The care sector is 130,000 short of staff, employers have to pay more NI on them and, now, they have to recruit from a smaller pool of unenthusiastic people who would be better paid in Tesco’s.
The choice of language is worse than Farage’s.
Remind me: how big is the government’s majority?
Trying to appeal to a sector of the electorate which is already lost to him, and doing so in language which you can imagine in the mouth of Enoch Powell (I think the repulsive Farage is actually too canny to have made the ‘island of strangers’ comment). My expectations of Starmer as a public figure were pretty low but he has failed to live up to them. He’s just really bad at this PM gig. I was thinking just the other week that I couldn’t remember his last public announcement and I rather wish he had kept it that way.
Care work is so badly paid. Forget the ads claiming £14 per hour or whatever, the reality for many care workers is timed visits that aren’t long enough to get the job done, unrealistic travel times, poor remuneration for using your own car and not being paid for the time that they don’t have a visit for you. Such an essential part of life now and the people who have to wash, dress and feed the vulnerable are treated worse than casual staff. As a country, we should be improving the lot of those already doing the job and making it more attractive. It’s literally a shit business.
I have a family member who has, after less than a year, been put off a career as a Support Worker by the long hours, exhausting workload, and poor pay, and is switching to… teaching.
Mystic Meg says: check in this time next year for news of another career swerve.
A carer is a skilled, stressful job which pays less than McDonald’s and Costa. I’m surprised that the number of vacancies isn’t higher.
Indeed, and one chronically understaffed. More than once the recent graduate has been left in charge of agency workers, with little/zero training, for the duration of a 14-hour double shift.
Being called and asked to do a 14-hour shift to cover staff sickness, when on annual leave to attend a funeral, is not untypical.
“Do this job on minimum wage and burn out in six months” makes for a tricky recruitment campaign. At least teaching has regular holidays.
Teaching does have regular holidays but the way things are now that isn’t actually much respite. Ignorant Governors, inexperienced and often scared senior managers, the ludicrous demands of Ofsted and the overentitled unrealistic requests from parents make a difficult career into an upsetting, stressful and challenging grind.
It’s a one-year contract for now. I’ll not wager on it being extended.
No PGCE either, which I would have thought makes it even harder.
I thoroughly enjoyed my PGCE year, and the most practically valuable part of it was probably the classroom experience. It brings home the vast difference there can be between the teaching experience in different schools. I really hope your family member has good luck with their placement.
“Labour as shit and venal as Tories shocker”. They’ll say anything to stay in power
I find the government’s policy to be incoherent. Immigration is a function of labour market demand. If there are ‘low skilled’ jobs that need to be filled in the agricultural, service and caring sectors, and there aren’t sufficient workers in the country to fill them, people will be drawn into the country to do them, with or without increased border security. In fact, raise the barriers to entry, and migration will change from circular (people coming and going according to the strength of the economy) to permanent – numbers entering the country through official routes might fall slightly, but numbers leaving will fall further, as people know it will be harder to get back in, (e.g. overstaying visa limits), and/or pursue currently illegal routes of entry.
Historically, politicians talk tough on immigration, but discreetly enact policies that are liberal once migrants are in the country, turning a quiet eye to employers who may rely workers from overseas. The devil may be in the detail:
“Migrants who demonstrate a “contribution” to the economy and society through their tax returns, who work for the NHS and other public services, who have engineering jobs or who do outstanding voluntary service will be entitled to fast-track their permanent residency”.
Still think Corbyn was the bad guy?
Not that I understand why you made that comment here, but I don’t recall ever thinking or saying that Corbyn was ‘the bad guy’ – the hopelessly hapless and amateurish hobbyist guy maybe, but I never thought his heart was in the wrong place, just his ability to command and lead.
I’ll add dogmatic and over-sensitive to the mix, as well. So maybe int the end bad, but defined as incompetent, rather than malevolent.
Or detail the cost of the absurdly extravagant promises he made.
Magic Grandpa’s 2019 savaging at the hands of Andrew Neill was so thorough that Boris Johnson sent AN a note from his mum saying he was too poorly to attend his own excoriation
I mentioned him just because we had a discussion on the man not long ago in which you were very negative towards him, as I recall.
