Killing so many trans people to get to power, just to piss off again after only 2 years. Was that really worth it?
Struggling for years to get power with the only goal of killing as many trans people as possible, only to get ousted after two years (in favor of a different person whose sole goal is killing trans people)
End-stage Soc-Dem parties. Just one reactionary party leader getting backstabbed by a different reactionary, who, in turn, also gets backstabbed by another ghoul soon after.
Was recently reading about the early years of the SPD (before the whole Weimar republic bullshit), and it’s just ridiculous how easy it was for the warmongering, anti-Semitic right wing to take over the party and purge all the left wingers right before WWI. People love to say that these parties are shit because of all the neoliberal influences since the 90s, but I think there’s just something inherently wrong with Soc-Dem parties that makes them so vulnerable to chuddy attitudes, and it’s not just them embracing capitalism.
I think there’s just something inherently wrong with Soc-Dem parties that makes them so vulnerable to chuddy attitudes, and it’s not just them embracing capitalism.
It’s the chauvinism. The reason why they became socdems to begin with was because of chauvinism, because when push came to shove they chose to side with their own bourgeoisie’s wars over the international proletariat. And it is chauvinism and exceptionalism that continues to fuel social democracy. Because social democracy requires the spoils of imperial and neo-colonial plunder to sustain the privileges of a welfare state under capitalism. And because it requires you to believe in your own exceptionalism and superiority to think that social democratic reformism can succeed for you even though it has failed everywhere else. All of that naturally attracts and incubates reactionary attitudes, at first as an undercurrent and later increasingly overt as the crises of capitalism deepen.
I believe he thinks so
is one of the ‘political realities’ he’s reflecting on that he is a pile of wet laundry, strategically placed by assholes to block global human progress?
To anyone more tapped in with
politics: is this a good thing? Like fuck Kid Starver, it’s nice to see him go, but is there any potential for this to actually change the trajectory of ? (My instincts say “no” but I figure it’s worth asking.)Burnham made a vague suggestion he would support electoral reform which would be a minor improvement (and absolutely not trajectory-changing thing) he obviously won’t follow up on.
Other than that it’s basically no difference whatsoever from Starmer. Far as I can tell nobody even cares except the bourgeois class. So just a different set of specific allies with exactly the same interests and goals.
Burnham will be Starmer but with a northern accent.
Like MAYBE the UK will get Land Value Tax. While Karl Marx heavily criticized Georgism as capitalism’s last ditch effort, even he admitted he likes Land Value Tax.
No.
Nothing will change. This is just aesthetics.
One of the only things I remember about that hideous looking Br*t.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Morally corrupt serial liar who courted the far-right and demonised the left. Tried to starve pensioners and children. Made it illegal to protest genocide. Assisted with said genocide. Weaponised terror law against UK citizens to defend Israel. Appointed Epstein’s mate as US ambassador. Tried to scrap jury trials. Whipped up anti-immigrant and anti-trans hysteria. This is his legacy.
This is our “human rights” lawyer PM. UK may not be better without him in charge, but it sure as hell won’t be worse.
Excellent! And then Jeremy Corbyn or Zarah Sultana will take his place, right?
A populist who will oppose reform instead of doing all their policies and accepting the blame will step in, right?
The ultra-reactionary piece of shit is being forced out because he isn’t quite reactionary enough, “innit”?
What a loser
Every UK lib/Blairite was celebrating his “massive win” compared to Corbyn’s performance in the previous election and ignoring the glaring issue that Labour had fewer votes than Corbyn. I’m sure they’re now reflecting on this and not deciding to double down on becoming even more fascist.
I saw this rumored on Saturday and there was some counter-reporting saying that it was fake. Then Trump declared it today, 12 hours ago. It would seem that Keir Starmer is being told to resign by the real leader of the UK.
https://xcancel.com/RapidResponse47/status/2068696237763637653#m
Trump is so bad at regime change that he is now trying it with the UK purely out of cope. It is sad and ultra pathetic, but it may actually work and if it does he will get to feel like a serious dealmaker and real statesman again for a whole two hours.
This has literally nothing to do with Trump.
It’s been rumoured and expected for a long time since Labour started polling way below the openly Fascist party, and the polls proved true in the recent local elections.
Does my post say “Keir Starmer is being told to resign by Trump”? I did not say that Trump is the leader of the UK.
…? Given your post seems to very clearly imply exactly that, I’m quite confused. Apologies if I’ve misunderstood.
I cant/dont believe it, but if it somehow is true that Trump called the UK PM and told him to sit and he sat it might be the funniest shit ever. Like it would be such an easy W to turn it around and “be strong” on Trump/American dominance. Can still frame it as “I’m willing to work with America, but the UK people will decide not Americans.” Bunch of libs here would respectfully nod. Like you couldn’t ask for an easier poll boost.
If he rolls over, the UK is so over cooked, they’re officially a part of Anglo cuisine.
