UK election 2024

[ProfessorDavey]

I've never really understood why labour didn't as a party remain agnostic on it.

Then I don't think you really understand the DNA of the Labour party - from establishment they have considered themselves to be internationalist in outlook (rather than nationalist) and indeed part of an international socialist movement.

With that DNA it becomes pretty clear that Labour are going to oppose breaking the UK up into bits.

[Nearly Sane]

Then I don't think you really understand the DNA of the Labour party - from establishment they have considered themselves to be internationalist in outlook (rather than nationalist) and indeed part of an international socialist movement.

With that DNA it becomes pretty clear that Labour are going to oppose breaking the UK up into bits.

So they will be Unionist about Northern Ireland? And not want a 2 state solution in Palestine?

Wrapping yourself in one flag as opposed to another doesn't make you internationalist.

[ProfessorDavey]

So they will be Unionist about Northern Ireland?

Labour don't stand candidates in NI so the comparison with Scotland isn't really relevant where they do have candidates and MPs etc. But regardless, no I don't believe that Labour supports a united Ireland as a point of principle.

And not want a 2 state solution in Palestine?

Are you really comparing the situation in Palestine with Scottish independence NS

Wrapping yourself in one flag as opposed to another doesn't make you internationalist.

And what 'national' flag does Labour wrap itself up in NS. I know they have been a bit more willing to embrace the Union Flag recently, but over the decades Labour have often been criticised for not wrapping themselves up in the British flag.

You'll no doubt be aware that Labour do wrap themselves up in a flag - traditionally singing of it at their conference - that flag is the red flag of the international labour movement. That is all about internationalism, not nationalism.

[Nearly Sane]

Labour don't stand candidates in NI so the comparison with Scotland isn't really relevant where they do have candidates and MPs etc. But regardless, no I don't believe that Labour supports a united Ireland as a point of principle.
Are you really comparing the situation in Palestine with Scottish independence NS
And what 'national' flag does Labour wrap itself up in NS. I know they have been a bit more willing to embrace the Union Flag recently, but over the decades Labour have often been criticised for not wrapping themselves up in the British flag.

You'll no doubt be aware that Labour do wrap themselves up in a flag - traditionally singing of it at their conference - that flag is the red flag of the international labour movement. That is all about internationalism, not nationalism.

Isn't NI part of the UK. And since they aren't a Unionist party as regards it, it would seem thar their 'DNA' is malleable.

Same applies to Palestine. You were the one being absolutist, it would appear that isn't the case.

And you were the one to espouse the UK which is not in thar sense internationalist. So if Labour stands up for the Union they are saying that the UK is better. It's just a different nationalism.

[jeremyp]

Isn't NI part of the UK. And since they aren't a Unionist party as regards it, it would seem thar their 'DNA' is malleable.

Same applies to Palestine. You were the one being absolutist, it would appear that isn't the case.

And you were the one to espouse the UK which is not in thar sense internationalist. So if Labour stands up for the Union they are saying that the UK is better. It's just a different nationalism.

I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.

As for Palestine, the situation there is such that a single state would spell disaster for the Jews who live there and also for the gay and lesbian population and well as women. I would not fault Labour for prioritising reality over a general principle. More people should do that.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.

As for Palestine, the situation there is such that a single state would spell disaster for the Jews who live there and also for the gay and lesbian population and well as women. I would not fault Labour for prioritising reality over a general principle. More people should do that.

My point is that the Labour Party has and is allowed to have policies in different areas about whether places should have independence that are different. There is some magical DNA that means you can claim to be just an internationalist party as Prof D puts forward. The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.

[jeremyp]

My point is that the Labour Party has and is allowed to have policies in different areas about whether places should have independence that are different. There is some magical DNA that means you can claim to be just an internationalist party as Prof D puts forward. The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.

Maybe Labour takes a unionist view of Scotland because it believes that it would be absolute madness to give it independence. Sometimes parties stand on principle rather than votes. I know that's rare these days.

[Nearly Sane]

Maybe Labour takes a unionist view of Scotland because it believes that it would be absolute madness to give it independence. Sometimes parties stand on principle rather than votes. I know that's rare these days.