I actually agree with your opinion of him (over-sensitive and dogmatic), but the fact is that back in 2019 he received very, very little support here on the AW, only criticism, silly name-calling (see Jaygee’s comment) and accusations of racism directed at him and his supporters.
I imagine now a UK where he hadn’t been vilified by the press and brought down by the Labour right wing and slagged off on the massively influential forum of The AW but had instead won the election, held his promised second referendum on Brexit (which I think “Remain” would have won) and been PM for 4 years. I doubt he’d have been a great PM, but I reckon the UK would be in a better place right now than it seems to be.
Since 2019 I’ve come to respect him much more. In opposition and as an independent MP I don’t think he’s said or tweeted anything I don’t completely agree with, including his current defence of immigrants and criticism of Starmer on the subject.
Without direct quoting, I can’t tell if your recollection is accurate or not – so forgive me if I ignore it.
Do feel free to stick with your somewhat nuanced drum-beating for a politician who didn’t succeed and who would have been a ‘crap PM’ if he had, your imaginings of what might have happened if the world wasn’t as it actually is, but please leave me out of it if you don’t mind.
When Corbyn entered the Labour leadership race, he seemed a refreshing change, but others on this site were more prescient than I was about the ineffective and stymieing influence he would have on presenting genuine alternatives.
Racism? Is that your euphemism for anti-semitism?
Is anti-semitism not a form of racism?
Only if you believe that Jews are of a different race. Otherwise it’s just anti-Semitism.
@sitheref2409
I’m not sure how widely accepted that is. I recall David Baddiel in his book “Jews Don’t Count” talking about antisemitism as a form of racism:
“First published on 4 February 2021 by TLS Books, the book discusses the status of antisemitism, a form of racism.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_Don%27t_Count
Other sources too, including the Labour Party:
https://labour.org.uk/resources/antisemitism-and-other-forms-of-racism/
https://www.enar-eu.org/specific-forms-of-racism-2/
https://theconversation.com/antisemitism-isnt-just-jew-hatred-its-anti-jewish-racism-193614
I’ve always tended to think of “racism” as an umbrella term covering different forms of discrimination, including, for example, xenophobic discrimination, even when “race” is not involved.
I got mine from the Anne Frank organization, who I trust more on this subject than the Labour Party.
Corbyn, of course, wanted to rewrite the internationally agreed definition of antisemitism to suit his own view of the world.
To suit his anti-Zionist view. He was and is strongly anti-Zionist. I guess whether anti-Zionism can be equated with anti-semitism is the issue.
Corbyn’s pal Diane Abbott famously said that antisemitism isn’t racism.
As does Sit Here F2409, above, and apparently the Anne Frank Organisation. I have no strong feelings either way. I once had an argument with an Italian about the treatment of a specific group of foreigners in Italy. I called it racism and was answered “How can it possibly be racism when we are the same race?”. As said above, rightly or wrongly I’ve always used “racism” as something of a blanket term to cover various forms of discrimination.
@Gary
Like political cartoonists’ caricatures, “Silly name calling” is a pretty effective form of lampooning leaders and those who aspire to leadership..
The fact that SNC continues to incense those who slavishly continue to follow said figures years after they and their opinions become irrelevant also make the practice pretty good fun.
Electoral poison to huge numbers of former Labour loyalists, JC was a disaster as Labour leader. His ineffectual handling of anti-semitism and his unsubtle sabotaging Labour’s support for Remain indicate he’d have been an equally disastrous PM.
@Jaygee
You make a good point in comparing it to political cartoonists’ caricatures. I just find it out of place in serious discussion, especially when used consistently. It makes me think of Katie Hopkins’ approach to politics.
As to JC being irrelevant, he seems to still “trend” extremely regularly on Twitter and I think his voice in the Commons in opposition to Starmer, particularly with regard to what’s happening in Gaza, is extremely relevant and also quite valuable. Plus, in a discussion about the incumbent leader of the PLP I think it would be pretty weird to avoid mentioning his immediate predecessor.
