The Student Room Group

Why do people vote labour?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by DMcGovern
True - something we agree on!

"The fact that bourgeois labour parties have already been formed in all the advanced capitalist countries and that unless a determined and relentless struggle is waged all along the line against these parties, or groups, trends etc. it is all the same. There can be no question of a struggle against imperialism or of Marxism, or of a socialist labour movement... (wherever Marxism is popular amongst the workers, this political trend, 'this bourgeois labour party' will invoke and swear by" Marxism) - Lenin

Btw what's your stance on Palestine?


Don't particularly give a crap, they can blow each other to pieces for all I care.
Original post by Jammy Duel
Don't particularly give a crap, they can blow each other to pieces for all I care.


Ach fair enough - that's just a hint at some future TSR legislation :wink: :biggrin:
Original post by Jammy Duel
Why the change of subject, we're talking about Labour here? Practise what you preach.


I wasn't.. In fact I was praising the Tory prime minister and criticising labour if anything. Sigh.

Difference is im all too willing to criticise labour from the right and left. I don't think you've ever criticised the Tories from the left...
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by DMcGovern


Violence was the last resort - what would you do if your parents' home was attacked and damaged by a loyalist mob and they were forced to move - TWICE?

As I've said before, Bobby did not seek out violence. He was a creature of his time and circumstance and it is barely conceivable to his family that he would have ever seen the inside of a prison cell if it hadn't been for the conflict in which he was caught up. In another time and place, maybe he would simply have become a great poet, politician or perhaps more likely, a coachbuilder.


To your highlighted point I wouldn't murder someone else's babies in revenge. Would you do this yourself? Do you applaud that? Worship the author of this act as a hero?

You are part of a culture and tradition of hatred and bigotry, and reading your posts shows that in spades. Your views caused bombs to be placed in pubs and under cars. Unarmed men shot in their homes in front of their children.

The gun has had its lamentable place in Irish politics since at least the Phoenix Park murders. Before probably. People like you mean although it has been put away for now, it won't be for long.

Booby Sands a hero? You make me puke.
Original post by JezWeCan!
To your highlighted point I wouldn't murder someone else's babies in revenge. Would you do this yourself? Do you applaud that? Worship the author of this act as a hero?

You are part of a culture and tradition of hatred and bigotry, and reading your posts shows that in spades. Your views caused bombs to be placed in pubs and under cars. Unarmed men shot in their homes in front of their children.

The gun has had its lamentable place in Irish politics since at least the Phoenix Park murders. Before probably. People like you mean although it has been put away for now, it won't be for long.

Booby Sands a hero? You make me puke.


At least the Americans and RoI had the balls to stand up and fight and not resort to planting bombs and then running away as far as they can.
Everyone who vote Labour Party probably hate their british roots. All people from Labour Party that i have met in my life are naive and ignorant liberals.
Because we don't want another term of David and his right wing friends??
Original post by john2054
Because we don't want another term of David and his right wing friends??


What is right-wing? Can you describe it to me?
Original post by Alternate Aurora
What is right-wing? Can you describe it to me?


Right wing (centre right at least) is typically associated with the conservative party here in the uk, and the republicans in the usa.

Equally left wing typically means democrat in the us, and labour here in the uk.

However people also tend to vote for the personalities, and opinion polls and the press (tabloids and mass media) would tend to suggest that themes can also be vote winners.

That being said, if you look at the last uk election, the UKIP (united kingdom indepence party) who's at the time sole platform was bringing the uk out of europe, only won a single seat.


Left right, centre, it's all the same anyway

Spoiler

Original post by JezWeCan!
To your highlighted point I wouldn't murder someone else's babies in revenge. Would you do this yourself? Do you applaud that? Worship the author of this act as a hero?

Again, he didn't murder anyone.


You are part of a culture and tradition of hatred and bigotry

That actually made me laugh.

My Irish culture and tradition is nothing of the sort - that accusation is beyond stupid.

My republican views are, again, not fuelled by hatred or bigotry.
Hold up - bigotry?

This just shows how much you know.

To quote the Proclamation of the Irish Republic in 1916:
"The Irish Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens…cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien Government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past"

To quote Wolfe Tone:
"To unite the whole people of Ireland, to abolish the memory of all past dissentions, and to substitute the common name of Irishman in the place of the denominations of Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter—these were my means."

Your views caused bombs to be placed in pubs and under cars. Unarmed men shot in their homes in front of their children.


