Mick Lynch - The New Statesman

What I do like about Mick Lynch and the article, is the position he puts forward on brexit. I disagree with him for many reasons, but also concede his view on it is not without merit.

Refreshing because most brexiteers (including politicians who should really be doing and have done, much better) struggle to string together a coherent argument for it beyond clichés like "take back control" and "sovereignty".

Perhaps if someone like Mick Lynch was leading the leave campaign we could have had a more grown up discussion about it and people might have been able to make a more informed decision. Whatever that might have been.
 
festa5 said:
What I do like about Mick Lynch and the article, is the position he puts forward on brexit. I disagree with him for many reasons, but also concede his view on it is not without merit.

Refreshing because most brexiteers (including politicians who should really be doing and have done, much better) struggle to string together a coherent argument for it beyond clichés like "take back control" and "sovereignty".

Perhaps if someone like Mick Lynch was leading the leave campaign we could have had a more grown up discussion about it and people might have been able to make a more informed decision. Whatever that might have been.
Click to expand...
He’s 100% correct about the privatisation clause embedded into the Lisbon agreement. However the railways and almost every other public service in the U.K. has already been privatised so seemingly the horse has already bolted. Perhaps he is hoping for renationalising of services in the future.

I disagree with his freedom of movement argument. He says it “doesn’t help anyone”. It helps fill shortages in manual labour sectors that are still struggling to be filled. Perhaps those positions will be filled by immigrants from other parts of the world or perhaps it will help raise UK wages in those sectors eventually but those costs will be passed onto the consumer.
Additionally, surely it helped the Europeans who worked in the UK, earning a salary beyond what they could expect in their home country. Take fruit pickers - they are going home to pick fruit for €3/4 an hour compared to whatever in the UK (£10-15?).
Skilled workers will still leave Slovakia, Romania etc. UK companies will pay for visas or they will head to Germany/France.
 
This daft country. Any time anyone challenges the ruling class in any way, the consent-manufacturing machine kicks in and destroys them. Lynch will end up going the same way as Corbyn and Scargill now. In a few years he'll be absolutely despised by half the population. We should be questioning why a publication is even asking him about China and Ukraine. It's pointless. He's not a politician. He doesn't have any kind of foreign policy role or influence.
 
SuperStu said:
This daft country. Any time anyone challenges the ruling class in any way, the consent-manufacturing machine kicks in and destroys them. Lynch will end up going the same way as Corbyn and Scargill now. In a few years he'll be absolutely despised by half the population. We should be questioning why a publication is even asking him about China and Ukraine. It's pointless. He's not a politician. He doesn't have any kind of foreign policy role or influence.
Click to expand...
I agree with your sentiment Stu but he willingly offered up the sound bite to a follow up question about Brexit. A simple “by all accounts the UK is still supporting Ukraine so it makes little to no difference”. He used the question as a prompt to have a dig at the EU.
 
I haven't read the article as yet but there seems to be question marks about the interpretation of his comments.
Surely, follow up interviews should clarify to leave us in no doubt about what he means??
 
SuperStu said:
This daft country. Any time anyone challenges the ruling class in any way, the consent-manufacturing machine kicks in and destroys them. Lynch will end up going the same way as Corbyn and Scargill now. In a few years he'll be absolutely despised by half the population. We should be questioning why a publication is even asking him about China and Ukraine. It's pointless. He's not a politician. He doesn't have any kind of foreign policy role or influence.
Click to expand...
Why Mick Lynch would be dragged into answering questions about China, Russia and Ukraine is anyone's guess. There are no right answers, only answers that some will say are wrong.

It's not about the ruling class - is there such a thing? - he is lucid, smart and his views are popular. He'll be well regarded for as long as (as a union leader) he sticks to the union message. If he wants to spill over into the broader political spectrum then he's in different and less comfortable territory.

But he's a capable bloke, maybe he can succeed where Arthur Scargill failed. I'd just prefer him to stick to the message until he moves into a political role.
 
Nothing is black & white. We all think Russia and China are evil untrustworthy regimes (they are) but do we really think America and the UK are on the side of good? I'm not so sure any regimes or governments have their peoples interests at heart.

I watched an interesting video with aussie journalist John Pilger on youtube about the war in Ukraine and Americas threat to China.

 
Man speaks truth. Establishment then seek to discredit man’s views or cause controversy around them, in an attempt to discredit him in some way, or at least weaken him. To deflect, divert, turn people against him.

Whatever he thinks about one thing - whether it’s China, or bingo or Asda or ice cream or the Ukraine - doesn’t change what he thinks about the other. We can agree with him about rail, but maybe not on something else.

It’s not difficult IMO. The establishment has spent about three months trying to find something to discredit his arguments. It’s the oldest trick in the book. Don’t let them win.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
It’s not difficult IMO. The establishment has spent about three months trying to find something to discredit his arguments. It’s the oldest trick in the book. Don’t let them win.
Click to expand...

I saw one interview with him where he briefly mentioned that he’s had Daily Mail hacks camped outside his house since he became prominent, even following his kids to school and his wife to the shops, hoping to find something they can use. It really is a despicable rag.
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Brilliant watch that 👍
Hard to disagree with anything he says in it. Gives me a bit of hope.
Click to expand...
The New Statesman isnt the first and wont be the last to smear him, the RMT and Trades Unions.
Capitalism feels threatened by organised labour.
Its oligarch-owned media moves into gear to defend it, to divide and rule.
Fact is - he`s spot on the button: bosses cant be done with a strong working-class defence and fightback against low wages, zero hours contracts, sacrificing safety and jobs for private profits and using whatever means to take away our rights, including the right to a decent quality of life and a publicly owned - publicly funded National Health Service.(y)
 
I’m in total disagreement with him on lots of things there. Why does a Labour front bench made of up professional people not speak for those in a Union? Just because you haven’t got trade related skills doesn’t mean you can’t oppose the Tory thinking completely.

His thinking about EU privatisation is flawed too. If his views are true then why can Germany, France and others all have nationalised railways and utilities? Scotland and Wales have not-for-profit water and have done so for years.

As for freedom of movement. It’s not just people, it’s goods and services. That makes economic conditions much better for everyone. Not every single person in Eastern Europe (which the likes of Lynch really means) wanted to come to Britain. Those who did were often enticed by companies looking to cut as many costs as they could. Shareholder Value Maximisation.
 
It would be fascinating to know the leave/remain % of unionised workers. Any guesses? Perhaps he’s preaching to his choir.
 
Nero said:
I’m in total disagreement with him on lots of things there. Why does a Labour front bench made of up professional people not speak for those in a Union? Just because you haven’t got trade related skills doesn’t mean you can’t oppose the Tory thinking completely.

His thinking about EU privatisation is flawed too. If his views are true then why can Germany, France and others all have nationalised railways and utilities? Scotland and Wales have not-for-profit water and have done so for years.

As for freedom of movement. It’s not just people, it’s goods and services. That makes economic conditions much better for everyone. Not every single person in Eastern Europe (which the likes of Lynch really means) wanted to come to Britain. Those who did were often enticed by companies looking to cut as many costs as they could. Shareholder Value Maximisation.
Click to expand...
I think his Brexit/Lexit thinking is wrong-headed but there are some good points around workers pay and conditions that need addressing.

As for the professional classes speaking for the unions, I think it's more 'look at what they do, not what they say'. The current Labour leadership isn't fit for purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top