hi aharon Thanks for sharing this - it's a good email and lots of good questions. I hope he gets in, as he seems to talk about things I find important. Many people say he'll make Labour into a laughing stock and Labour will never get elected again, as he presents the wrong image and Labour need a carefully crafted marketed approach to reach the middle ground voters. I feel Labour needs to be true to it's original values and be on the side of people not business/ profit.
I agree with what you say about voting for Labour as find them more palatable than the tories. I would like to know what he plans to do about austerity - will he fight it- try to stop it? What will he do about the banks? Will he push for them to pay back the bailout money? What about houses? House prices and rents? dave On 10 August 2015 at 08:52, none <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Jeremy Corbyn, > > Hope this finds you, and/or a trusted assistant very well indeed. > > Am considering to register as a labour party supporter with the intention > of voting for you in the leadership elections. However, some questions > prickle my mind, for which am hoping to get some relevant replies. > > Since i suspect these prickling questions might be shared with other > people - > this email is open and shared via personal contacts and mailing lists. > > More regarding context - in Notes bellow signature. > Am kind of rushing into questions while assuming, hopefully not too > incorrectly, it might assist readability. > > Question #1 > Will a labour party with your leadership, be open and willing for > dialogues with both like minded and interested people?* (Debate note) > > Question #2 > Have read somewhere that you rather people Not vote for you if they do not > feel represented by your views and policies - a very commendable stance, > imho. > > The following might be an over interpretation and misunderstanding what > was actually meant - hence please excuse a certain bluntness: > Would you welcome a vote from a person like me who sees potential > similarities in directions of ideas you support, rather than being > represented by these ideas*?(Policies note) > > Question #2.1 > Another, related feeling of unease is to do with being a labour supporter. > > I didn't - and wouldn't - support neo-liberal, blairite labour. > > However, I have always considered the labour party more palatable than the > tories. eg, think that if in one's constituency the "choice" is between > labour and tory - vote labour precisely because then it gives more weight > for people with links and dependencies to social oriented considerations > in political views. > Does it qualify a person like me to sign up as a supporter? > > Question #3 > Suppose it turns out that perhaps there is a positive argument to be made > in favour of someone like me voting for you. > I'd like to have a clue whether or not, if you were to be the labour party > leader, you'd prioritise aspects of public policies. e.g. education over > foreign aid and defence, etc.. > > If there will be such prioritising, where about in the scale of importance > culture - including art, science and technology developments - might find > itself?* (Culture note) > > Considering this might be slightly late in terms of the 12th august > deadline for getting involved, am considering a payment of £3 as a > possible way to ensure there is enough time to mull over whether or not to > vote. > > There's a whole bunch of other, more specific questions, however they are, > in my view, more specific and perhaps less appropriate here. > > Cheers, best regards and many advanced thanks for any ideas and > suggestions! > > aharon > xx > > Thanks for all who suggested stuff to do with this email!! > > > Notes: > > * A general note > > Following May 2015 elections, there was a time when it seemed only > new-labour linked people might run for the party's leadership. > > At that time, I thought this might be strange because in the past there > were at least Token candidates from the more socialist wings of labour. > When your candidacy was announced, I thought this would be such a token > leadership run - hence am pleasantly surprised there is an actual chance > someone of your views being elected as the labour leader. > > > * Policies note > In my opinion, if Blair and Co took labour - and the UK - firmly towards > 19th century socio-economic practices and debate references that inspired > some of Dickens' best novels; the kind of socialism you seem to represent > is firmly in the 20th century. Eg policies like: nationalisation, and > national education services*. (national education services note) > > Personally, for example, am more interested, in commonisation*(common > note) than nationalisation, and a wide scope for experimenting with > solutions for public services and education. > > > * Debate note > It seems that with your kind of views leading the Labour party, perhaps > the debate can turn in the direction people with my kind of views think > it should. > E.g. services that are - or become - a public requirement, should be > commonised if private and remain of the common if already as such. > > This "debate reference" argument to vote for you is linked to Owen Jones' > point about preference for debating with a Labour government, rather > than fight a Tory one. ( > > http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/08/owen-jones-right-are-mocking-jeremy-corbyn-because-secretly-they-fear-him > ) These kind of views perhaps have a realpolitik feel - > assuming there might indeed be a willingness for dialogical rather than > theatrical debates. > > * Culture note > The reference is regarding developments that are culturally oriented. Art, > science and technology are general examples, and hopefully do not preclude > relevant developments in other interests, be it, for example, education, > driving, swimming, hacking, plumbing, etc.. > > * Common orientation note > In reference to what seems a yet to be well established notion of making > public services in and of the common. eg: > http://dougald.nu/fullcommonism/ > http://is.gd/AfbrTH > http://is.gd/come2common > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indu_Prakash_Singh > http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/17806/ > > http://www.networkedlabour.net/2015/02/the-internet-and-social-media-at-a-crossroads-capitalism-or-commonism/ > > * National education service note > The idea of a national education service seems, to me, be actually a > Training - work skills provision - focused proposal. In my mind education > is to do with questioning that which is considered known, and the skills > involved with that, rather than specific work/job related skill. While > this distinction might sound on the scale of pompousness and semantic for > some, fair enough. > Yes, on some levels it is indeed meaningless, however, I think that, as > illustrated in: > > http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/08/jeremy-corbyn-proposing-national-education-service-would-it-work > - the policy and activity ideas seem to be focused on the training side > of learning, and perhaps education requires policies as well..? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
