Labours changing policy on the EU

Same_as_before said:
www.researchgate.net

(PDF) The Labour Party's Changing Relationship to Europe: The Expansion of European Social Policy

PDF | In 1950, the National Executive of the Labour Party stated that European integration could not be reconciled with a socialist agenda; however, by... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
www.researchgate.net www.researchgate.net

Today's left wingers not agreeing with the party's view. There you go, left wing by backside.
Click to expand...
Come on SaB give us an introduction for those of us who don't have time to read the article!
 
I think the first line does it. Against socialist principles. This by people who fought a war, understood 1930' s poverty, no NHS, no minimum wage (Blair spit)

Today the left sit in their three bedroomed house with the central heating on looking at the 4 X 4 and tell Easterside how to vote.
 
Same_as_before said:
www.researchgate.net

(PDF) The Labour Party's Changing Relationship to Europe: The Expansion of European Social Policy

PDF | In 1950, the National Executive of the Labour Party stated that European integration could not be reconciled with a socialist agenda; however, by... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
www.researchgate.net www.researchgate.net

Today's left wingers not agreeing with the party's view. There you go, left wing by backside.
Click to expand...

the shift is in what people call left wing.

as your proving, most dont know the difference between left wing and a whistling kettle.


labour party policy changes regularly, always has and will continue to do so.

if you dont happen to be in the Labour Party its a little sneaky and disingenuous to start carping on about it - what i call a political pygmy, small in mind and small in character.

others would label you worse.

*just to confirm for reason of any doubt i am not a member of the labour party.
 
Same_as_before said:
I think the first line does it. Against socialist principles. This by people who fought a war, understood 1930' s poverty, no NHS, no minimum wage (Blair spit)

Today the left sit in their three bedroomed house with the central heating on looking at the 4 X 4 and tell Easterside how to vote.
Click to expand...
Is this the same ladgate ward that elected in two Labour councillors at the last election? Must be the left telling them what to do I guess
 
The same Labour government that made the UK a nuclear power, oversaw the Batang Kali massacre in the 'Malaya Emergency' and decided to partition India with little care for the fall out?

You'd struggle to find a greater advocate for the 1945-50 Labour government than me, but they were as cynical, was nowhere near perfect as others and not afraid to hide behind 'socialist principles' if it suited them (and keeping the UK out of a common coal and steel market suited the Labour party's heartlands v much in 1950).
 
Same_as_before said:
www.researchgate.net

(PDF) The Labour Party's Changing Relationship to Europe: The Expansion of European Social Policy

PDF | In 1950, the National Executive of the Labour Party stated that European integration could not be reconciled with a socialist agenda; however, by... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
www.researchgate.net www.researchgate.net

Today's left wingers not agreeing with the party's view. There you go, left wing by backside.
Click to expand...

What's the point of the article? Genuine question.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
What is this thread trying to imply?
Click to expand...
It implies nothing BBG- it specifically states that Labour 1950 would not join a common market because the CM was not Socialist enough.
By 1994 the CM (by now the EU) was an advocate of social and welfare policies that were in alignment with Labour Party policies and values and so Labour would have no objection in joining it.
 
Johnny Vincents Motorbike said:
the shift is in what people call left wing.

as your proving, most dont know the difference between left wing and a whistling kettle.


labour party policy changes regularly, always has and will continue to do so.

if you dont happen to be in the Labour Party its a little sneaky and disingenuous to start carping on about it - what i call a political pygmy, small in mind and small in character.

others would label you worse.

*just to confirm for reason of any doubt i am not a member of the labour party.
Click to expand...
Ah the laughable left, wanting to be inside a capitalist based cabal,b y a centralist elite.


there is a bloke on here who won't vote Labour because of an in house argument.


i can tell you now; Heffer, Short, Wilson, Benn, Foot, Crossland, Most Trade Union leaders who tell him to stop being a baby and back Labour.
 
Trug said:
It implies nothing BBG- it specifically states that Labour 1950 would not join a common market because the CM was not Socialist enough.
By 1994 the CM (by now the EU) was an advocate of social and welfare policies that were in alignment with Labour Party policies and values and so Labour would have no objection in joining it.
Click to expand...
I think the word Socialism has confused you. You will soon be getting a like from the in house Tory.
 
