I have Labour sympathies but I’d want to wait a couple of days and a few other polls to claim a “surge”.

Same old same old.

I seem to remember the same thing happened to Nick Clegg too.

When are you people gonna wise up to the fact that Labour are a Capitalist party and despite the good talk aren’t in any better position than the Tories to do anything.

Read a bit of Das Capital. It may help your problem.

@ 2 MoCO

“When are you people gonna wise up to the fact that Labour are a Capitalist party and despite the good talk aren’t in any better position than the Tories to do anything.”

What people? Who do you see saying that they’re not capitalist? And the point isn’t that they’d in a better position, it’s that they’d do better things with the position if they got it.

Um, yes. Conference polls are notoriously volatile. I thought it was a pretty good speech as these things go, but lets see where we are in a month.

I agree with Nick Clegg…

… well…

… not now since he sold his soul cheaply to Satan…

… hum…

I agree with Ed Miliband…

… well…

… hum…

MoCO @ 2:

“Read a bit of Das Capital. It may help your problem.”

But it’s turgid stuff; and Marx, though not without his insights, is a third-rate (or less) thinker. If you have been seduced by his Teutonic vapourings, then I suspect you have been educated far above the level of your innate intelligence.

When will people click.
Every political party, Ukip, Bnp,Labour,liberal & conservate , is headed by freemasons.
They just pretend to be independent.
They must laugh at us when the camera’s are down.
If you want evidence how near to the top, this freemasonry goes, here -
http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/royal_family_and_freemasonry.html

Now, just to remind ourselves of the evil royal members mentioned above-
http://www.thehalsreport.com/2010/07/the-evil-history-of-the-british-royal-family/

Now, just PLEASE remember, this monarchy , all superpowers form part of this freemason network.

I found this link about the queen, not so far fetched when one considers the history of our rulers.
http://inpursuitofhappiness.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/the-queen-and-missing-kids/

Today’s Yougov poll also has Labour 14 points up and shows a significant improvement in Ed’s personal ratings too.

The specific uplift means little other than “job done” through the conference itself. This contrasts with the Lib Dem conference having little impact on polling, suggesting failure on their part to achieve anything in their week.

Now we get the Tories – and so far they seem to be taregtting UKIP voters rather than Labour ones, with an early suggestion they could veto the EU budget and effectively pull out of Europe by conidering and end to free movement (the entire point of the EU).

Will be interesting to see how that plays out in the polls.

@3

What people? Who do you see saying that they’re not capitalist? And the point isn’t that they’d in a better position, it’s that they’d do better things with the position if they got it.

What people = those than play watch the polls.

The rest of it is complete naivety.

@6 Empty vessels.

@ 8 MoCO

“What people = those than play watch the polls.”

So you’re determined to stick to the vaguest categories possible while venting your ire?

Chaise

I don’t think the definition is vague at all. This site regularly talks about the polls as though it was the grand national. I can only assume the underlying logic is Tory = bad and Labour = equals good.

Unfortunately, it precludes any consideration of testing that presumption.

@ 11 MoCO

…So where is this naivity you’re talking about? Where did you get the impression that “people who talk about the polls” are wrongly convinced that Labour isn’t capitalist?

By the way, we all know that none of the parties are ideal, but that doesn’t make them all as bad as each other. Pretending that they are is defeatist faux-cynicism.

12 Chaise.

No the point I am making is that they are both irrelevant. The reference to Marx is in relation to the fiscal crisis of the state.
Ultimately I am suggesting the collapse of all state apparatus ,political parties,trades unions and all the social relations that emanate from them. In this context whether Labour has a small and possibly temporary advantage in the pols is completely by the by.

MoCO

You seem to be saying “I don’t like either party – so people who care which of them forms a government are idiots”

This rather precludes and sense of plurality in thinking, priority or interest. I for one care which of them forms the next government because I think one will make our country less unfair and less painful a place to live.

@15

No what I am saying is that the political system is framed in capitalist terms .The idea that the Political representatives of this system can somehow transform themselves is kinda an object lesson in self delusion.History has shown pretty conclusively that Labour have never been socialist principally for the reasons above. Politics in this country follows a predictable trajectory based on very limited bourgeoisie strictures I am afraid. You only have to look at Tony Blair’s premiership to realise that.
The notion of ‘One Nation’ has a tremendous resonance with fair play but sadly you have to ask yourself why, after it was uttered for the first time over 100 years ago, has it never come to fruition.

@ 14 MoCO

“No the point I am making is that they are both irrelevant. The reference to Marx is in relation to the fiscal crisis of the state.”

Irrelevant? That must be news to the disabled people having their benefits cut, or the councils being manouevered into charging council tax for unemployed people, or the workers who will shortly find themselves stripped of their employment rights.

“Ultimately I am suggesting the collapse of all state apparatus ,political parties,trades unions and all the social relations that emanate from them. ”

I doubt we’ll be descending into anarchy any time soon. And it’s not something to wish for either, seeing as “anarchy” is shorthand for “damn great power vaccuum that allows the strongest bastard to seize control” (libertarians, take note).