I’d agree Corbyn’s handling of the accusations of anti-semitism was ineffectual. As to his handling of genuine anti-semitism, Martin Forde, who was officially commissioned to investigate the matter, has been notably more critical of Starmer’s handling of it than Corbyn’s and various other sources have exposed the extent to which exaggerated or even false accusations were undeniably used against Corbyn.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Corbyn got more votes than his predecessor, Miliband, and than his successor, Starmer. Like you, I suspect he’d have been a crap PM, but I doubt very much he’d have been as bad as Starmer. For one thing, he would undoubtedly have refused to support what is now widely regarded as a genocide (nor would he have used National Front-esque language when talking about immigration).
His failure to get behind Remain angered me greatly, but as I’ve said, his promise of a second referendum was the only hope for Remain as far as I could see.
Apart from that brief period when he unwillingly got elected leader of the Labour Party, Corbyn has rested comfortably on the Right Side of History – a tremendously comfortable position for a backbencher, because you get to criticise those who make the hard decisions while impressing undergraduates with your Man of Peace and Compassion patter.
Look at his handling of Brexit and antisemitism in the party – he ducked both so as not to annoy his comrades on the Left, and then returned to carping from the sidelines having proudly stuck to his principles whatever the cost.
His calls for peace and compassion obviously had a far wider appeal than just to “undergraduates” and I think sticking to his principles is an admirable quality in a backbench MP, but it’s true he was never anywhere near pragmatic nor ruthless enough to be an effective political leader.
Not supporting his country’s involvement in the mass slaughter of children is clearly not a “hard decision” though.
What is this “involvement” of which you speak?
I assume Gary means his repeated calls for a ceasefire and humanitarian aid?
Arms exports, intelligence and surveillance support, military deployments in the region, and diplomatic backing.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/may/12/britain-israel-donald-trump-arms-exports-law
If another country were bombing the fuck out of England and killing thousands upon thousands of its children, would anyone consider a third country calling for a temporary ceasefire and humanitarian aid to be an adequate, praiseworthy reaction?
It’s one of these pesky hard decisions. Yes, the UK could stop providing components for the American-made F-35 Fighter mentioned in that article, but it’s also used by NATO, patrolling Polish airspace when Russian missiles pass through it on their way to Ukraine.
Obviously, I don’t see it as a hard decision. I think the right decision is clear. We’ll see what the court decides. But that’s not the UK’s only export of military hardware to Israel.
Not a bad guy, just a hopeless ideologue whose stubborn refusal to defend the political centre ground gave us Johnson and Truss. Since you asked.
He’s an agitator not a leader.
Totally agree. Very, very good in opposition, in my opinion. Would probably have been a crap PM (yet still better than Johnson, Truss, Sunak or Starmer).
I don’t think people who were against him in 2019 can credibly complain that he didn’t win the election.
We knew he wasn’t going to win the election – that’s why we were against him
Isn’t that called “self-fulfilling prophecy”?
Not really – still voted for him.
Me too.
Sympathy for those poor souls who won’t change their mind and can’t change the conversation, and for whom, in consequence, every day is 12 December 2019 ☹️
I liked Corbyn to begin with but he was near-silent on Brexit and nobody knew what he really thought on that issue.
As anti-EU as he seemingly was, he was nonetheless the only realistically possible way out of the insanely ill-thought out act of self harm that was Brexit, via a second referendum.
Alan Johnson led the Labour Remain campaign (Corbyn refused to join the combined Remain campaign with other leaders) and said the Leader’s team actively destabilised what he was doing, for example cancelling attendance at rallies at the last moment, delaying signoff of comms until it was too late or demanding significant changes which it was too late to make. In Corby’s 1970s view of the world (when Labour was opposed to the EU) it was all a capitalist plot. I think he bears a reasonable amount of responsibility for the resultant situation and of course was awkward on a second referendum and wouldn’t work with Theresa May on a least worst option which gave us Boris Johnson.
My biggest gripe with JC was definitely his attitude to the EU, but I still think a 2nd referendum would have been the best possible option. Having said that though, the people I know personally who suffered most from Brexit – people who worked in language schools and services – J think would have seen their jobs go up the spout anyway, thanks to AI.