Same_as_before said:
I think the first line does it. Against socialist principles. This by people who fought a war, understood 1930' s poverty, no NHS, no minimum wage (Blair spit)

Today the left sit in their three bedroomed house with the central heating on looking at the 4 X 4 and tell Easterside how to vote.
Click to expand...
What an absolute load of tosh, you are either trolling or just clueless. The left are the ones attempting to instil even a modicum of morality to the butchers currently dividing up our countries spoils between their mates.

Also the disingenuousness of this argument, in what way are the right trying to make our country better at the moment? They are making it harder to vote, criminalising protesters, leaving old people to die in nursing homes, lining the pockets of their mates and openly lying through their teeth in the commons and to the press.

Where is your class solidarity? Why do you feel the need to attack the left rather than shout about the rights accomplishments (there must be some in 12 years surely)?

Take your dog whistle and sod off.
 
Trug said:
It implies nothing BBG- it specifically states that Labour 1950 would not join a common market because the CM was not Socialist enough.
By 1994 the CM (by now the EU) was an advocate of social and welfare policies that were in alignment with Labour Party policies and values and so Labour would have no objection in joining it.
Click to expand...
Aye I read the paper and found it interesting how the left slowly recognised the advantages of being in the club:-


"At the General and Municipal Workers’ Union (GMWU) Conference, A.M. Donnet declared:
“Joining the EEC will commit Britain to implementing the principle of equal pay. It
could also give added impetus towards longer holidays and shorter hours, and may
lead to an improvement of training methods and facilities. The harmonization of
social policies could lead to an improvement in family allowances”."

"Another new policy introduced in 1965, in line with existing Labour policies,
was the formation of a committee designed to distribute the money of the European
Development Fund to projects originating in the less-developed EEC Associated
Countries. Funds were provided for infrastructure, as well as public institutions,
such as schools and hospitals."

But I've no idea what SAB's point is. What is "left wing by backside?"
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
Aye I read the paper and found it interesting how the left slowly recognised the advantages of being in the club:-


"At the General and Municipal Workers’ Union (GMWU) Conference, A.M. Donnet declared:
“Joining the EEC will commit Britain to implementing the principle of equal pay. It
could also give added impetus towards longer holidays and shorter hours, and may
lead to an improvement of training methods and facilities. The harmonization of
social policies could lead to an improvement in family allowances”."

"Another new policy introduced in 1965, in line with existing Labour policies,
was the formation of a committee designed to distribute the money of the European
Development Fund to projects originating in the less-developed EEC Associated
Countries. Funds were provided for infrastructure, as well as public institutions,
such as schools and hospitals."

But I've no idea what SAB's point is. What is "left wing by backside?"
Click to expand...
But I've no idea what SAB's point is. What is "left wing by backside?"
No idea, Unless it is a reference to Thatchers " socialism by the back door" whinge
 
JonnyHistory said:
What an absolute load of tosh, you are either trolling or just clueless. The left are the ones attempting to instil even a modicum of morality to the butchers currently dividing up our countries spoils between their mates.

Also the disingenuousness of this argument, in what way are the right trying to make our country better at the moment? They are making it harder to vote, criminalising protesters, leaving old people to die in nursing homes, lining the pockets of their mates and openly lying through their teeth in the commons and to the press.

Where is your class solidarity? Why do you feel the need to attack the left rather than shout about the rights accomplishments (there must be some in 12 years surely)?

Take your dog whistle and sod off.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, no reasoned argument just insults. I vote Labour without thinking I don't need a manifesto to tell me it's better than the alternative.

It's the left on here crying I am not Voting Labour because of that nasty Starmer.

It was the left who questioned the outcome of the referendum, a vote for Brexit significantly in Major Labour heartlands. Then suggested there should be a rerun. The electorate in those Labour heartlands did indeed get off the leash and stuffed us.
Keep your theoretical principled socialism I am pragmatic Labour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top