Election incoming

[version]

There's an Adam Curtis interview from earlier this year where he says the question people need to ask themselves is whether they really want change or whether they just want to tinker with the status quo and I think the answer to that for a lot of people - myself included - goes some way to explaining what luka's been puzzling over re: the left finally having a proper candidate in Corbyn and seemingly looking for excuses not to vote for him.

Another point he makes is that whilst liberals and the left are on the fence, there are millions of people who do want change, who feel they have nothing to lose and who are currently being led by the right, so they can't sit around forever: change is coming one way or another and if they don't make a decision and come up with their own vision of the future then society's going to head in a direction they might not like.

45:57 - 50:05



Having said that, I'd be interested in hearing his thoughts on Labour's manifesto now that it's been released as Corbyn strikes me as very much presenting a vision of the future, what with his plans for a 'green industrial revolution' and all.

I guess Brexit could be one of these 'big ideas' which prompts the middle-classes to sacrifice something in support of the movement too, but I get the impression that despite it obviously being the right's vision of the future and fulfilling some of the criteria, a lot of the people who support it don't actually feel they'll be negatively impacted by it, so are they really sacrificing anything? Surely you have to be aware that you're giving something up in order for it to be a sacrifice?

 

[version]

You ask what real change might look like - that's a really interesting question for liberals and radicals because there's a hunger for change out there among millions of people who feel sort of insecure and uncertain about the future and do want something, do want that to change.

I think that change only comes from a big, imaginative idea, a sort of picture of another kind of future which gives people… which connects with that fearfulness in the back of people's minds and offers them a release from it. That's the key thing, but I think that the question for liberals and radicals is that… they are always suspicious of big ideas, that's what lurks underneath the liberal mindset and the reason is, and they’re quite right in a way, is... look what happened last time when millions of people got swept up in a big idea. Look up the last hundred years of what happened in Russia and then in Germany. The point is that change, political change, is frightening, it’s scary. It’s thrilling because it's dynamic and doing something to change the world, but it's scary because it can change things in ways where nothing is secure. It's like being in an earthquake - even the solid ground underneath you begins to move and things dissolve that you think are solid and real.

And I think the question liberals and the left have to face at the moment is really sort of a difficult question. Which is, do you really want change? Do you really want it? Because if you do, many of them might find themselves in a very uncertain world where they might lose all sorts of things. I mean, what we’re talking about, in many cases, is people who are the sort at the centre of society at the moment. They’re not out on the margins. They would have a lot to lose from real political change because it really would change things in the structure of power. Or, and this is the brutal question, do you just want things to change a little? Do you just want the banks to be a little bit nicer say, or people to be a little more respectful of each other's identities - all of which is good, but basically you carry on living in a nice world where you tinker with it? That's the key question. But you can’t just sit there forever worrying about big ideas because there are millions of people out there who do want change and the key thing is they feel they've got nothing to lose, you might have lots to lose but they feel they've got absolutely nothing to lose. But at the moment they're being led by the right. So things won’t remain the same. But society may go off in ways that you really don't want.

In answer to your question, what you need is a powerful vision of the future with all its dangers. But it’s also quite thrilling - it would be an escape from the staticness of the world we have today. And to do that you’ve got to engage with the giant forces of power that now run the world at the moment; in confronting those powers and trying to transform the world you might lose a lot. This is a sort of forgotten idea - that actually you surrender yourself up to a big idea and in the process might lose something. But you’d actually gain in a bigger sense because you’ve changed the world for the better. I know it sounds soppy but, sort of, this is the forgotten thing about politics is that you give up some of your individualism to something bigger than yourself, you surrender yourself, and it's a lost idea. And I think, really in answer to your question, is you can spot real change happening when you see people from the liberal middle-classes beginning to give themselves up to something, surrender themselves to something bigger than themselves. And at the moment there is nothing like that in the liberal imagination.

.

 

[DannyL]

I like that a lot. Very much my dilemma. What I didn't write above is that although "the centre" may in lots of ways have the best analyses there's no consideration of the apocalyptic changes that seem to be bearing down on us. There's the whole notion of having something to lose is important I think, will come to more so if we're talking about large scale economic changes.

I'd really question the idea of "proper change" = Corbyn obvs. A lot of his base is 55 year old Trots who've rejoined the Labour party after leaving in the 90s. But that's another discussion.

 

[luka]

Does Britain really harbour such a large reserve army of disaffected 55 year old Trots?

So many disaffected 55 year old Trotts that they can sieze control of the largest political party and force it to change direction so drastically?

I'm sceptical.

 

[subvert47]

Does Britain really harbour such a large reserve army of disaffected 55 year old Trots?

Yes, we're everywhere. I advise you to check under your bed right this minute

 

[DannyL]

There are a lot of 'em. A friend who's in the Greens commented that the membership of his local branch has plummeted 'cos they've all rejoined Labour, after leaving under Blair.

 

[Mr. Tea]

The trouble with asking yourself "Well what have I got to lose?" is that you may just be about to find out.

 

[DannyL]

And hey, I said "a lot" deliberately not "all" - he taking over has allowed all the SWPers, the RCP, the AWL - all back into the party.
When the party is literally being run by an ageing socialist, is it so offbeam to say that other ageing socialists have been attracted (back)?

 

[luka]

Objectively it's been a totally mental decade. Reality gone haywire

"So again, let's assume hyperdimensional contact did commence in 2012, but at first only gradually, imperceptibly, a slowly widening circle of disturbance. As in PKD's own metaphor of the arriving Logos, it comes into view like a zebra cautiously exiting its camouflage of high grass. Now, slightly more than four years later, its effects -- although still not positively identified by anyone -- have become readily apparent even within "mainstream" channels of communication.