Yes - by loyalists and through collusion with state forces.
For example, the Greysteel massacre:
On the evening of 30 October, the three UDA members, two of whom were wearing blue boiler suits and balaclavas, entered the "Rising Sun Bar" in Greysteel. There were about 70 people inside attending a Halloween party, and so the masked men were not noticed until they produced an AK-47 and a 9 mm pistol, and started shooting into the packed crowd in the lounge area.
The leading gunman, Stephen Irwin (who was carrying the AK-47), yelled "trick or treat" as he opened fire. The scene was chaotic as people inside the lounge began to scream in panic, with women pleading for mercy from the gunmen. Six of those killed were Catholic civilians and two were Protestant civilians. None had any known links to political parties or paramilitaries. The killers, laughing, then made their escape in their getaway car.
These attacks were commonplace, many of my relatives were injured in similar events, and the fact that they were aimed directly at killing innocent civilians purely because of their religion is unforgivable.

Meanwhile, the PIRA, using a van modified to run on railway tracks, launched an elaborate bomb attack on a British Army checkpoint in South Armagh. The checkpoint was obliterated,1 soldier was killed and 23 wounded. Acting as any army would in attempting to remove a foreign power's occupying forces.

Republicans have never thrown away an opportunity to negotiate terms of a ceasfire. Over the 30 year conflict, the IRA had 7 ceasefires and made 3 peace agreements - 2 of which were thrown out by loyalists, usually led by Ian Paisley.
The Sunningdale and Anglo-Irish Agreements were, in essence, the same agreement as Good Friday, but unionist bigotry had them failed - even the Good Friday Agreement was opposed by the DUP: the very same party that is in a permanent coalition with Sinn Féin today.

The gun has had its lamentable place in Irish politics since at least the Phoenix Park murders. Before probably. People like you mean although it has been put away for now, it won't be for long.


The gun has had its place in Irish politics since the gun was invented.
Physical force republicanism has had its place since the Norman invasion of the 12th century, and was succeeded by the Desmond Rebellions, Nine Years War, 1641 Rebellion, 1798 Rebellion, Emmet's Rebellion of 1803 all the way up to 1916, the Tan War and the Northern conflict.

The vast majority of republicans like myself believe in the words of Connolly:
"We believe in constitutional action in normal times; we believe in revolutionary action in exceptional times."
That is, in normal times such as this in Ireland, we believe in the power of the parliamentary process; but in times of oppression, tyranny and discrimination, when democracy has been subverted and all other methods exhausted - as was the case in the North in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, and in early 20th century Ireland, and before - then, and only then, may the use of physical force be utilised. "I believe and stand by the god-given right of the Irish people to the ownership of Ireland, and the right to assert this through armed rebellion."
Original post by john2054
Right wing (centre right at least) is typically associated with the conservative party here in the uk, and the republicans in the usa.

Equally left wing typically means democrat in the us, and labour here in the uk.


You can't really compare UK left-right to US left-right given they really use two different metrics.
Original post by Jammy Duel
You can't really compare UK left-right to US left-right given they really use two different metrics.


Granted. But I was only doing a rough approximation, to help some out clearly who has no idea of the understanding of the concepts, and trying to help them out by giving them a starting point from which to kick off from. thanks again.
Original post by KingBradly
>Labour
>Liberal

Labour aren't liberal. In many ways the tories are more liberal than labour.


New Labour was pretty liberal in a lot of ways.

The SDP that represented a strain in Labour politics went on to join in with the actual Liberal Party... Labour politics has had a more liberal strand existing in it for a very long time.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by DMcGovern

To quote the Proclamation of the Irish Republic in 1916:


And North Korea is called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Words are cheap. Actions speak louder than words.

Yes - by loyalists and through collusion with state forces.

Meanwhile, the PIRA, using a van modified to run on railway tracks, launched an elaborate bomb attack on a British Army checkpoint in South Armagh. The checkpoint was obliterated,1 soldier was killed and 23 wounded. Acting as any army would in attempting to remove a foreign power's occupying forces.


He pointed out that armed republicanism has caused innocent deaths, and you obfuscate and pretend the IRA only ever targeted soldiers? Utter dishonest crap.

What of the numerous IRA attacks that killed civilians? What of Bloody Friday in 1972, where the IRA set off twenty bombs around Belfast in the space of eight minutes, Shall we examine the list of targets on Bloody Friday?

Smithfield Bus Station. Brookvale Hotel. York Road Railway Station. Queen Elizabeth Bridge. Great Victoria Street Railway Station. Botanic Avenue Railway Station.

