I don’t believe it – some points to ponder

What is it I ask myself that allows some of the greatest cynics/know it alls, to prescribe the future of the towns voters actions to all voters hating the current incumbents representing Labour party in this locality?

What makes such cynics sound as they have some crystal ball that allows them to sound so upright and correct in their proclamations for the rest of Labour candidates and the future of politics for our town.

Well besides the proclamations stated in such positive -know it all language- and with such a dismissive and cruel identification of all the current incumbents -portrayed as self perpetuating -inferring corruption -on all of them -with such sweeping pronouncements -which really shows a hate or despondency of what Labour has turned out locally or maybe nationally. Well join the club -many of us may have a similar despondency but would not claim to -damn all those that hold office and many who gave up their time to discuss/debate to seek a better world than what the class enemy of the working class of Rotherham and wider society would have under Toryism and also worse still UKIPism.

So can we have a bit of sanity in the discussion about what both happened in Rotherham and what ‘may happen’ in Rotherham. The focus on junkies and individuals is up for discussion but not to the lost of rationality and fairness. Like any football manager-or business leader there is a need to visit twin towns -or promote Rotherham. But i feel that the current leader who does not seem to endear himself to either the trade unions and the left in general -and is praised by the local business people -as he like the latter has always been noted to seek power for power sake. He is noted as a bully (but aren’t all bosses-and i certainly am not condoning such an attribute). he is also noted to be a cunning and devious sort-which most leaders and owners of business are. So was Jack Layden who also was noted for his bullying, conniving and yes-corrupt ways. So there is a general feeling that a certain group within the Labour group (and if you went to any town or city or even Parliament) most have been identified as self effacing and leaning towards being in it for their own financial gain-but that does not mean all of them are.

Most of the list you present -with your clever scrawl on Barry Dodson -for an act he is alleged to have committed in the 1980s-and you cynics and anti labour -gloat on each person’s demise. The Christian statement ‘Let you who are without sin’, comes to mind and he has not proven to be corrupt. Also if all these -current Labour councillors are so rubbish -and maybe their inactiveness to challenge the leader -is what most of them can be accused of-and well that takes us into the realm of philosophy -were a French guy named Michel’s wrote about the Iron Law of Oligarchy; which basically said that Party politics -cannot be democratic-as it is steered by authority and ideology rather than conscience’. Well now that means we are all responsible for what is going on in the world. How many of your subscribers cynics or otherwise -spend their time of speaking on issues of the corrupt capitalist system that brought about colonisation and slavery? How many spend their time on issues as the current attrocities happening to the Palestenians? How many identify the fact that the austerity attacks on the masses for something that they were not the cause of -which we are informed mainly came about from the corrupt financial system -with a major focus on the banking system?

Now hopefully we now realise that we all live in a corruopt economic order called capitalism and that we are all corrupted by it -by not shouting out about its corrupt ways. But as Michel’s stated -Political Parties can be labelled the opposite of what they are-ineffective because of their structure is opposite what they claim to be their goal to run a democratic system of government.

Finally I do not want to start and contradict myself by espousing points and sounding a know it all -but i hope that i can present some evidence to whatever facts i present. I am merely trying to challenge the ranting style that forms a lot of what appears here and also in the Advertiser. I am also seeking a bit of sanity in not damning all those that seek to stand to represent us (though that is my starting pioint-in offerring a new kind of politics that is not -us being dependent on others -to represent us). Surely its the fact that those who stand at all are up to loose as -the cynics will always seek to put them down and others are jealous or do not like the idea of others thinking they are -deemed to be over us -or more important than the rest of us. It is no win situation as its like that game of throwing bags of water a gianst them -either from time to tme -or for some all of the time because its a way for us to get back at authority. In other words -How good woukd you be at the job? Yes lets have change but real radical change in selecting/electing on experience and success-which many do a decent job-but others are in it for their own devices and perform the role as an actor performs on stage-but has no real idealogocal affinity to what their party originally was formed for.

I know several of these councillors and I may agree with some of the allegations that they are self fulfilling -self efacing types -who actually think they are better than us-and accordingly act in that way- when you see them or meet them in formal occasions. The sycophantic nature of many locals that allows them to think they are more important -is what is worrying. The fact that some maybe like the latter-such as Barry Kaye and I could name a few -does not mean that they are all like that. Maybe we should let the people choose them rather than the party -which then would mean that -that as long as they have a belief in the main plank of what the party stands for -then they should be elected by their peers -not just in the party but in the locality.

