Yesterday I watched the long debate which took place a few weeks ago between Melanchon & Zemmour. 3 observations in a 🧵 1. the level of arguments & discussion - even between these 2 extremist politicians- was way, way above the standards of UK politics.
This was a genuine debate of ideas & principles. It so happens that I disagree with most of them but it was genuinely interesting. 2. After the end of each discussion theme - e.g. immigration, security, defence- the debate stopped for a Fact Checker which corrected false
assertions & statistics of the 2 candidates, giving them a chance to reply when they were corrected. This showed up the mendacity of Zemmour: when corrected with genuine statistics, he attacked the statistics provenance. Melanchon was far more gracious.
3.Whatever one thought of these individuals, this was good politics i.e. a genuine debate of ideas & 2 competing vision of the world, not a Punch & Judy exchange of 3 words slogans. It brought to light the degradation of the political debate in the UK.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So true:
"Elections are won by parties with a compelling and optimistic, forward-looking story about themselves and how they will change the country. The Tories still have one; Labour does not." What could this compelling narrative be? 🧵 on.ft.com/3rshLvG via @FT
Labour badly needs all hands on desk and this means including others from outside the now sclerotic Labour movement. In particular Labour needs to work hand in hand with the Libdems & the Greens & even include discussions with & ideas from new parties like True & Fair.
Working with other parties and running as a #ProgressiveAlliance is, as I argued below, the surest way to present a compelling, optimistic & exciting narrative of renewal & modernisation
Beth Rigby did it just right: softly, softly, no aggression. Just calm, precise questioning, with a hint of pity. Something which makes it impossible for Johnson to react with his usual aggressive boosterism because it would look out of place & fake. Starmer missed it.
It could have been devastating if it had been calm, cold and forensic, like a scientist dissecting a particularly unpleasant & stinky specimen.
Playing to the gallery was a mistake. Yes, it got laughs on the Labour benches but it didn't do the job.
Homer-Dixon says that a fascist US regime would seek to undermine Canada. I am in no doubt that, should this scenario happen, the Conservatives if still in government would ally with America & join forces to seek to destabilise the EU.
The dangers presented by the Brexiters are not only domestic. Close to & financially supported by the US extreme right, they are a threat to a weakened international order. Some leaders like Draghi or Macron - and hopefully Scholz- see this. Other are oblivious or (🇵🇱🇬🇧🇭🇺)
Almost six out of 10 (57 per cent) believe Boris Johnson lied to them about what Brexit would be like during the bitter referendum campaign of 2016.
More than half of those questioned (51 per cent) want a referendum on rejoining at some point, with 39 per cent saying it should come in the next five years, compared to just 32 per cent who say the issue should never be reopened.
When asked what effect Brexit had so far had on the UK’s interests generally, some 38 per cent said it had been damaging, against just 27 per cent who said it had improved matters.
These are the reasons @DJAHallam gives for asking Labour voters not to vote for Helen Morgan:
She is he says "obsessed with nazis". This is because she:
- told Patel to "tear up her Goebbels'manual" because of her approach to propaganda around refugees
- compared the PM's attempts to prorogue Parliament as acting like "what Hitler did in 1933" & a "shameless power grab"
- compared the situation of Jewish people fleeing war and persecution to the situation of the refugees doing the same today
I am rather impressed by Mrs Morgan
Note that before posting this article, he started by implying she was pro-nazis. The honest Mr Hallam.