Mick Hall @ Organized Rage believes:

What Trump's victory in the US presidential election shows is the old way of doing politics is no longer viable


For me the US presidential election was a choice of two evils, both godawful, Trump is a right wing bigot and Mrs Clinton a corrupt woman far too close to the Wall St banksters who have poured millions of dollars into the Clinton family coffers.

Trump being a novice politician doesn't have a political track record to delve into to judge him on. Mrs Clinton certainly does and it doesn't make good reading.

Not only has she supported all the Treaties which have hollowed out the USA's once mighty manufacturing sector she has been an advocate of deregulating the markets, and supported every single one of the US military interventions which have set aflame parts of North Africa and the middle east and sent millions of refugees heading to Europe.

Whether it be Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria she either publicly supported US military intervention vigorously or when President Obama's Secretary of State she help organised the 2009 military surge in Afghanistan which prolonged the occupation and ended in failure.

As to the Libyan Civil War, Clinton's shift in favor of military intervention aligned her with Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice and National Security Council figure Samantha Power and was a key turning point in overcoming internal administration opposition from Defense Secretary Gates, security advisor Thomas E. Donilon, and counterterrorism advisor John Brennan, the very people whose advise Obama should have been taking heed of.

She portrayed herself as a supporter of the Arab spring but facts speak otherwise. After leaving office to concentrate on winning the presidency she also failed to speak out against the US and its allies arming and financing armed Islamic groups in Syria.

So I am not that disappointed that this over ambitious lady didn't win. She seemed to believe from the start of the campaign she had a god given right to be the candidate and the next president, well the US electorate thought otherwise. Some of her emails released by Wikileaks show her campaign staff manipulated the Democratic party machine in the primaries in her interest and against those of her main opponent Bernie Sanders.

As to Trump, he is what he is and needs to be opposed with vigour. As with Brexit in the UK I might not like the consequences of a Trump presidency, but we need to face the fact millions of voters both in the US and UK believed their political systems were in desperate need of a shake up.

There is a lesson here for the LP: Hillary Clinton represented more of the same neoliberal status quo which has served millions of US and British people poorly. For these folk, low wages, factory closures, benefit cuts, gross inequality and ever more foreign wars have become the norm, and in yesterday's US election it turned out the majority of US voters were heart sick of this, and understandably so.

If the likes of Dan Jarvis and the LP's right-wing get their way to maintain the status quo, albeit with a more human face, and manage to return the party to doing politics the old way, then Labour will be marginalised for a generation, especially in places like Thurrock, Basildon, parts of the north of England and Wales.

The main lesson from the US election is the old ways are no longer acceptable or viable for millions of voters. The LP must offer a real alternative which offers change and hope. For if we don't, you can be certain the right-wing Tory Government of Theresa May and Ukip will, and it will not be to our liking.

No Longer Viable

Mick Hall @ Organized Rage believes:

What Trump's victory in the US presidential election shows is the old way of doing politics is no longer viable


For me the US presidential election was a choice of two evils, both godawful, Trump is a right wing bigot and Mrs Clinton a corrupt woman far too close to the Wall St banksters who have poured millions of dollars into the Clinton family coffers.

Trump being a novice politician doesn't have a political track record to delve into to judge him on. Mrs Clinton certainly does and it doesn't make good reading.

Not only has she supported all the Treaties which have hollowed out the USA's once mighty manufacturing sector she has been an advocate of deregulating the markets, and supported every single one of the US military interventions which have set aflame parts of North Africa and the middle east and sent millions of refugees heading to Europe.

Whether it be Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria she either publicly supported US military intervention vigorously or when President Obama's Secretary of State she help organised the 2009 military surge in Afghanistan which prolonged the occupation and ended in failure.

As to the Libyan Civil War, Clinton's shift in favor of military intervention aligned her with Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice and National Security Council figure Samantha Power and was a key turning point in overcoming internal administration opposition from Defense Secretary Gates, security advisor Thomas E. Donilon, and counterterrorism advisor John Brennan, the very people whose advise Obama should have been taking heed of.

She portrayed herself as a supporter of the Arab spring but facts speak otherwise. After leaving office to concentrate on winning the presidency she also failed to speak out against the US and its allies arming and financing armed Islamic groups in Syria.

So I am not that disappointed that this over ambitious lady didn't win. She seemed to believe from the start of the campaign she had a god given right to be the candidate and the next president, well the US electorate thought otherwise. Some of her emails released by Wikileaks show her campaign staff manipulated the Democratic party machine in the primaries in her interest and against those of her main opponent Bernie Sanders.

As to Trump, he is what he is and needs to be opposed with vigour. As with Brexit in the UK I might not like the consequences of a Trump presidency, but we need to face the fact millions of voters both in the US and UK believed their political systems were in desperate need of a shake up.

There is a lesson here for the LP: Hillary Clinton represented more of the same neoliberal status quo which has served millions of US and British people poorly. For these folk, low wages, factory closures, benefit cuts, gross inequality and ever more foreign wars have become the norm, and in yesterday's US election it turned out the majority of US voters were heart sick of this, and understandably so.

If the likes of Dan Jarvis and the LP's right-wing get their way to maintain the status quo, albeit with a more human face, and manage to return the party to doing politics the old way, then Labour will be marginalised for a generation, especially in places like Thurrock, Basildon, parts of the north of England and Wales.

The main lesson from the US election is the old ways are no longer acceptable or viable for millions of voters. The LP must offer a real alternative which offers change and hope. For if we don't, you can be certain the right-wing Tory Government of Theresa May and Ukip will, and it will not be to our liking.

1 comment:

  1. Never tire reading this mans stuff. Now the electorate seems capable of thinking nce again perhaps New Labour rather than Bliar's New Tory is finally an option.

    ReplyDelete