@17

The collapse of the state doesn’t necessarily mean anarchy at all. I don’t necessarily think it even requires the collapse of a market based system of commerce. Indeed I would argue that you are starting to see elements of new market thinking from the ground up such as the emergence of local currencies which are shared by local producers and supplies thus subverting the relentless onslaught of Tesco and the like. I can imagine that this could progress into areas political administration.

Power vacuums will inevitably develop in this process and I think the biggest challenge to the country is the rise of police/security powers and the dwindling of access to information and Justice. This politically, is what the left should be focusing on at the moment in my view and something Labour have said little. It is only with freedom of information that the left can break down ‘commodified thinking’ something I think constitutes the current basis of what Gramasci calls ‘common sense’ and oppose it. (Sounds a bit Hegelian I know – apologies). I think a push for commodity backed money is really vital area too.

With regard to benefit cuts, I understand the concern but I am not so sure that voting Labour is really going to address that. I believe we are at the point which Connor describes as a ‘fiscal crises of the state’,a point at which it can no longer maintain its material compact with wider society and hence its legitimacy.I think this is reflected in current political thinking which I regrd is best described as clueless.

Extreme politics will follow if Labour can’t (assuming it gets in)stop the slide. I don’t believe Labour can change things dramatically simply because political parties are only an element of the state apparatus and ultimately completely dependent on the success of regional capitalism.Given capitalism is now well and truly global I think ‘local government’ influences are now very doubtful.

Observing Greece is ,I think a salutary lesson for us all. In that context we have a lot more to worry about than just benefits.

MoCO

You do realise of course that much of the political discourse in this country is a reflection of public will. As such you do realise that perhaps the lack of a socialist movement in the red-book sense may reflect a lack of support for such a movement?

Now I would like to see a more radical set of principles guide the direction of this country in future. I don’t think private management is proving as efficient as it was once presented as being. I look at state owned and controlled railways like the DLR and London Overground running very efficiently and effectively, and I look at recent cases of judges being bribed to lock more kids up to boost the profits of prison companies (who make profits per prisoner effetively) and see a strong case that can be made for reversing some of the damaging slide towards marketisation of all public life and activity.

But none of that means I don’t want the party that does more to mitigate that to beat the party that does more to propogate that.

It seems reasonable to me that if I want something I can’t have, moving in small steps (be those steps a minimum wage or a right to union represenation), is better than nothing.

BTW

Worth noting that the Tories have surged in the polls since their party conference.

They have bought Labour’s lead down to just 7% in the last two yougov polls (typically yougov have been more accurate than others in predicting recent elections).

However, it is always worth noting that Labour’s actuall standing in those polls showed no noticable downturn. They have remained above the 40% mark that they have hovered over for about a year now.

As such Labour’s position in the polls may seem relatively solid – while the Tories are able to win support from other parties more easilly (UKIP and Lib Dem being the other two main parties) or able to turn non-voters into tory voters.

@ 18 MoCO

What you’re describing is still anarchy. It’s just the rural idyll version of anarchy – communitarianism or whatever you want to call it – rather than the violent urban version of anarchy.

That can work quite well (and is a naturally occuring system anyway) for small communities, in a all-pull-together kind of way, but you’re still basically fucked once a serious power group gets together and decides they want your stuff.

As for “fiscal crises of the state”, I think you’re getting a hell of a lot of mileage out a simple recession. Thy wish was father to that thought, and all that. On the assumption that the state is not about to fall apart – and I have no reason to think it will – then Labour, while far from perfect, would be an improvement on the Tories.

@19

”You do realise of course that much of the political discourse in this country is a reflection of public will”

I think this may be a circular argument on your part. The question surely is where does this ‘will’ comes from and how is it structurally supported in the Capitalist state.

The kind of incrementalism you suggest has palpably failed with the differentials between rich and poor widening. Moreover, wage negotiation and forms of collective workplace bargaining are unlikely to change the position of the working person and in any event will not help those out of work. I am thinking particularly about the £trillon required to service the burgeoning profile of old age that the country is just about to experience.

Furthermore, I would argue that the failure of domestic capitalism , largely masked by the smoke and mirrors of consumerism fueled by credit, has long term cultural consequences which do not aid a producer led recovery, particularly in face of the lack of surplus value compared to that found in the east. This will contribute to long term decline.

I believe there are also worrying developments associated with the state apparatus which will result in further attacks in legal transparency and freedom of information.
In the security area I think it particularly worrying that the Police are taking an increasing political role, the latest saga being the police demanding the resignation of a minister of state. Once upon a time they were regarded as servants of the state. Not anymore evidently.

@21

I don’t think the state will fall apart but I don’t think it will remain a liberal democratic state in the long term.
I don’t think this is an ordinary recession either.I am not sure this is even a consensus view is it? I am aware that even folks in the City are looking at Marx in a new light.
I would add that I think the issue of agency has been very much clouded by Trotsky and the like. My view,not popular with the social workers, is that all transformations occur outside of the consciousness of the individual. Something like the public will will therefore transform when presented with a new set of crises and a new set of ideologies which accord with those circumstances.

My gut feeling is however the current position is untenable
it will get worse and what you see in Greece will eventually befall us, sadly with no resolution. In that context Ed’s ‘one nation’ speech is laughable. The only way people will survive is through collective action but not proletarian revolution more like the ‘big society’ ironically.