Is the Guardian worse than it used to be?

goblins 4 spümcø labour

GG i dont think of you as a goblin

we are not the same

sorry i kinda skipped over the possibility of a Zarah party. that would be better than any of the alternatives, it's not a short term project, and the SCG have shown a frankly masochistic willingness to chunter under their breath, do nothing and let themselves get picked off one by one

oh and this is all the Graun thread because this is their dream Labour except not enough virulent transphobia

sorry, SCG?

Socialist Campaign Group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Campaign_Group

(xpost)

"Corbyn's ideas with Blair's slick presentation"

Post this in 2017, when someone would've cared.

morelike Socialist Landlord Group, amirite?

would recommend watching 70's tv series Bill Brand to anyone who wants a reminder that the Labour Right were also a bunch of cunts well before the Blair era! And also it's rather good.

still technically a group, not so much campaigning

Spüm Cø Goblins

My impressions are:

- There are the odd local groups emerging in certain areas, that might challenge and change the composition of councils from Lab to something else.

- The items listed in that libcom tweet: donate to some unions and their strike funds.

- There are other groups that are carrying out action and risking life and limb.

But to look to Lab and their 20 or so left MPs is to look at...not v much. Nobody is going to influence Starmer, I suspect when he's in trouble he might look for support. It would be foolish to give him any.

Spüm Cø Goblins

Finally a reference I get. You sick little monkey.

I should’ve gone with “bloated sack of protoplasm” smh.

re riots: the lampposts around here have had nov 5th march on government stickers on them for a while, done by the same people who bought you the anti-vax and anti-un stickers. just a time and date and oblig guy fawkes mask on them and a bunch of links to c0v1dtrvth5.com etc. i wonder if their plans have changed? or if more than 5 people and a dog will turn up.

(also other stickers saying THE TRUTH WILL SHOCK YOU + a QR code are also available)

rude

xp

You know I’m joking right? Probably doesn’t need to be said but just in case.

Reading this thread now worse than reading the UK edition of the Guardian.

Dear Moran,

I’m having a swell time here at the insane asylum. It would be nice if you could come and visit me sometime. Wish you could read.

(That was also an allusion.)

https://media.tenor.com/s6HXPT_n5a4AAAAM/ok-thumbs-up.gif

Reading this thread now worse than reading the UK edition of the Guardian.

― Tsar Bombadil (James Morrison), Saturday, 22 October 2022 bookmarkflaglink

UK Pol chat is popular across the board.

Many ppl are saying this.

huge numbers

James just posted? Wow. I didn’t know that. You are telling me now for the first time. He made some amazing posts. What else can you say. Whether you agreed or not, he was an amazing poster who made some amazing posts. I am actually sad to hear that. I am sad to hear that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYcyacLRPNs

"I'd prefer it if they targeted shitty art only of the Damien Hirst variety"

I realise I'm replying to something from a week and several political aeons ago, but I remember seeing this in a department store when I went to Hong Kong back in 2019:
https://i.imgur.com/gdS0DiW.jpg

I was dimly aware that Hirst had made a crystal skull but I wasn't aware he had a full range of branded perfume bottles and paperweights. I remember wondering what the rich people of China thought about him. In the UK he is a legendary art icon and one of the most widely-beloved public figures of the 1990s - this is true (SOLVED) (2022) - but did the rich people of China read Ray Gun in the 1990s? Why should they be aware of him?

