|
Post by Progenitor A on Jun 15, 2018 19:59:23 GMT 1
The Lewisham East by election turnout was miserably low: a mere third of eligible voters took part. The Labour candidate Janet Daby seems a nice enough person and may well become a good MP despite being a Corbynista (how else would sh have been selected?) Ms Daby is black, an unremarkable fact in multiracial Britain where 'racism' has almost vanished
Or has it?
Ms Daby was selected from a deliberately all-woman, all black labour Party selection list
Non-black men and women were explicitly excluded from the list
Racism is often defined as favouring (or persecuting) a person based upon their race. By this definition, the Labour Lewisham list was indeed racist
Surely in modern Britain peole should be selected on merit, not upon race?
Where is the difference in principle between the racism of pre-apartheid (and in some respects the post-apartheid) South Africa and the blatant racism of the Labour party
Indeed there are anti-discrminatory laws in Britain designed exclusively to prevent a LEWSIHAM
Why are the laws of the land ignored if the beneficiary of breaking those laws is black?
|
|
|
Post by alancalverd on Jun 16, 2018 0:08:38 GMT 1
A sadly naive view of modern politics, PA. Nothing to do with "representation of the people", ethics, principles, public service, or anything else (even politics). It is merely a game, and the sole object of any selection committee, just like cricket selectors, is to pick the candidate who is most likely to win the election. No point in selecting four fast bowlers for Mumbai, or four spinners for Trent Bridge. It's all about reading your electorate and giving them what they want to see and hear. Hence Trump and, apparently, Janet Daby.
In a brief foray into local politics I met my chief rival over a pint. Turned out he was ideologically well to the left of me but had served on the council for many years because "folk round here would vote for a gorilla, as long as it wore a blue hat."
|
|