Oh yes, that sounds like a list of obvious military targets :rolleyes: Nine fatalities and 130 serious injuries. Two British soldiers and two police officers killed, every other person was civilian. This is your glorious Provisional IRA who only attacked military objectives?

And what of the La Mons Restaurant Bombing in 1978? The Provisional IRA set off a napalm bomb in a restaurant which was hosting a dinner dance for civilians of all ages. 12 fatalities, 30 seriously injured many of whom suffered the most horrific scarring and permanent disablement from being burned by the napalm.

What heroes these PIRA men are :rolleyes:

And yet another "glorious" act in the annals of the Provisional IRA; on 20 March 1972, PIRA detonated a car bomb with a 200 pound explosive warhead that they'd parked in Donegal Street in Central Belfast. Seven dead, 150 injured. Among the dead, two police officers (one was Catholic, the other Protestant); they were killed when they were trying to escort the crowd away to what they thought was a place of safety. Another three of the dead were dustbin men who had been parked too close to the carbomb.

In the end, the IRA accepted peace terms no more ambitious than the Brits were willing to give them in 1972. Thousands of lives lost for the vanity and bloodthirstiness of these terrorists. Frankly, it's obscene that you defend them.

Original post by JezWeCan!
To your highlighted point I wouldn't murder someone else's babies in revenge. Would you do this yourself? Do you applaud that? Worship the author of this act as a hero?You are part of a culture and tradition of hatred and bigotry, and reading your posts shows that in spades. Your views caused bombs to be placed in pubs and under cars. Unarmed men shot in their homes in front of their children.The gun has had its lamentable place in Irish politics since at least the Phoenix Park murders. Before probably. People like you mean although it has been put away for now, it won't be for long.Booby Sands a hero? You make me puke.


Superbly well said. The valorisation of terrorist thugs by Irish republicans is nothing short of obscene. And the fact that the remnants of these organisations are now major players in Irish organised crime speaks to the kind of people who were attracted to these groups
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Alternate Aurora
Everyone who vote Labour Party probably hate their british roots. All people from Labour Party that i have met in my life are naive and ignorant liberals.


Not true at all. I'm a Labour voter and party member, and I'm as proud an Anglospherian as you'll ever meet. I'm very committed to traditional British institutions like the common law, parliamentary democracy, the House of Lords. I have a strong appreciation for our culture, our literature, our history and our architecture.

In fact, I'd say I'm a lot more patriotic than conservatives like Peter Oborne, who despise this country's place in the world, hates our allies like America and sympathises with Islamist terrorist groups. I'd say I'm a lot more patriotic than all the Tory politicians who go to live in France when they retire, like Nigel Lawson.

And the English working-class is traditionally, by instinct, extremely patriotic. They make up the core of the enlisted element of our army. There are many patriotic working-class Labour supporters, many of them veterans. It's true the party is currently led by a man who does appear to despise what this country stands for, but equally there are conservative politicians who appear to have nothing but contempt for the native culture of this country
People vote labour to ruin western civilisation.
Original post by DMcGovern
These incidents were few compared to the vast number of attacks on legitimate targets.

You said they only attack legitimate targets? (Your words were "Unlike loyalist paramilitary bodies, the PIRA only attacked 'legitimate targets'" ) So were you lying, or were you unaware of these attacks?

I could say far more about loyalists and the British army


A rather obvious attempt at whataboutery. Either it's wrong to target innocent civilians, or it's not.

Untrue. I doubt you know anything about the Good Friday Agreement, let alone the Sunningdale Agreement


Simply making bare assertions and personal attacks claiming my lack of knowledge, when I've already demonstrated the falsity of your assertions about PIRA tactics, causes you to come across as overly emotional and seem to be desperately grasping at straws. Quids says you weren't even aware of the March 20 bombing before I mentioned it here.

Yes, the loyalists were terrible


I was referring to PIRA, which you obviously know. These kind of low rhetorical tactics speak very poorly of the substance of your position.

That's not what valorisation means.


You seem to be confused, though I'm happy to help you to grasp the English language better.
val·or·ize (văl′ə-rīz′)
2. To give or assign a value to especially a higher value:
"The prophets valorized history"
(Mircea Eliade)

Do you understand now or do I need to hand-hold you some more?

All in all, you offered up a highly-emotional, substantively-empty response which was primarily characterised by cheap personal attacks and desperate attempts to avoid grappling with the substantive issue.