Enough of my concerns that politics should not descend into a hate campaign and fall apart altogether-but instead -a place where ideas can be discussed and a structure that does not give anyone a ‘Strong Leadership’ role that allows the cunning to ascend to the top and corrupt others. That is what we have running the economic order of capitalism -the national politics and the local. What is needed is good grounding in Marxism (but not in the majority of followers -though one is better than the others namely Socialist Appeal). Also lets have a little respect for those that are not self fulfilling but who actually joined a political party to make a difference on behalf of their class but who many sadly got sucked up into the mind boggling game of -conniving politics and cow towing that comes along with it. Many loose their souls because they vote with aparty rather than their conscience and the main bulk of others with a conscience that seeks a freer and better world. But no group can ever get rid of it (corruption) unless you change the rules by which it is played-but it would be far worse if you had the real cunning political jackals who are the most experienced at corruption in representing the rich over the masses-namely the Tories and the abilty to seek power in order to undermine any sense of justice or values of the predicament of the poor. But then you will have me talking about Socialism as an alternative rather than power by -ego’s -you may actually have power for a rationale reason.taht has been recently taken up by the best selling book in America by -oops another – French philosopher. Now that won’t do as we like ouir own grown philosophers -niot that there is even racism in academia -like yes. Though Britain does have some great writers and thinkers. but they all end up in the trash bin, when a society and world has been taken over by the most corrupt power of all the ideology of profit over people which is capitalism.

I don’t believe it

13 thoughts on “I don’t believe it – some points to ponder

  1. Rothpol,
    “on Barry Dodson -for an act he committed in the 1980s”
    I think that for your sake should read ” … – for an act he is alleged to have committed in the 1980s” .
    The rest should come with a large pack of Paracetamol.
    It’s a garbled parody of so much of what I heard, as it reached toward closing time in the pubs of Stoke Newington in the late 1960′s.

    Like

  2. Fascinating, we have an anarcho syndicalist theoretician being quoted in Rothpol. . Anarchists, by the way are responsible for one of my two favourite political jokes, but little else other than a bit of bomb throwing. The joke?
    “Why do anarcho-syndicalists drink lemon tea? Because “proper tea” is theft”.
    Frankly the main article is a bit muddled. Am I right in thinking it means to say that all parties are corrupt to some extent (MIchel) because of their constitution, all politicians have good sized egos and are self serving? ? That what we have in Rotherham is to be expected and none of us are perfect. That we unfairly tar all LP politicians with he same brush? The real evil is Capitalism, with a kind of hint that we should focus on that, not worry about the local corruption that is petty ?
    I have yet to figure out what the author is referring to with closing phrase “I don’t believe it.”
    Overall it feels a bit like Mystic Meg crossed with Nietzsche. Michel, source of his first theory was an interesting character. The law the writer refers to Michel called the Iron rule – if you think about quite an arrogant term in terms of any socio political theory. Not surprisingly he went on to become a supporter of Mussolini
    The thing about the article is, what do we conclude from it? For me it is pleasing that someone attempts to bring a broader historical and global perspective, however in the end it seems a call to arms to do….well, umm, Nothing.
    I’m all for accepting that corruption, like child sex abuse is global and even that capitalism is the cause, although the USSR wasn’t really any better at preventing it and Nazi Germany was probably the most corrupt of all.
    The thing is that global corruption starts with small acts down ones own street, and the feeling of the article is that if one doesn’t fight Capitalism globally then don’t bother doing anything at all.
    Lastly for all would be philosophers submitting to Rothpol…get your words right. You use the phrase “self-effacement” when I think you mean self-serving. “self-effacement” means -the act or fact of keeping oneself in the background, as in humility.
    Surely not when referring to Rotherham LP Group. Who calls this the silly season

    Like

    • Will, Maybe “self-defacement ” is what the OP meant

      Oh, and it’s “MIchels” not Michel or MIchel’s , and he was a German sociologist, not a French philosopher, and the ” -oops another – French philosopher”, is the French economist Thomas Piketty.