There is an obvious point not being mentioned here and not really clarified by JC himself: Brexit t was only desirable in the context of a favourable deal, favourable in his terms, otherwise not.
I’m pretty sure he promised a 2nd referendum with both a re-negotiated deal and remain as options.
Only when really pushed to do so though. Still unsure what his own position was.
Grumpy.
He promised lots of stuff.
It’s what politicians do to get elecypted
The whole “they must learn the language” rhetoric is truly unbelievable. Especially given how many Brits emigrate without bothering to do so.
However, it’s his lack of any objection to what’s happening in Gaza that I find most shocking. I see that now both The Guardian and The Independent have done a volte-face and condemned Israel’s actions as “genocide” in their editorials. I can’t understand his failure to do the same.
Worry over the right-wing press raising anti-semitism accusations which they undoubtedly would and I don’t think having a Jewish wife can be entirely laid aside as perhaps having some influence on his and indirectly his government’s cowardly stance.
Yvette Cooper on R4 this morning, reacted to the latest gruesome consequences of our friend and ally Israel’s actions in Gaza with a Jeevesian “most disturbing” before some waffle about long term hopes for a two state solution. No word of condemnation I am sure Netanyahu, Smotrich et al are quaking in their loafers.
At the risk of raising the ire of some although I can’t imagine why, this mealy mouthed complicity in what is quite obviously at the very least a seriously egregious act of inhumanity ( I am chosing my words carefully ) is the one overiding act of ommission that will cause me to for the first time spoil my ballot paper at the next GE. I said at the start of this recent continuation of this repugnant and appalling conflict that my sympathies lay with the innocent victims whichever side of the conflict they were on, they still are. It should be clear to all by now where the bulk of that weight now lies and where the greater responsibility for the dreadful and sickening continuation of death and suffering must be laid. Somewhat naively I still expect at the age of sixty nine that the government of my nation in circumstances such as these should do the right thing and not just the expedient thing, sadly that has not happened or seems likely to.
And now I’m going to shut up about politics and listen to some Arnold Bax and try to drown out what has become the incessant awfulness that seems to be engulfing so much of life at this present time. Thanks for indulging me.
100% agree with all of this. Having heard the UN address last night and then the Israeli government spokesman’s quite extraordinary take on reality on Today this morning – to the audible incredulity of Nick Robinson – there will have to be some bloody good reasons put forth by our government, should they keep pursuing their path of appeasing Israel.
I swore at the radio again this morning and Mrs F switched it off.
Ignorance is better than… listening to nutjobs and getting worked up.
Welsh is also an official language in the UK, check any government forms that give you the option to choose which language you prefer, so those speakers should be welcomed too 😉
To live in Canada you need to prove you can speak either English or French. I believe this requirement is waived if you want to bring over elderly relatives who are not expected to contribute to the workforce, but they would not be eligible for any federal or provincial benefits.
“First Nations” communities are also exempt but they have lived here much longer than the English/French invaders so are unlikely to be applying for immigration
Learning the language of the country you want to live in is, of course, “common sense”, as Starmer says. But for a politician to use failure to do so as a weapon to attack immigrants with directly echoes the “they come over here and can’t even speak bloody English” rhetoric spouted by National Front supporters back in the seventies.
I’ve heard rumours that some English migrants to Cymru learn to speak Welsh. Not many mind you but it’s heartening. Even an occasional Bore da or Diolch yn fawr helps to keep the language alive and is appreciated.
I’ve voted Labour virtually all my adult life. I’ve held my nose and done so on many an occasion. I left the Party some years ago but old habits die hard. I’m not at all sure even holding my nose will be enough at the next GE. It’s only a fear of Reform taking the seat that may find me making my mark for Mr Tami once again. Here in Wales despite it’s many manifold problems Welsh Labour are sticking to their guns rather more than the Westminster shower. Eluned Morgan has made clear her disagreement with Starmer on a number of issues and her intention to lead Welsh Labour more to the Left. The Senedd elections next year will be fraught as Reform will push hard for seats and depressingly I can foresee them winning more than a few especially in areas bordering England. The rhetoric is the same bullcrap. Tapping into people’s justifiable grievances and offering simple answers to very complex questions. It’s all the fault of immigration and woke this and woke that. All nonsense of course. Migration is a net benefit to the UK. It needs sensibly applied fine tuning not an axe taken to it to appease the Right.
