidKruger]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> keano77 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at

> > Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the

> > people but amassed a huge property portfolio

> and

> > now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit

> and

> > for advising dictators among others.

> >

> > When will people learn?

>

> How about the person that attended Harrow School,

> opposed votes for women, regularly slept till

> noon, used opium in college, suffered severe

> depression, agreed to use his parliamentary

> influence to raise issues in return for money,

> drank whiskey every evening, plus devised a

> disastrous campaign in WW1 that cost over a

> quarter of a million lives and lost him his

> military job.

>

> Oh, that would be Winston Churchill.

>

> When the right person turns up at the right time

> with the right argument, their past is a bit

> irrelevant, no?

Nice.

[keano77]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > keano77 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Just another champagne socialist. Schooled at

> > > Fettes in Edinburgh. Claims to speak for the

> > > people but amassed a huge property portfolio

> > and

> > > now charges vast sums on the lecture circuit

> > and

> > > for advising dictators among others.

> > >

> > > When will people learn?

> >

> > How about the person that attended Harrow

> School,

> > opposed votes for women, regularly slept till

> > noon, used opium in college, suffered severe

> > depression, agreed to use his parliamentary

> > influence to raise issues in return for money,

> > drank whiskey every evening, plus devised a

> > disastrous campaign in WW1 that cost over a

> > quarter of a million lives and lost him his

> > military job.

> >

> > Oh, that would be Winston Churchill.

> >

> > When the right person turns up at the right

> time

> > with the right argument, their past is a bit

> > irrelevant, no?

>

>

> Nice.

On the contrary - no.

Cometh the hour cometh the man - yes, I agree.

Churchill (despite his father Lord Randolp's legacy) and, say, Lech Walesa, were people who rose to prominence at particular points in history for specific purposes.

My point above is one's formative years, upbringing, socialisation etc, determine to a large extent what type of person one turns out to be (there are rare exceptions). Churchill lived beyond his means and sponged off contacts in the old boy network who paid off his debts.

Blair had the right pedigree and education for his failed attempt to become president of the EU.

His pedigree does not strike me as a possible leader of the vanguard of the proletariat - hence my classifying him as just another champagne socialist.

I suspect, like Churchill, you'll find more Pol Roger Champagne in his household than cheap (champagne for the masses) Prosecco

[jaywalker]

Where would one find the proletariat to be in the vanguard for in 2017?

Churchill was of aristocratic lineage - hence his tendency to risk-taking and dissolution, but also to artistic expression, political non-conformity, absolute faith in national destiny and so on.

These were by no means typical of his schooling (indeed, his schools labelled him very dull).

Contrast with, say, Lenin: "Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov was born in Simbirsk on the Volga River on 22 April 1870 into a well-educated family. He excelled at school and went on to study law. At university ..." (bbc). Certainly Lenin had the intellectual capacity (unlike Churchill) to be in the vanguard of new thinking (a great pity the way it turned out of course).

[keano77]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Where would one find the proletariat to be in the

> vanguard for in 2017?

>

You raise a number of interesting points jaywalker but let me concentrate on your first sentence.

If the proletariat, in Marxist terms, are those who have nothing to sell but their labour then look no further than the gig economy and zero hours contracts in 2017.

Uber being a prime example. Use your own car, your own wear and tear and servicing, your own petrol, your own car tax, insurance and if you download Uber's app you may earn minimum wage. (I do however see that there are some benefits for Uber drivers using the service as a second or third job to bring in extra income).

However, I digress.