Cruddas the Brave(Compass Conf)

[ViolentPanda]

Cruddas gets a lot of reach-arounds from the left-leaning parts of the mainstream media for presenting himself as a regular working-class bloke, but all he is, is just another m/c tosser playing a role in order to rook his constituents and build a faction that's no different policy -wise to the other circling vultures in Labour.

 

[articul8]

Just watched the Newsnight clip - he comes across as an old style East End gangster. But his prole talk is all bluff, very stylised and false. Generally very worrying and yet some encouraging elements to what he was saying. Obviously stuff about "food banks" being the future, and "the music's stopped", "do more with less" stuff is classic soft-face neoliberalism. On the other hand, he's signalling rent controls are on the way so there is some sense of openness to left demands that are revenue neutral or positive. Very obvious they intend to use vocabulary of construction - "building", "laying the foundation", "putting in a floor", "getting the architechture right" -

Ed the Builder? Can he fix it? (no he can't)

 

[butchersapron]

Listen to yourself.

Did you ever think that you'd be arguing such tripe? What a waste.

 

[articul8]

What tripe?

 

[butchersapron]

The "encouraging" bollocks, the classic PR switch of cover your shit in sugar and some mug will fall for it - and look, you did. This shows that we're winning, that we're on the right path!

 

[articul8]

Well, apart from explicitly not "falling for it" and saying it was "generally very worrying", "all bluff, very stylised and false"

But even within recklessly imposed spending limits, it is still possible to deliver some quite practical reforms (like rent controls). Do I think this suffices? No - I don't.

 

[butchersapron]

Well, apart from explicitly not "falling for it" and saying it was "generally very worrying", "all bluff, very stylised and false"

But even within recklessly imposed spending limits, it is still possible to deliver some quite practical reforms (like rent controls). Do I think this suffices? No - I don't.

Did you only type half that original reply or something and get someone else to do the rest?:

...and yet some encouraging elements to what he was saying. Obviously stuff about "food banks" being the future, and "the music's stopped", "do more with less" stuff is classic soft-face neoliberalism. On the other hand, he's signalling rent controls are on the way so there is some sense of openness to left demands that are revenue neutral or positive.

So, "encouraging" because it shows "there is some sense of openness to left demands" - exactly as i said that you had said, and exactly you falling for the shit/sugar trick.

And if you don't "think this will suffice", why are you accepting and playing your role of but but but...Here's an idea, why don't you not do that and point out the trick he is attempting to play here entire?

 

[butchersapron]

Seriously, what sort of person could come out viewing that Cruddas thing on newsnight describing any part at all of it as "encouraging"?

 

[articul8]

the sort of person that would welcome controls of rents and a crackdown on private landlords?

 

[butchersapron]

a)This is worrying shit.

b)Yes, but it's encouraging worrying shit!

 

[butchersapron]

the sort of person that would welcome controls of rents and a crackdown on private landlords?

And of course that sort of person could never be the sort of person who could point out that a) it's PR bollocks and b) the price of supporting this wider program is all that worrying shit.

How can you not see this is labour playing their part in reconstructing victorian model of self-reliance on modern neo-liberal grounds and other such shite in order to dismantle collective provision of welfare, social care and so on, and this "encouraging" stuff is designed to make mugs like you react as you have.

 

[butchersapron]

You can see the idea forming for the 2015 election defence of labour in his mind, yes, they're shit and what they have said they will do is worrying but...the rent controls! The rent controls!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Just watched the Newsnight clip - he comes across as an old style East End gangster. But his prole talk is all bluff, very stylised and false. Generally very worrying and yet some encouraging elements to what he was saying. Obviously stuff about "food banks" being the future, and "the music's stopped", "do more with less" stuff is classic soft-face neoliberalism. On the other hand, he's signalling rent controls are on the way so there is some sense of openness to left demands that are revenue neutral or positive. Very obvious they intend to use vocabulary of construction - "building", "laying the foundation", "putting in a floor", "getting the architechture right" -

Ed the Builder? Can he fix it? (no he can't)

There's no "openness to left demands", all there is, is a few rhetorical sops to soft-left opinion that'd disappear from Cruddas' and his fellow-travellers' political vocabulary as soon as they have a sniff of power.
Cruddas is attempting a somewhat more subtle version of the Blair "everyman" tactic. Everything is couched in generalities, so that it can be represented as all things to all people and still not frighten the neoliberal horses. That's not "encouraging", it's the same piss in newer bottles.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Seriously, what sort of person could come out viewing that Cruddas thing on newsnight describing any part at all of it as "encouraging"?

A flack or other shill?

 

[ViolentPanda]

the sort of person that would welcome controls of rents and a crackdown on private landlords?

And yet where was the broad detail of these rhetorical flourishes? Not present, and we know why.

 

[butchersapron]

And this is the speech today that all this was leading up to (in full) - utter tripe, but encouraging tripe - and encouragingly vague utter tripe:

Personally, I very much welcomed David Cameron when he began to talk about ‘a social recession’.