I agree these are very complex questions which need addressing carefully. I think net benefit hides the real picture with migration, which seems to be a smokescreen for and distraction from massive inequalities in a liberalized economy like the UK.
In a society where profits and wealth are far from equally distributed, where GDP and GDP per capita are very different, it’s quite easy to see why those whose real wages haven’t risen in decades and who pay more in proportion of their income in tax than higher earners might be led to blame those brought in to fill the jobs, maintain the profit streams to higher earners, bring the growth that the Labour government is pinning its hopes on.
Managed immigration with higher wages for those in the sectors they are filling – caring, agriculture, services, construction would see more domestic workers seeing the value in taking up those jobs, diminishing the need for ever-increasing migration. However, ageing and diminishing demographics, a higher qualified workforce, and full gender employment suggest the market for incoming workers is not going to diminish any time soon.
I concur Sal. If people felt better off, less ignored then the siren song of the hard Right would begin to fade into the background.
There is a view that Labour voters are cuddly types who worry about the state of the world, but let’s remember there is a decent percentage who are only interested in their own betterment which was the origin of the party anyway. They voted Brexit, don’t like immigration and probably agree with a lot that Farage says. They are McSweeney’s beloved Blue Labour and are the priority for the party. I didn’t vote for a Labour government (but I would rather have one than the Tories) and didn’t expect them to be much cop though currently they are doing worse than even my low expectations suggested.
I dread to think what we will get after Labour lose the next election.
Pretty accurate assessment.
Wonder what odds the bookies are offering on Farage holding some kind of cabinet post after the next election
Absolutely. Back in the day we meaning my wife and I used to occasionally spend an evening or two with friends in our local Labour Club or ‘The Kremlin’ as it was affectionately known. Donna used to comment every single time how she was bemused at how some of the inhabitants could call themselves even vaguely Socialist after listening to their views often spoken at volume about issues ranging from economics to of course migration and everything in-between. I believe after hearing indirectly from the one friend who still pops his head in there occasionally that it’s only gotten worse and Reform is spoken of frequently as the answer to all their problems.
That’s interesting P. When I was a student I went to a few Socialist student meetings and the anger and hatred was scary. The Conservative ones were much more relaxed, smug, entitled. So I washed my hands of both and have been a Liberal every since where they default view is everyone should be allowed to live their life as they wish and be left the fuck alone by government as far as possible.
It was where friends frequented so that’s where we had to go if we wanted to spend an evening with them. We stopped going after a little time. Bile and anger aren’t exactly conducive to a good night out or a good anything really.
My hometown constituency used to be the strongest Labour one in the country (Michael Foot was our MP), in 2016 they had, I believe, the biggest vote for Brexit in England and Wales.
Since the steelworks closed EU money helped to re-build that area with a school, a hospital and a leisure centre. Was also used towards improving roads and re-establishing a rail link with Cardiff and Newport. What have the Romans ever done for us?
Same thing here @dai only at the opposite end of the country. I used to try and talk to some locals about the stupidity of voting Leave including my postman but to no avail. Funnily enough he’s not too keen on talking about Brexit anymore and I’m too worn down by all the crap to bother pushing him on the matter.
A few of my friends in UK are crying out for a Green/Liberal coalition. I wonder if that would be the best way to curtail support for Reform?
Well they have the environment in common but like most left wing parties they are in favour of centralised control and many of their policies are illiberal. I read a radical policy agenda created at a Just Stop Oil event. Scary. Destroying environmentally damaging vehicles cannot be prosecuted was one I remember. Plus they don’t believe in a mixed economy and their economic prospectus was batshit last time I read it. I imagine they could work together though my mate in Germany says the Greens were a disaster in the recent coalition though I don’t really know more than that.
