Hearthly wrote:
Sorry Cavey but I must say that whilst I do have the utmost respect for you and always have, your recent comments to this thread are absolutely stretching that to breaking point, and I'm finding those comments borderline repugnant, if I'm honest.
I wouldn't agree with the invective used by markg but I can understand and sympathise with his absolute 'what the fuck?' reaction to some of the bile and triumphalist vitriol you're spewing.
To suggest that the Labour party have 'fucked up everything they've ever touched' is to deny both history and human decency.
You know I too hold you in the greatest respect. Why? You're an interesting, intelligent, kind and funny guy. I've known you well over 10 years; I know your background (upon which I have much in common as you know); I know where you're coming from. Accordingly, in keeping with almost everyone else here for that matter, whilst I think your politics and suggested methodologies are totally and diametrically incorrect, for obvious empirical reasons (as even a very casual glance around the globe will surely tell you, not least 22 miles across the English Channel) - I have never, nor will I ever doubt your sincerity or good faith.
Knowing this, and your knowledge of me also, it is somewhat galling (to say the least) to realise that you doubt MY reasons for believing in the cold, dispassionate logic and efficacy of methodologies and politics that I genuinely believe, as incredulous as you may well be, would (and do) benefit the most people, achieve the optimal results? I mean really, do you think I want to protect the often entirely undeserving and amoral rich, at the expense of the poor and disadvantaged? You mention the terrible ills and provocations I have supposedly wrought in my posts earlier, but frankly it should be me who's getting pissed off at this juncture?
This 'wtf' reaction you mention; this supposed 'bile' and 'vitriol'. I mean,
what? I'm sorry, but for all the revisionist bullshit of hardcore Labour supporters, Labour DID wreck the economy of this nation, in fact they very nearly destroyed it, as well as having the worst foreign policy since Suez. That is an incontrovertible, absolute FACT - it is the job of government to regulate the banks and financial sector; they failed to do so and the consequences (still ongoing) could have hardly been more dire. So, all those supposed "good" things that they did were all wiped out in an instant, and then some. They even themselves had to apologise for it (along with their disastrous immigration policy).
Quote:
no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party that inflicted those bitter experiences on me. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
The 'bitter experiences' the former Labour minister for health recounts were rooted in a poverty stricken childhood in South Wales, when working class families such as his lived a precarious existence on the precipice of disaster and destitution without an NHS or welfare state to protect them. Those things arrived in Britain courtesy of the 1945 Labour government, of which he was a key member, and in 2014 are in the process of being rolled back.
You reckon those words are 'yet to be bettered', basically a nasty, bitter, deeply prejudiced man decrying every single Tory who ever lived, regardless of their deeds, achievements and kindnesses as 'lower than vermin', gleefully describing his 'burning hatred'? I mean seriously, you want me to respond to this?
Personally I think this says it all. In my view, anyone with such views, past or present and for whatever reason, however justified they might think they are, ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
There are many well meaning, entirely decent Tory voters and party members, just as there are Liberals and Labour. To suggest otherwise is divisive, irrational and above all, idiotic.
_________________
Beware of gavia articulata oculos...
Dr Lave wrote:
Of course, he's normally wrong but
interestingly wrong