      Like

  3. Lets not forget that Dodson resigned from the Labour party hence his name being scratched out. This sounds more like a Christian Democrat than a Marxist, there are no longer any socialists in the Labour party hierarchy that is why the party has followed the road it has; there may be small pockets in the rank and file who have no influence on party policy. If you asked the majority of Rotherham councillors what socialism was there would be a lot of blank faces. Out of all the Labour councillors on Rotherham council there is never a voice of dissent, no matter what the vote is for they all vote the way they are told. This is not democracy it is dictatorship, and it has bred in fighting and cliques, it also fosters greed. The real answer to the problem is to vote for independent candidates who have no hidden agendas or party politics, the only people they answer to are the people they represent. Let us imagine that UKIP got control of Rotherham, nothing would change we would have replaced one party’s dogma for another it would still be a totalitarian council. This stifles discussion and criticism, as in the case of Peter Thirwall. We need to have a council that is answerable to the people not the party.
    Dave Smith

    Like

  4. If I read this correctly ‘I don’t believe it’ is upset because several people-including me-do not vote for or like Labour politicians or their policies. So what? I have never claimed or written that the Tory party or UKIP has the solutions to our socio-economic problems but the Labour party’s track record so far shows they don’t have the answers either.
    I-d-b-i alleges the Tory party and UKIP are ‘ class enemies of the working class’. Really? Which anteduluvian rock has he/she been hiding under? Perhaps ‘I don’t believe it’ will enlighten us and give examples of industrialised societies where the ‘working class’ is not and has not been exploited?
    Exploited? Which verb tense is being referred to? (Make use of), verb. Apply, avail oneself of, bring into play, capitalize on, consume, employ, exercise, fall back on, find useful, implement, make the most of, operate, profit by, put in practice, put into action, put into operation, put to service, put to use, put to work, resort to, set in motion, set to work, take advantage of, turn to account, use, utilize, wield, work–or……………………………………..(Take advantage of), verb. Abuse, do an injustice to, ill-treat, ill-use, maltreat, manipulate, milk, misapply, misappropriate, misdirect, misemploy, misgovern, mishandle, mismanage, mistreat, misuse, oppress, overtask, overtax, overuse, overwork, persecute, put to wrong use, turn selfishly to one’s own account, use badly, use improperly, use selfishly, use wrongly, victimize.
    A very muddled text from the writer. Like Wil I have to think who this missive is really aimed at and without a logical conclusion by the author it is difficult to understand the message. My interpretation of the text is; All non Labour supporters are crypto fascist apologists for the ruling classes.
    Yes, I think it is nonsense as well.

    Like

  5. I found it simple to understand. And I don’t mind if it wandered at times. If we banned ‘wandering’ from themes on Rothpol most threads would go without comments.

    As for the post content I think it is aimed at the various parties (all parties I would argue) that put party interest first and concentrate on scoring political points via vitriol rather than state what they would do instead.. No one seems to have the confidence to put their policies forward – especially local solutions.. Either that or they don’t have any or are scared they may be found wanting. Be brave is my message to all the local politcos.

    I feel the post is aimed at the state of politics today.(All parties are guilty – and this applies locally ) It is aimed at the way parties and most politicians take the PMQT’ approach, spin the spin, refuse to rock the leaders boat by giving personal opinions and solutions. (Whether it be Cameron, Mileband, Clegg, Farage or Clegg etc),It is aimed at the tendency to guffaw,rely on innuendo, and shut louder ‘than the others’ rather than oppose in an intelligent manner. And it is aimed at highlighting how many concentrate on ‘personality’ and ‘personal attacks’ rather than ‘the pros and cons’ of actual policy.

    I feel the post is aimed at the lazy politics all parties in practice (especially in Rotherham). The lazy MO of “have you seen what they are doing rather than this is what we will do.”, It is aimed at the focus on tittle tattle and gossip rather than content and constructive ideas. It’s aimed at everyone on here too – including me.