The substantive issue is that you support an organisation that murdered innocent people. Placing a napalm device in a restaurant, setting off car bombs in the Belfast CBD and attacking train stations in operations that kill innocent Irish civilians (including Catholics) cannot by any stretch of the imagination be claimed as attacks on an occupying force.

Your bizarre attempt to claim that civilians were only killed by ASUs on the run is laughable given none of the attacks I cited were carried out by mainland ASUs on the run from British authorities; perhaps you simply aren't very well informed about the structure of PIRA? In any case, even had it been the case, it's very strange justification for murdering innocent civilians to say that it was caused by the terrorists in question being on the run from the authorities.

You are clearly highly emotional on the subject of republican terrorism and obviously incapable of engaging in a serious and honest debate. I could cite another dozen PIRA attacks that had no justification even in the mentally ill, parallel moral universe of republican terrorists, and you would still defend them to the hilt. You are a terrorist sympathiser and a supporter of criminals who killed innocent people with no justification. I make it a policy not to debate with sociopaths and crackpots, so we should probably just leave it there
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by BeastOfSyracuse
Simply making bare assertions and personal attacks claiming my lack of knowledge, when I've already demonstrated the falsity of your assertions about PIRA tactics, causes you to come across as overly emotional and seem to be desperately grasping at straws. Quids says you weren't even aware of the March 20 bombing before I mentioned it here.
Alright - what kind of experience or knowledge could you possess compared to a person who has grown up in that warzone and experienced terror attacks?
All in all, you offered up a highly-emotional, substantively-empty response which was primarily characterised by cheap personal attacks and desperate attempts to avoid grappling with the substantive issue.
Except I really haven't. My argument isn't exactly neutral but I've addressed your points clearly and I've included a large amount of precise statistics and information. All you're doing now is the equivalent of trying to shut your eyes, put your hands over your ears and shout 'LALALALALALALA' while walking away.
I could cite another dozen PIRA attacks that had no justification even in the mentally ill, parallel moral universe of republican terrorists, and you would still defend them to the hilt.
Really? You've not as of yet mentioned any of these attacks. The only attack I can think of that had very little justification would be the Remembrance Day Bombing in Enniskillen, which was carried out to target the military procession - the Brigade who carried the attack out was then disbanded...which obviously isn't a decent enough punishment, but some of the men were then personally punished. I myself would have seen them handed over to the authorities, which probably would have contradicted their ideology.
The substantive issue is that you support an organisation that murdered innocent people. Placing a napalm device in a restaurant, setting off car bombs in the Belfast CBD and attacking train stations in operations that kill innocent Irish civilians (including Catholics) cannot by any stretch of the imagination be claimed as attacks on an occupying force.
Funny how you've completely ignored most of my points.Shall I repeat them?The PIRA only attacked 'legitimate targets' - soldiers, RUC men, loyalist terrorists, the occupiers' economy, infrastructure and so on. Occasionally, an accident would result in the death or injury of noncombatants, since most Brigades were given the freedom to attack targets without needing the permission of the Army Council.
You are a terrorist sympathiser and a supporter of criminals who killed innocent people with no justification
To quote you, "These kind of low rhetorical tactics speak very poorly of the substance of your position."Refusing to understand 'terrorism' is convenient for bigots like you because it does not require reflection on possible responses and consequences. As a result, any retaliation appears to be justified, all the way to terrorist acts in return. You have to understand 'terrorists' to defeat them.There were no attacks directly on innocent people, nor were there any ever attacks without some justification. That's a pretty stupid thing to say - there would be no attacks perpetrated by any 'terrorist' group without a justification. The Paris attacks technically had a justification. I obviously don't condone in any way the attacks because I'm not a psychopath.
Original post by DMcGovern
X


As I said, I make it a policy not to debate with sociopaths and crackpots. Your responding to my first comment with pathetic ad hominem attacks and cheap rhetorical tricks simply confirmed that there is no profit to be had in interacting with you and that you are entirely uninterested in genuine discussion.

I also do not doubt that you rate your knowledge of the Troubles much greater than it is in reality. For example, I doubt you'd be able to answer if I asked you a simple question like what was the broader significance of the March 20 bombing.

Thus there is little incentive for me to engage with someone who is sociopathically gleeful in justifying the murder of innocent Irish people, whose style of argumentation is little better than personal attacks and low rhetorical devices and whose actual knowledge of the Troubles is, at best, superficial and likely closer to hagiography than history.

I would say good day, sir but you're obviously no gentleman. We're done.

Quick Reply

Latest