Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    You said you can never be too left wing. We're far more left wing than Labour.

    With regards to China: I'm a socialist and I wrote a bill trying to enforce human rights around the world (I assume that's your problem with China).
    My problem with China is nothing Political tbh. The problem is I'm Indian so we hate each other anyways.
    Offline

    16
    can I ask a question?

    I am more on the Law side of TSR and rarely venture into shark infested territory ...
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    can I ask a question?
    Yes...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Nye Bevan or Hugh Gaitskell?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    My problem with China is nothing Political tbh. The problem is I'm Indian so we hate each other anyways.
    Yeah, well, we have nothing to do with China. China is economically capitalist with a tyrannical political system. We're economically socialist, but with freedom on our lips. (Though illiterate Tories accuse us of being totalitarian.)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I've requested to join.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why shold I leave the Liberal Dems and come and join the labor party? lol (thats a hard one)

    When is the labour party gonna stop following America and stand up on its own two feat, as this is ruining the reputation of britain world wide.
    Offline

    16
    Two questions actually

    1. Does the Labour Party accept that the invasion of Iraq has resulted in an increased threat of terrorism? And what does the Labour Party intend on doing as a result of that?
    2. What is the single biggest regret of the Labour Party, in terms of the home affairs?


    EDIT: changed "iraq" to "Iraq"
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    What are you doing in relation to Darfur? (useless UN resolutions aside)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Audrey Hepburn)
    What are you doing in relation to Darfur? (useless UN resolutions aside)
    Yes, let me echo this. I'd be very interested to hear how TSR Labour justifies Iraq whilst not getting involved into Darfur where genocide is occuring.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    PS Reviewer
    Speaking on behalf of no-one here:

    In Iraq we were certain that weapons were there and we were heavily pressured by the US to go and remove the dictatorial government in power. In doing so we have made many mistakes yet the situation there for most has improved greatly.

    In Darfur, the situation is one that can be spoken of everywhere in Africa. If we decide to aid/invade Darfur, people will pressure to invade Zimbabwe and so on. This is a situation for the UN to handle however with Iran taking up most of the UN's time the resolve will come slowly.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Are you more New Labour than Old Labour?
    Are you now inherently a Thatcherite, right-wing party?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    From my understanding of clause IV it was changed in 1993 from

    "To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service."

    to

    "The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"

    Personally the second and newer version is the one that it most similar to my personal beliefs.

    Is that what you were getting at?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    Speaking on behalf of no-one here:

    In Iraq we were certain that weapons were there and we were heavily pressured by the US to go and remove the dictatorial government in power. In doing so we have made many mistakes yet the situation there for most has improved greatly.

    In Darfur, the situation is one that can be spoken of everywhere in Africa. If we decide to aid/invade Darfur, people will pressure to invade Zimbabwe and so on. This is a situation for the UN to handle however with Iran taking up most of the UN's time the resolve will come slowly.
    I personally agree with your second point. However, no one is talking about invading them but instead exerting as much pressure as we can on them to stop these atrocities. I think he best bet would be to engage other African leaders and change their attitudes towards Africa foriegn policy. At the moment they will support any other fellow African president such as South Africa suporting Mugabe. If the UK and other nations exert their presussure on places like South Africa and Nigeria they may have a positive affect.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    In Darfur, the situation is one that can be spoken of everywhere in Africa. If we decide to aid/invade Darfur, people will pressure to invade Zimbabwe and so on. This is a situation for the UN to handle however with Iran taking up most of the UN's time the resolve will come slowly.
    So in the meantime we just sit around twiddling our thumbs allow genocide to happen!? For God's sake! We're not simply talking about a corrupt government or inflation or poverty, we're talking about masses of people being needlessly slaughtered!!

    We have a moral responsibility to interfere! It is ridiculous that we do nothing simply because the UN is busy with other things and because other countries may ask for help! Just because we interfere with one country does not mean that we are obliged to do the same with others.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by randdom)
    From my understanding of clause IV it was changed in 1993 from

    "To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service."

    to

    "The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect"

    Personally the second and newer version is the one that it most similar to my personal beliefs.

    Is that what you were getting at?
    Kinda - my point was more along the lines of 'Should it be a long-term aim of the party to secure the means of production in the hands of the collective ownership of the workers?'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    Okay, let's get this started:

    1. What do you think of the Tories?
    They're not very nice ;no;

    2. Define totalitarian.
    A regime which unnecessarily restricts human and civil rights and otherwise oppresses its populace.
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    Speaking on behalf of no-one here:

    In Iraq we were certain that weapons were there and we were heavily pressured by the US to go and remove the dictatorial government in power. In doing so we have made many mistakes yet the situation there for most has improved greatly.
    It is a shame none of the more avid TSR Labour could assist you here.

    But could you indulge me in a little tearing-the-meat-of-the-bones, so to speak, but you didn't answer my questions, intentionally or accidently, I ask them again with a few more in response to your comment:

    1. Does the Labour Party accept that the invasion of Iraq has resulted in an increased threat of terrorism? And what does the Labour Party intend on doing as a result of that?
    2. What is the single biggest regret of the Labour Party, in terms of the home affairs?
    3. To what extent does the Labour Party consider the importance of such a 'relationship' with the US, considering the effects it has had?
    4. Your vague response may need clarification for me (see italics), but in what sense has there been an improvement in the situation in Iraq? Is there not an internal 'war' between Shea and Sunni?
    5. What real and substantial threat did Iraq pose to the UK, that justified our invasion of Iraq?


    Regards
    Lord Hysteria
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    Are you more New Labour than Old Labour?
    Are you now inherently a Thatcherite, right-wing party?
    We are the TSR Labour Party.
    We are more left-wing that the real Labour Party, so no, we are not Thatcherite in the slightest.

    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    Questions.
    I'm sorry, I went to eat dinner. I'm now going to type up some answers for you.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Audrey Hepburn)
    So in the meantime we just sit around twiddling our thumbs allow genocide to happen!? For God's sake! We're not simply talking about a corrupt government or inflation or poverty, we're talking about masses of people being needlessly slaughtered!!

    We have a moral responsibility to interfere! It is ridiculous that we do nothing simply because the UN is busy with other things and because other countries may ask for help! Just because we interfere with one country does not mean that we are obliged to do the same with others.
    Firstly responding to someone else above this post: Yes, applying Pressure is all good and well, have you ever tried pressurising someone who has Mugabe next to him??? Pressure has been apllied for the last 10 years to these African countries and as yet, no avail has come from it. The bettermore sensible option is to let the UN apply embargo's and other warnings against the country however Mugabe's regime is not going to end ths way. I believe, as Labour have done for many years, the whole world must come togetherand crush down the dirst that is Mugabe together: Politically, not with Force.

    As to this post quoted above, well yeah we do have a moral responsibility but going in all guns blazing will solve nothing. More people will die and there is enough poverty/famine in the area as it is. In my opinion, people have to keep patient over these inhumane crusades occurring in Africa. The situation will be resolved, not by fighting the militia of 5 countries at once, but by changin the atmsphere and political sense in those countries. The people there need to be taught and aided to sense: not tortured or killed to sense.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 17, 2018
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.