We had the Greens in Scotland propping up the SNP and directing policies in various disastrously expensive and ultimately failed directions. Keep them far away from the levers of power please.
This is the point that I give up on Starmer. There has to be a sensible debate around immigration, with an acknowledgement that it produces some tensions, and measures to manage it in line with what the country needs; but his language comes straight from the racist Reform vocabulary.
It’s clear that the local elections scared Starmer to the extent that he’s beginning to pander to bigots. I’ve been ready to forgive him for the public groveling to Trump – which was embarrassing but maybe necessary – but his latest words are not those of someone who believes in a tolerant, open society; or those of a Labour Party leader.
I voted Labour in the last general election, but this has made it a lot more difficult for me to do so next time.
First paragraph is spot on. Terrible, ham-fisted speech that seems likely only to pour petrol on the flames he’s meant to be trying to douse.
This government is consistently terrible at comms, and we’re all going to end up paying the price if they don’t sort it out.
I wrote to my MP and told him this. I got a boilerplate reply from someone in the office telling me the plan was working and not to worry. Case closed.
I think it’s more than poor communication although I am in full agreement on that. This stance has an air of poorly thought through panic about it. The people for whom Reform are increasingly looking like a viable alternative are hardly going to change their opinion about the current government or the previous skip fire Tory administrations because Starmer tries to talk tough over migration. It started going downhill with the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowence and subsequent actions have only served to exacerbate the dissatisfaction amongst a significant number of the electorate. The optics stink and yes that’s almost but not entirely down to poor comms. The migration stance now being adopted will serve only to lose them votes from the more socially left leaning Labour constituency without gaining any votes from the dyed in the wool bigots and seriously disaffected who see Reform as their natural home.
Putting my Mystic Meg hat on for a moment I think at this point in the electoral cycle that unless many things, especially economically start to turn more favourably for Labour the best we can hope for at the next GE is a hung parliament with the Liberals having a say in who gets to fuck things up going forward or is that backwards it’s getting hard to tell.
From a purely strategic POV I don’t think he has any choice other than to make the electorate an offer of some description on immigration.
Governments have been largely ignoring what has been the fairly evident will of voters in poll after poll for nearly a generation. Doing so has already contributed to our leaving the European Union, and if we simply continue along the same path, serving up the same old bromides, it feels fairly evident we’re going to end up with a Far Right government. Maybe not next time out, but at some stage.
I’ve been broadly “pro” immigration my entire life, but I’ve come to accept the above. It’s just where we are, I’m afraid – where quite a few Western countries are, by the look of it. Reform is pretty much a single issue party, and they’re gaining traction on this issue, just like other ghouls elsewhere. If the government ignores the single issue they’ll continue to do so. Starmer has to lance the boil somehow, this just isn’t the way to do it.
I thought Polly Toynbee wrote a characteristic but telling article in the Guardian yesterday, essentially waving the issue away because “Just over half of voters want fewer migrants (I would have expected more), but it’s the priority issue for only 27% of those polled.” This is what being in denial looks like, and it’s precisely the same as the denial that landed the Americans with Trump.
Immigration is currently second on the list of issues the public regards as most important for the country, very narrowly behind health. It’s the issue that’s going to see actual fascists in power if we don’t wake up. Starmer needs to either win the argument, which we’ve been trying and failing to do for 20 years now, or shift policy to something that satisfies the public. But whichever he does, for god’s sake he needs to please pick his bloody words a bit more carefully.
Not going to argue on any of the above because it’s a crap feeling effectively arguing against immigration. These are just my observations, for what they’re worth.
We are in agreement I believe especially about the sheer cackhandedness of that speech. My point is unless Starmer and Labour start to very visibly improve people’s lot there is no reason for those who have already decided that a vote for Labour was a mistake to change their minds and vote Labour again at the next GE no matter how tough they talk or act about immigration. A lot of people are throughly pissed off with the two main Parties and have come to believe however erroneously or otherwise that ‘they are all the same’ increasing numbers will just not bother to vote but some and it may well be a significant number will vote for an alternative that offers them a free unicorn. I think the Senedd elections next year will be a canary in the coalmine moment for Labour not just in Wales but for England too. It will be informative.