They might do but there's always been a number of independence supporters in the party. As the article covered, it's going to have a good number of people voting for it that support independence, I think possibly about a third of their votes. It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence.

[Nearly Sane]

More bets. This one from Philip Davies on himself to lose.
 I have to admit he will be on my list of Portillo moments as he's odious. And while I might agree there is nothing necessarily illegal about such a bet, it stinks morally, and if it was for 8k then shows how out of touch he is.


 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxw2lm2mm14o

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.

Absolutely correct, which is why NS's comparison of Scotland and NI in nationalist terms is non-sense.

Nationalism in NI and Scotland mean completely different things. In Scotland it is about Scotland becoming a distinct independent nation state. That isn't what nationalism in NI means at all - I don't think anyone is arguing for NI to be a distinct independent nation state. Rather, the nationalists want NI to be part of the Republic of Ireland, rather than the UK. So NI 'nationalists' are really unionists, just that the 'union' they want isn't with the UK but with the Republic of Ireland.

[Nearly Sane]

Absolutely correct, which is why NS's comparison of Scotland and NI in nationalist terms is non-sense.

Nationalism in NI and Scotland mean completely different things. In Scotland it is about Scotland becoming a distinct independent nation state. That isn't what nationalism in NI means at all - I don't think anyone is arguing for NI to be a distinct independent nation state. Rather, the nationalists want NI to be part of the Republic of Ireland, rather than the UK. So NI 'nationalists' are really unionists, just that the 'union' they want isn't with the UK but with the Republic of Ireland.

And Labour's attitude to independence is different in different cases. Which is perfectly reasonable as opposed to asserting that it is in its 'DNA' to oppose it as an absolute.

[ProfessorDavey]

And Labour's attitude to independence is different in different cases.

Except you haven't been able to provide a credible example to support your assertion. The NI situation is completely different - not about independence at all. And Palestine is again completely different - I actually don't think Labour's really preference is a two state solution - rather I think they'd actually prefer a situation where jews and palestinians are able to coexist safely and peacefully within a single state. That this doesn't appear possible is the driver for a 'second best' preference for a two state solution rather than the current status quo. So there is no principle for independence, rather a pragmatic 'second best' (but better than status quo) approach.

Which is perfectly reasonable as opposed to asserting that it is in its 'DNA' to oppose it as an absolute.

You are completely misunderstanding what I mean - that something is in the DNA of a party means that it is a core, defining part of the values of a party. That doesn't mean that it is inalienable and that there may be pragmatic reasons why that core value might be set aside at times. But that doesn't change basic instincts.

Sunak keeps talking about tax cutting being in the DNA of the tories - I wouldn't argue with that - their instincts are always around cutting tax and shrinking the state. That sometimes they don't deliver on this (e.g. right now where taxes are at historic highs and they've broken the state!!) doesn't change their instincts and that tax cutting is in their DNA.

[Nearly Sane]

Except you haven't been able to provide a credible example to support your assertion. The NI situation is completely different - not about independence at all. And Palestine is again completely different - I actually don't think Labour's really preference is a two state solution - rather I think they'd actually prefer a situation where jews and palestinians are able to coexist safely and peacefully within a single state. That this doesn't appear possible is the driver for a 'second best' preference for a two state solution rather than the current status quo. So there is no principle for independence, rather a pragmatic 'second best' (but better than status quo) approach.
You are completely misunderstanding what I mean - that something is in the DNA of a party means that it is a core, defining part of the values of a party. That doesn't mean that it is inalienable and that there may be pragmatic reasons why that core value might be set aside at times. But that doesn't change basic instincts.

Sunak keeps talking about tax cutting being in the DNA of the tories - I wouldn't argue with that - their instincts are always around cutting tax and shrinking the state. That sometimes they don't deliver on this (e.g. right now where taxes are at historic highs and they've broken the state!!) doesn't change their instincts and that tax cutting is in their DNA.

Special pleading.

[ProfessorDavey]

Special pleading.

Nope - are you really claiming that the situation in NI and Palestine regarding independence are somehow analogous to Scotland? You are simply trying to compare apples with bananas. Come back when you are willing to compare apples with apples.