The odd thing is that media coverage of the collaboration seems weirdly timid. After Googling it the only report I could find in an actual newspaper was this, which is essentially a press release:
https://observer.com/2015/07/damien-hirst-lends-his-quirky-touch-to-this-127-year-old-glass-company/

You'd think there would be loads of "this is a pile of cack / he is creatively bankrupt" editorials, but no. Is it too obvious to criticise Damien Hirst for partnering with a jewellery firm? Is it just that he isn't as famous as he used to be? Even the coverage of his recent art-burning-NFT thing has been muted.

i doubt they read ray gun lol but rich ppl everywhere have always enjoyed paying for fancy and expensive art, especially when it's gleaming and show-offy!

so im guessing rich ppl in china are very likely not wildly different? they read glossy investment mags which tell them what art to buy into

ps my entire guide to what rich ppl in china are like is this mainland-chinese netflix police procedural: luxury, criminal decadence, martial-arts cops and profiling on the streets of the people's republic of china: WHEN A SNAIL FALLS IN LOVE

in conclusion they like to murder one another (just like rich ppl in the UK per poirot etc)

"In the UK he is a legendary art icon and one of the most widely-beloved public figures of the 1990s"

I do not believe that these statements are true.

They feel a bit overegged, or referring to a specific audience, yes

But I'd say the YBAs' star has declined since the 90s anyway

Yeah, beloved by whom? Recognisable, but beloved?

renowned art critic Dave Stewart of the Eurythmics considers him a genius ...lol

Some YBAs - Gillian Wearing, Georgina Starr, Jane and Louise Wilson, Mark Wallinger, Yinka Shonibare, Richard Billingham- go from strength to strength as serious artists. Hirst, not so much.

That sounds right Suzy, I suppose I mean as a group

what happened to Sarah Lucas?

Yeah, beloved by whom? Recognisable, but beloved?

The poster in question has a track record of making similarly bizarre statements.

‘Beloved’ is same level horrible-ness as ‘national treasure’ and ‘one of the good guys ‘, and just above the excruciating ‘he’s good people’.

xp yes we seem to be having a recent and unwelcome uptick of similar bullshit

Observer:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/23/labour-membership-soars-as-party-prepares-to-take-on-failing-tories-in-a-general-election

"Labour membership soars as party prepares to take on failing Tories in a general election

Speed of government collapse prompts a scramble to solve logistical problems and select candidates"

I post that because

1: we know that membership has fallen greatly and a smaller gain is now being misrepresented as "soaring"

2: we know that the selection process is corrupt, malicious and determined by factional power.

Therefore the report reflects on the Observer.

Observer:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/23/labour-membership-soars-as-party-prepares-to-take-on-failing-tories-in-a-general-election🕸

"Labour membership soars as party prepares to take on failing Tories in a general election

Speed of government collapse prompts a scramble to solve logistical problems and select candidates"

Soaring.

In addition: why should those 'senior figures' be trusted?

They cannot be trusted with anything else.

They have a political motivation to misrepresent the numbers.

They are not named.

No official source is given.

In fact actual numbers of Labour members has been elusive for a long time. People who leave (like me) often still receive contact as if they were members.

I don't doubt that numbers may have risen somewhat, after a large fall.

I do say that citing ballpark figures from 'senior figures' is not responsible journalism.

precision abt total membership -- inc.those corbyn highs -- is iirc rendered somewhat foggier and soggier by the quality of the counting tho (which the piece does not broach)

i: there's a known lag between non-payment and actually being struck off the list (tbf literally all parties do this, w/the SWP it was often like three decades lol; but if it's anything longer than a year then it will deliver questionable results
ii: wasn't there a *massive* data-breach and loss fuck-up in this terrtitory like two years ago? actually turning a good deal of the info into a black box of motivated guesswork?

i mean maybe they've got all this stuff on track? but

xpost

sure, not really interested in defending the headline but assuming the headline causes you to read the article the numbers are in the third para.

“source” thing looks to me more like the source is more trying to speed up the process to get a new base, fed up with inaction from the party leadership.

rising membership is good, especially considering lost revenue since corbyn years.

but yes

on membership numbers it’s surely total and utter chaos and who fuckin knows (for example pf’s regular contact)

Numbers are in the 3rd paragraph.

Are they 'the numbers'?

They are the round numbers that 'senior figures say'.

Do you trust 'senior figures' in the Labour Party, and what they say to the Observer?

Mark S is correct -- this is a notoriously foggy area, certainly with recent Labour, if not beyond.