It is also of little surprise that the eye of this cyclone of weirdness has emerged first in the heart of the world's principal media, financial and military empire, the U.S.A. From this vantage point it would emanate out and infect all of human culture and thought.

A detailed survey of its possible reverberations is required. But as its contours and impressions are by definition unknowable, we are really whistling in the dark. As always, we are discovering patterns that may only exist in our imagination. And yet it could be that it is the imagination that is the actual object we are attempting to describe. We can only plunge in.

The ideal object does not arrive as a definite something -- the classic UFO landing on the White House lawn -- but as an indefinite everything.

The surest sign of its emergence is the total breakdown of consensus. This has been occurring for many decades now, just as the Incarnation of spirit into matter was expected by thinkers and visionaries for over a century before Christ, but at this moment it has become an undeniable crisis for everyone.

Donald J. Trump, billionaire and reality TV star, has inexplicably for millions become the president of the most powerful nation in history. In a way, Trump's triumph is the culminating point of the new Incarnation. He -- the man -- is not the Messiah or the hyperdimensional object in himself, but he is a kind of threshold where the effects of that object become evident to most.

A demonstrator in New York City held a sign stating that the election of Trump was worse than 9/11. In a way, she is right. 9/11 was still confined within the consensus narrative, the conspiracy theories questioning or doubting the official story of 9/11 only circulated gradually. It took years for these theories to reach the mainstream, and even after that the discourse took on a predictable dichotomy: the sane official story vs. the wild conspiracy theories.

In this dualistic form the consensus persisted, but 9/11 was really the shot across the bow. The consensus began to really fray at this point. Conspiracy theories began to multiply. The consensus remained, but the counter-consensus fragmented endlessly. 9/11 was the foreshadowing in physical form of the more significant ideal encounter with the wholly other beginning in 2012, yet not really noticed by most until the present moment. By Bloomsday 2015 it took on an uncanny yet definite form."

https://groupnameforgrapejuice.blogspot.com/2017/01/ideal-objects-delerium-and-other-pizza.html

 

[Mr. Tea]

There's an Adam Curtis interview from earlier this year where he says the question people need to ask themselves is whether they really want change or whether they just want to tinker with the status quo and I think the answer to that for a lot of people - myself included - goes some way to explaining what luka's been puzzling over re: the left finally having a proper candidate in Corbyn and seemingly looking for excuses not to vote for him.

I think the left is going to vote Labour without hesitation and in their droves. A different proposition is the large block of mainly middle-class voters who are basically centre-left or liberal in outlook but don't identify as "leftist" per se, are keen on most or all of the Labour manifesto and are strongly anti-Tory but are even more strongly anti-Brexit, and who are concerned that (in the event of a Labour victory) Corbyn might renege on the promise of a second referendum with Remain as an option. These are the people who are going to vote Lib Dem, Green or indy in England and for the regional nationalist parties elsewhere.

Really my big fear is that this compromise position Labour have reached on Brexit - pro-2nd-ref but officially neutral - is Brexity enough to put off a lot of middle-class Remainers but not nearly Brexity enough to attract working-class Leavers.

 

[version]

It's terrifying that millions of people are willing to write Boris a blank check in exchange for 'getting Brexit done'.

 

[version]

 

[Leo]

Do you think John Major holds any sway over voters?

 

[version]

I doubt it. I imagine a lot of people have forgotten he was ever PM.

 

[DannyL]

I enjoyed his book on music hall!

 

[version]

This is worth a watch.

 

[version]

Brilliant.

Matt Hancock
‏Verified account @MattHancock

Very clear from the opening and the first answers:

This is a choice between Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn

#BBCDebates
12:37 PM - 6 Dec 2019

 

[version]

There's a real shitstorm going on on Reddit atm.

We were recently made aware of a post on Reddit that included leaked documents from the UK. We investigated this account and the accounts connected to it, and today we believe this was part of a campaign that has been reported as originating from Russia.

Earlier this year Facebook discovered a Russian campaign on its platform, which was further analyzed by the Atlantic Council and dubbed “Secondary Infektion.” Suspect accounts on Reddit were recently reported to us, along with indicators from law enforcement, and we were able to confirm that they did indeed show a pattern of coordination. We were then able to use these accounts to identify additional suspect accounts that were part of the campaign on Reddit. This group provides us with important attribution for the recent posting of the leaked UK documents, as well as insights into how adversaries are adapting their tactics.

In late October, an account u/gregoratior posted the leaked documents and later reposted by an additional account u/ostermaxnn. Additionally, we were able to find a pocket of accounts participating in vote manipulation on the original post. All of these accounts have the same shared pattern as the original Secondary Infektion group detected, causing us to believe that this was indeed tied to the original group.

Outside of the post by u/gregoratior, none of these accounts or posts received much attention on the platform, and many of the posts were removed either by moderators or as part of normal content manipulation operations. The accounts posted in different regional subreddits, and in several different languages.

Karma distribution:

0 or less: 42
1 - 9: 13
10 or greater: 6
Max Karma: 48

As a result of this investigation, we are banning 1 subreddit and 61 accounts under our policies against vote manipulation and misuse of the platform. As we have done with previous influence operations, we will also preserve these accounts for a time, so that researchers and the public can scrutinize them to see for themselves how these accounts operated.

 

[DannyL]

What's the specific election connection? What's been fed through there?

 

[version]

The documents detailing the trade deal negotiations with the US. They were apparently floating around on Reddit for a month before Corbyn got hold of them.