[Nearly Sane]

Nope - are you really claiming that the situation in NI and Palestine regarding independence are somehow analogous to Scotland? You are simply trying to compare apples with bananas. Come back when you are willing to compare apples with apples.

Again, I'm simply saying that the Labour
Party develops policy based on the situation. You're the one claiming that they have to be opposed as a party to Scottish independence because of some mythical 'DNA'.

[ProfessorDavey]

Again, I'm simply saying that the Labour
Party develops policy based on the situation.you're the one claiming that they have to be opposed as a party to ascotiish independence because of some mythical 'DNA'.

So are you trying to argue that political parties somehow do not have overarching values and instincts - their DNA so to speak. Sure policies will be developed as and when needed, but they will still be guided by those overarching principles.

[Nearly Sane]

So are you trying to argue that political parties somehow do not have overarching values and instincts - their DNA so to speak. Sure policies will be developed as and when needed, but they will still be guided by those overarching principles.

I'm saying that saying that there is some basic principle in the Labour Party that means it has to be opposed to Scottish independence is simply an assertion from you.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.

It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence.

You seem to be arguing that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party!!

In which case, evidence please.

Labour, along with most political parties, are broad churches. They have members with a wide variety of views on a whole range of issues. And whisper it quietly, in some cases those individual views may not align with the 'official' party position on specific matters. That doesn't stop individuals being members.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm saying that saying that there is some basic principle in the Labour Party that means it has to be opposed to Scottish independence is simply an assertion from you.

One backed up by the evidence of the history and values of the Labour party as being internationalist rather than nationalist.

So over to you NS - have you found that apple to compare with an apple, or are you still arguing that because the Labour party might suggest that a banana is long thin and yellow that it is inconsistent if it considers an apple to be round-ish and green (or red).

[Nearly Sane]

One backed up by the evidence of the history and values of the Labour party as being internationalist rather than nationalist.

So over to you NS - have you found that apple to compare with an apple, or are you still arguing that because the Labour party might suggest that a banana is long thin and yellow that it is inconsistent if it considers an apple to be round-ish and green (or red).

Oh look another assertion.


If you want me to provide a case that is exactly like Scottish independence there isn't any. That's why you are special pleading since you are simply saying that it's opposed to Scottish independence because it's Scottish independence.

The Labour Party does not oppose NI leaving the UK. It does support the independence of a PLestinian state. It can have policies based on the situation, and it dies. The evidence shows thar. You just repeat assertions about DNA.

[Nearly Sane]

You seem to be arguing that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party!!

In which case, evidence please.

Labour, along with most political parties, are broad churches. They have members with a wide variety of views on a whole range of issues. And whisper it quietly, in some cases those individual views may not align with the 'official' party position on specific matters. That doesn't stop individuals being members.

I know it's  broad church. That's been my point from the beginning. You think though that those members and voters who might believe in independence for Scotland are going against the 'DNA' of the party.

[ProfessorDavey]

I know it's  broad church. That's been my point from the beginning. You think though that those members and voters who might believe in independence for Scotland are going against the 'DNA' of the party.

Nice diversionary tactic NS.

You have asserted that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party. Evidence please.

[Nearly Sane]

Nice diversionary tactic NS.

You have asserted that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party. Evidence please.

Oh look, misrepresentation.

[ProfessorDavey]

If you want me to provide a case that is exactly like Scottish independence there isn't any.

You are correct that there are no other independence campaigns for independence for a place called ... err ... Scotland. No shit Sherlock.

But there are plenty which have features that are pretty well identical (e.g. long-standing and stable union with all parts of that union having democratic rights, without recent history of violent oppression from the central government etc), including Wales and Cornwall in the UK. And Catalonia and the Basque region in Spain/France. In fact there are absolutely loads of them - select those that have the features I describe from this very, very long list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh look, misrepresentation.

Nope - how else would you interpret:

"It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence"

So which is it NS - are you going to retract that comment in which you clearly assert that the Labour party does not currently allow its members to support independence. Alternatively you can provide some evidence to back up your assertion. Choice is yours NS.