His answer was Compassionate Conservatism and the Big Society

He recognised there is more to life than money and markets.

Many admired him for saying that we should hug a hoodie.

He said ‘working together for the common good is the way to create a new and inspiring sense of national identity.’

I believed and supported David Cameron when he said these things. Although from a different Party I believe he was asking the right questions. I still think that.

I fear however, that he could not carry his party with him.

 

[Fruitloop]

How revolting.

 

[articul8]

not all bad

we have introduced markets and financial transactions into areas of life they do not belong

we’ll campaign against loan sharks and pay day lenders; helping to develop community banks, credit unions

We’ll protect communities with stronger regulation of the private rental market - giving families the security of tenure they need to plan their lives and put down roots.
We spend far too much on subsidising rents and far too little on dealing with the historic housing supply crisis. It needs to change.

but this seems to the nub of it

the emphasis is going to have to shift from demands on simple state expenditure to campaigns that bring people together and enable them to improve their common life and build their power from the bottom up.

It's the kind of statement that on the face of it is hard to disagree with but could actually be very dangerous indeed - as it could easily mean replacing the "simple state" with complex private financial architecture through PFIs, private equity and others along with mutuals and "social enterprises" in a giant market for services. I remain to be convinced this isn't what they have in mind.

 

[Random]

not all bad

My little sister's taken up smoking. But it's not all bad. There's an encouraging sign that it's helping her to lose weight.

 

[Random]

On the other hand, he's signalling rent controls are on the way so there is some sense of openness to left demands that are revenue neutral or positive.

There's no sign of "openess" to your leftie demands. He's signalling a few utterly basic sops designed to shore up Labour heartland support, and thus make him independent of any left pressure.

Seriously. One of the "left" MPs in the LP says we need to basically give up on the welfare state, and your reaction is to pick the kernals of sweetcorn out of his shit?

 

[agricola]

I remain to be convinced this isn't what they have in mind.

TBH there isnt really any evidence to support that that isnt what they have in mind, and plenty to suggest that it is.

 

[articul8]

he didn't say give up on the welfare state. His language is dangerous ambiguous, I accept that, but it's the game he's playing - holding the line whilst there's a good old fight about the party's direction. But the idea that we need to rebuild networks of solidarity and collective power in communities is fundamentally right. It's just that this language can also be used and traduced cynically, for a market-driven carve up of public services.

 

[agricola]

There's no sign of "openess" to your leftie demands. He's signalling a few utterly basic sops designed to shore up Labour heartland support, and thus make him independent of any left pressure.

Seriously. One of the "left" MPs in the LP says we need to basically give up on the welfare state, and your reaction is to pick the kernals of sweetcorn out of his shit?

Well exactly. Even mentioning rent controls is a bit of an indication of how bad the proposals are, since if they were to instead embark on building a lot of new affordable* social housing it would bring private rents down far more effectively than introducing rent controls.

* ie genuinely affordable

 

[articul8]

Well exactly. Even mentioning rent controls is a bit of an indication of how bad the proposals are, since if they were to instead embark on building a lot of new affordable* social housing it would bring private rents down far more effectively than introducing rent controls.

* ie genuinely affordable

He's talking about a major increase in supply of affordable housing - but that will take time to come on stream. Rent controls are necessary and can work in the short term.

 

[butchersapron]

he didn't say give up on the welfare state. His language is dangerous ambiguous, I accept that, but it's the game he's playing - holding the line whilst there's a good old fight about the party's direction. But the idea that we need to rebuild networks of solidarity and collective power in communities is fundamentally right. It's just that this language can also be used and traduced cynically, for a market-driven carve up of public services.

Holding the line? What line exactly?

 

[agricola]

Holding the line? What line exactly?

 

[butchersapron]

he didn't say give up on the welfare state. His language is dangerous ambiguous, I accept that, but it's the game he's playing - holding the line whilst there's a good old fight about the party's direction. But the idea that we need to rebuild networks of solidarity and collective power in communities is fundamentally right. It's just that this language can also be used and traduced cynically, for a market-driven carve up of public services.

Yes, ed Miliband and his team are right into building up collective working class power through community. You are getting worse by the frigging day.

 

[agricola]

He's talking about a major increase in supply of affordable housing - but that will take time to come on stream. Rent controls are necessary and can work in the short term.

Rent controls would require legislation, consultation and could probably only be implemented as already existing contracts ran out. It would probably be as quick to just approve new social housing, especially because of the jobs that would be created as a result.

 

[articul8]

Yes, ed Miliband and his team are right into building up collective working class power through community. You are getting worse by the frigging day.

Did I say that? No. I'm saying that the language of empowering civil society organisation to determine and deliver local services is not inherently bad, it becomes bad when it is used cynically to undermine public ownership and accountability (as per the Big Society).

 

[butchersapron]

Yes you did, and you didn't even realise so far gone are you. In fact so far gone are you that you find cruddas doing the thing you mention as bad to be "encouraging"