Totally agree with all of that 👍🏼
I have just finished thr Gary Stevenson book The Trading Game. He has a very clear view that the global economy is broken – unfixable. The economic engine room part of society is shrinking. Too much of the economy is now owned by too few people who have no interest in spending it but are fixated on accumulation. (I have paraphased massively, but I did take this from his book – which is well worth a read).
All of this creates a fertile breeding ground for envy and hate. The UK reflects this and what was a minority view, it is now mainstream and, possibly, a majority view. It continues to grow.
If you want to be a prime minister, you have two choices. Do it for the right reasons and hope there is enough support to see you through. Or chase the vote by doing things that appeal to the majority. It is clear where Starmer has gone with this choice.
Given that 3 of the 4 main parties are being visibly tough on immigration to appeal to that set of voters, I think it can only get worse.
I watch quite a few of the Gary Stevenson videos and have heard a long form interview or two with him as well, and recognize what he says. Sadly the last time that a small minority took monopolistic control over a significant industry (oil), it seemed to take a world way (or two) to wrest wealth and assets (partially if not totally) destroyed from the grasping hands of the fearful and greedy billionaire equivalents.
If only it can be different this time.
The immigration problem must be hard for even dyed in the wool liberals to continue to shout “racism” without seeing from other’s perspective. I live in a town where we live separate lives from our immigrants; I guess that’s typical. They have their own schools, their own shops, live in their own area- parallel lives really.
I do try interacting with any that appear interested, though there is a level of distrust which I totally get, given how vehement the enmity is. I just wonder if this can ever end well.
That was pretty much my experience as well when I lived in Luton. It’s noticeably different where I live now.. There is still a significant element of people living in silos, but the difference is that, unlike in Luton, the individual communities aren’t big enough to live entirely separate lives. And , unlike my neigbours in Luton, I have yet to encounter anyone that isn’t allowed to speak to me becuae I am a man. Sadly, one of my wife’s colleagues ( a woman) isn’t allowed to give a lift to work to a ( male) colleague, becuae her husband’s uncle doesn’t approve.
I moved, workwise, from South Birmingham, where the “ethnic minority” held a slight majority over white British, in 2017, to Lichfield, where the black and Asians made up less than 0.5%, and probably still do. I felt never anything than acceptance, as a valued provider of care, or so I was led to believe. I seldom saw evidence of any frictions until that move, where the fear of the unknown remained I tempered by the reality. Rose tinted? I don’t believe so.
In this little exchange in the Commons, Starmer immediately reminded me of David Cameron and subsequently made me think of the end of Orwell’s Animal Farm.
https://x.com/LBC/status/1922635507047297286
@Gary
Mention of Cameron in the same context as porcine farmyard animals made me think of that infamous very early episode of Black Mirror
On the issue raised above of whether anti-semitism is in fact racism; quite obviously it is, but occasionally people do muddy the waters.
Here are a few well known quotes which demonstrate just how vexed the issue became within and around the Labour party until quite recently:
“Tomiwa Owolade claims that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people all suffer from “racism”. They undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they were interchangeable. It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism.”
“Only in the sense that antisemitism can be considered a form of “racism”. But again a very discussable issue (as exemplified in the recent Whoopi Goldberg controversy).” (Goldberg had described the Holocaust as “not being about race”, and instead categorised it as “white on white violence”).
“The documentary above shows evidence of an influential Jewish conspiracy against Corbyn”.
“Does a “Jewish lobby”, as Walter John Raymond defines it, really exist in America? and if so, it it not extremely powerful? Powerful enough to deter musicians from speaking out on Palestine”?
“He didn’t condemn a mural that supposedly insulted Jewish people with its caricaturish depiction. Which I thought was a bit like that time Danny Baker was held up as a racist for tweeting a photo of Meghan Markle with a baby chimp – I think you have to be “racially sensitive”, perhaps even a little racist, in order to see the connections… Was it the artist’s intention? I don’t even know who painted it… If it wasn’t the artist’s intention to draw a racist mural, then I’m not sure it can be considered racist. Otherwise any work of art is exposed to the possibility of being labelled racist.”
