BBC Daily Politics
- This topic has 13 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The CPB's and Morning Star's Robert Griffiths appeared on the BBC Daily Politics yesterday 51:08 into the programme here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05q11fs
Asked what distinguishes your party from the myriad of other socialist parties, the Socialist Party of Britain, Socialist Labour Party, Left Unity, Alliance for Green Socialism; he replied 'well firstly the fact that we have been around since 1920, we are the inheritors of the original communist tradition'
Other minor parties are here
I take it the geezer doesn't know the SPGB formed in 1904? About 54 minutes in he said something along the lines of them not wanting to jeopardize a Labour Party victory in a constituency where there was a possibility of a Tory win?
SocialistPunk wrote:I take it the geezer doesn't know the SPGB formed in 1904? About 54 minutes in he said something along the lines of them not wanting to jeopardize a Labour Party victory in a constituency where there was a possibility of a Tory win?No he knows when we were formed.
TUSC's own-produced Party Election Broadcast is also on today at these times:Friday April 17th….. BBC2: 5.55pm… ITV: 6.25pm… BBC1: 6.55pm… Channel4: 7.55pmif anybody wants to watch theirs as well as ours and contrast and compare (Revolution and Reform).
Now Andrew Neill jokes that SPGB stands for Special Patrol Group … You can't win on this name question !
ALB wrote:Now Andrew Neill jokes that SPGB stands for Special Patrol Group … You can't win on this name question !It's the biggest general election campaign the Party has ever run and name confusion is cropping up. After the election would be a good time to nail down the festering issue of the Party identity once and for all.
That wasn't confusion over our name but what passes for Andrew Neil's wit. But again lets just wait until after May 7th and really start discussing this election campaign, the fruits, both sweet and bitter, of it.I cannot access BBC i-Player so i wait the upload of the interview…try and be quick, please
Not a very flattering response from someone on Medialens website. Was it that bad a put-down by Neil? None of the issues should have been particualry difficult to re-but. http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1429271902.html Well done, Andrew Neil: kicking the far left when they deserve it.Posted by rippon on April 17, 2015, 12:58 pm On The Daily Politics just now, Neil did a very good job of making the 'SPGB' ('Socialist Party of Great Britain') look ridiculous. Or, rather than making them look ridiculous, simply revealing their ridiculousness. E.g.: – Enumerating the multitude of parties with 'socialist' in their name, Neil observed correctly that 'many of you on the left seem to hate each other more than you hate the Tories.' – Citing the SPGB's highly restrictive membership rules, which show they want to exclude anyone who can't meet their incestuous standards rather than embrace the most citizens possible. Now, it's a given that Neil's agenda, in general, would be to rubbish the left (I say "in general" because, in this instance, he didn't need an agenda – the SPGB are transparently ridiculous). So the interesting question is: why did the SPGB accept this invitation from the BBC who, presumably, they hate? Perhaps because, in addition to their masturbatory puritanism, they are also narcissistic: can't resist the temptation of a moment and morsel of celebrity fame.
You shouldn't need access to iPlayer to view us here.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32167563Here we are currently listed as 'Monster Socialist Party of GB'I propose a name change then we won't have to ask them to correct this.
jondwhite wrote:You shouldn't need access to iPlayer to view us here.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32167563Here we are currently listed as 'Monster Socialist Party of GB'Now corrected.
Cheers, now seen it and actually it wasn't too bad and Howard performed admirably. (albeit stumbled with the faux pas at the end calling for a socialist state before quickly correcting himself) and Neil wasn't that aggressive an interrogator either, asking the sort of questions that really do need to be asked in a non-confrontational manner. I know some will say he should have said this or that but we all possess our own approach and style to explaining socialist ideasWell done, Howard, and our Medialens critic simply didn't listen to the answers Howard gave. A useful 5 minutes to our campaign.
I'm waiting for a member of the SPGB to use the link provided by Alan, and again by me below, to refute the stuff said about the Party on MediaLens. To set the record straight, so to speak. There could be hundreds of people on that site that may now have a misconception of the Party, and it wouldn't take much to put it right, surely. http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1429271902.html
It seems someone has already eloquently posted a reply (you, yourself, perhaps?)http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1429469798.htmli was for a long time a member of Medialens discussion list from the Iraq War and still a regular visitor but no longer a poster (i have since forgotten my password) before i decided that there were too many conspiracy theorists aka anti-vax and HIV/AIDS deniers. (you'll soon recognise them if you linger).The website moderators have tried to enforce a policy of not permitting the 911 Truthers to dominate the messages, sadly they failed to stop others from promoting other conspiracies in their postings. Another failing is to see our enemies enemies as our friends and not designate all participants in conflicts as equally culpable and adopt a plague on both houses position. Nevertheless they do good work exposing much of the media and particularly the BBC/Guardian faux liberal progressive coverage
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.