    My personal view – I go on several sites – it’s all the same. If I ask Labour a difficult question (for example why don’t you re-nationalize the railways?) all I get the party line and a cop out. If ask UKIP on here about local issues (The Children’s Centres is a good example) all I get is UKIP’s regurgitated national polices rather than detailed local solutions. If I ask the Conservatives (my questions about ATOS and what was happening re the CSE cover up in Parliament were a good examples) I am simply insulted and called ‘Obvioulsy a Scrounger’ or ‘Socialist Scum’. (Their’s’ is not the brightest site or most respectful) If I go on the Libs Dems its all waffle about what Nick Clegg has done. (Not the negative though – and the Bedroom Tax issue has them struggling big time) it’s the standard “but we are in a difficult situation with regards to the coalition and it was all Labours fault.” (Ahermm The bankers didn’t fiddle and steal world wide then?) With Respect I just get George Galloways’ latest rambled thoughts rehashed and every solution lays within Palestine). Wherever I post everything is entrenched. Everyone sees any one that questions as the enemy. .Avoidance is the one unifying theme. Modern day party politics. You can place them where the sun tends not to go.

    As for Rothpol. It’s called Rotherham Politics but anyone that comes on supporting an aspect of a Labour Party policy gets insults and even ‘digging’ comments from Rik. (Sorry Rik but it’s true) Likewise if they dare to put a contrary view to the ‘Rothpol User’s Norm’ it’s suspicions of Labour Moles must be afoot. I find this sad and I feel it closes down, rather than opens up, real debate.

    Personally I am not surprised many of my friends refuse to come on here.. What they see (so they say) is more of the same. Grumpy this and grumpy that and no real discussion. At times it annoys me but I keep on keeping on, And I will keep on keeping on so there lol. (Go away Sally Kate I here some cry lol)

    Still as far as Rothpol is concerned I believe this is an issue we can address on here. It may be an impossible dream but is possible to discuss ‘possible’ solutions without the insults, (Though to be fair a few do refrain) . Yes I realize at times anger must be vented as it is. But continually, without respite or solutions offered – it becomes just another churlish forum for the moaners.

    There I have said it. – I have said it before – but someone has too from time to time. To all on here keep on being you – just be a little more open regarding who comes on and remember – well I will let you decide on that I’m sure you have a view…

    Now I’m off to make my Mom’s dinner. She’s 85, she has a hip replacement, arthritis, a dodgy pace maker and has had a fall. Now there’s an issue. Why are they cutting the NHS and ‘The Home Visitors Scheme’ and what can we do to stop it?

    SKT
    xxxx

    PS; If you think the poster – and I – am alone in this opinion – just ask – why most didn’t bother voting in the recent elections – and why are most turned off by politics today.

    Like

  6. @SKT.
    You wrote: ‘I think it is aimed at the various parties (all parties I would argue)’ On this occasion I disagree with your analysis because three political parties immediately spring to mind who do not share your views. The SWP, the CPGB and the Socialist Labour party.
    The OP wrote “when a society and world has been taken over by the most corrupt power of all the ideology of profit over people which is capitalism.”
    The OP argues for a non capitalist society but industrialisation breeds capitalism (Ask the Chinese). There is no purely capitalist or communist economy in the world today. Capitalist Great Britain has a Social Security system managed and overseen by the state and Communist China allows its citizens to keep some of the profits they earn.
    cato.org/policy-report/januaryfebruary-2013/how-china-became-capitalist

    Like

  7. I do get that Colin.

    But I stand by my comments on how this site has drifted in simply a no solution blog Sad really

    SKTxxxx

    Must get my computer sorted with the name thing.

    Like

  8. I’m new here so just reading mainly, but a discussion on politics of the day would be a very good idea, not sure what others think.? Maybe a live feed at certain times . Others iMay not agree but Just a idea.

    Like

  9. ‘a discussion on politics of the day’
    This is Rothpol. Politics,double dealings and shenanigans in Rotherham.
    Most of the politicians who live in the metropolitan bubble would have a problem knowing where
    Rotherham is unless they were shown on a map.
    There are several political forums where daily politics are discussed, this does not mean we operate in isolation on this blog, what it does mean is most of the topics discussed are not relevant to Rotherham.
    How many MP’s do you think are aware of the CSE scandal, the former Deputy Leader’s criminal record or the shady practices at the Unity Centre? (The list is not exhaustive) We’ve got enough to contend with on our doorsteps.
    You are more than welcome to contribute and comment on Rothpol IMHO.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.