On the racism question, does anyone have a clear definition of what a race is? I doubt it.
My own opinion is that race is not clearly definable and perhaps does not really exist except in the minds of its believers. That belief is race-ism. I would welcome a debate on this, especially from anyone with specialist scientific insight. The question of whether Jews are a race or not depends on what ‘racial’ views you hold, and the various views on this cannot be proven or even stabilised.
I understand that the genetic heritage of most Israeli Jews is made up of endowments in common with the Palestinians on the one hand and East European people (in general) on the other. So those who would try to find a uniquely ‘Jewish gene’ for ideological purposes, whether Zionist or antisemite, are probably equally race-ist, that is, obscurantist.
I have no idea whether the Jewish people are a race, and I would certainly tend towards your own view as to the ephemeral nature of race as a construct.
However, I did want to flag that racism isn’t solely a prejudice based on race, it’s also ethnicity – the “ME” in “BAME”. It’s the reason that I could be called a “p*ki” as a teenager by people who ostensibly belonged to my own racial group, and also the reason that Islamophobia is racism. It’s also the reason that hatred of Jewish people is racism regardless of whether they’re a race – I recognise you’re not suggesting otherwise here, but it feels important to clarify nonetheless.
One of the most noxious features of the last ten years has been warring online tribes attempting to warp the meaning of words – often important words – to suit their own ends. There have certainly been moves in recent times to adapt the term “racism” to suit a particular ideology. Personally, I think they should be resisted – watching what’s happening in Western politics at the moment we’d be out of our minds to reconstruct this important concept to exclude its ethnic component – frankly, it’s doing the work of the far right for them.
I’ve sat in quite a few lectures on what “racism” is, often delivered by well meaning American liberals, who have a tendency to see the issue solely through the lens of their own country’s issues and preoccupations. What they often miss is a very simple fact; racism, quite unfortunately; isn’t defined by well meaning liberals with very active Twitter accounts. It’s defined by racists – the ideology lives and breeds in their heads, and encompasses their hatreds and enmities, often in ways that make very little sense. I’ve been told more than once that the racism I enjoyed as a child wasn’t in fact racism, but rather xenophobia, or even nationalism. But unfortunately, I was present for those events; I knew the individuals involved, and I know that their words were delivered as racism, with the absolute intent of racism, and certainly received as such. No amount of academic theorising will change that basic reality.
Sorry, slight tangent on the question you were asking, but a point I felt worth making somewhere on this thread. The Jewish people may or may not be a race, but hatred of them en masse will always be racism, and we surrender that basic reality at our peril, regardless of our political affiliations.
You don’t have to be a descendant of Abraham to be a Jew. The religion allows for converts. The DNA seems to be mixed North African and Easter European but you can have similar DNA and not be a Jew. Or, have different DNA and be Jewish. There are Japanese Jews, for example. However, there could be a DNA cluster.
The prejudice against Jews is based on race, religion or both. I’m quite happy to call it racism.
That is quite different to being critical of the Israeli government.
Others will know far better than me, but my understanding is that the Jewish people are primarily an ethno-religious group. Prejudice against them is based on race, religion and/or ethnicity. You can be a non-practicing Jewish person with no particular distinguishing racial characteristics (to the extent that’s even a meaningful measure of anything), and it won’t spare you, because you’re still part of the ethnic grouping.
It should be obvious that you can (and indeed) should criticise the execrable government of Israel without being anti-Semitic. It’s equally obvious that certain parties cannot resist mixing the language and imagery of classic anti-semitism into their critiques (either knowingly or because they’ve seen their peers attempt to legitimise doing so), while others seek to use anti-semitism as a pretext to shut down literally all criticism. Each of those groups uses its opposite as an excuse for their own shitty behaviour, because that’s what the internet has educated people to do.
Look up ‘How to Argue with a Racist’ by Adam Rutherford. If I got the gist right, he argues that perceived distinctions between races are not backed up by the evidence of DNA. In essence, race is a social construct rather than a physiological categorisation.
I emphasise that does not invalidate Bingo’s point above about deliberate racism.