#not to mention the lack of help from a certain opposition party (labour) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

theasteriae-arc · 3 years

Text

THE INTERVIEW.

( or, when sebastian met katherine. the discord thread between @epiitaphs & myself, feat. our muses squabbling over @diabolicaltendencies’ jim )

WHITEHALL, c. 2009.

Her heels make an impressive racket on the tiles, the sound of her footsteps echoing in the corridor like there’s an army of interrogators on their way to sink their teeth into him. Sebastian Moran. The slick haired, sharp tongued politician she had never liked—not even before she’d found out Jim was screwing him. It was just a shame that the thick carpet in his secretary’s office—in his office—muffled the quick ratatat of those stilettos. Her war cry. “No. Excuse me, madam, you can’t- Have you got an appointment? You can’t go in there without an appointment.” Kate ignored her and opened the door to Sebastian’s office. “My name is Katherine Conway,” she said crisply to the man behind the desk. “You’ll want to see me.” And without waiting to be invited, she took a seat across from him, putting her handbag down, and folding her hands expectantly in her lap.

Sebastian is, as always, busy. Everything's manageable at the moment - neither the country nor the party are falling into the abyss, but that doesn’t mean that he's got time to rest. There’s people and policy to keep up to date on, and he can't afford to ever fall behind. Which is why he makes sure to keep a couple steps ahead of where everyone’s supposed to be. It's what got him through school and through the first years of his job. It's also what keeps him at the office late, though that's decreased over time now that Jim's around. Much more appealing to be able to come home to someone and not just the cats. There was a commotion outside, Sebastian looking up from his work just as the door opened. “An interesting opening statement, Katherine Conway,” he replied. The name seemed familiar but not enough to be someone he kept active tabs on. “Will I?” It seemed very much like he would, given that she had clearly decided to make herself home. A nod at the secretary in the doorway and the door was shut. “In that case, I suppose I'd like to know just what it is that you think is so important to require an urgent, unscheduled meeting. My time is valuable and I have later meetings, so brief is best.”

“Cancel them. I’m here to talk about James, and knowing him, that could well take all night.”

And wouldn’t he just love that? There was a bitter twist to her lips as she continued, “He called me last weekend, told me about the two of you. How serious would you say it was?” He had a pot of pens on his desk, sleek and black with shiny gold hooks so that he could slip one into his pocket without fear of it falling out. She reached forward to take one, testing its weight in her hand, twirling it in between her fingers. “Serious enough for him to call, I suppose. But not serious enough for him to have told you everything, am I right? Didn’t want you to run a background check on him?” Her free hand disappeared into her pocket and came out with a card. Katherine Conway, Named Partner at Conway O’Kelly, an all-female chambers in Dublin. There had been a glint of recognition in his eyes when he’d repeated her name back to her and she was sure this was why; he knew of her work, not her history with his boyfriend. She’d enjoy telling him then. “Well, let me clear up some of the confusion. I used to be his girlfriend. And he wants to introduce you to the daughter we share. So, I wanted to meet you first, to make sure I was happy with that. Politicians, you know, they’re not the most trustworthy people.”

“James, you say? That sounds rather serious.” He made no move to cancel the meetings. He was fairly certain the first one could go on without him, though he’d miss out. But they'd cross that bridge if they came to it. If this was about Jim, he'd rather hear what she had to say, but he didn't intend to be pushed into any particular action. Jim had called her? What could he possibly be up to? “Quite serious, I’d say. I assume you read the news.” If she wanted details, she could refer to that. He watched as she took a pen, wondering just what her intentions where, what her connections to Jim might be. Sebastian didn't indicate an answer one way or another to the first question. “He’s told me more than enough and I have respected his privacy when asked to do so.” Jim’s privacy. Not that of others, but that wasn't something he was going to admit to. Not when she'd given him one small fact - that Jim had called. Fact 2: Sebastian hadn't known. Fact 3: Sebastian didn't know everything.

She pulled out her card - as if that would give him much more information. It’d give him information that he could find, which was exactly what this meeting was not about. This meeting was about gaps in knowledge and Sebastian hated being on the wrong side of that. She was more than simply her job and title - if she knew Jim, that is. “Thank you for the clarification. It's much appreciated.” The thin smile on his face suggested otherwise. That she was the mother was a surprise, but she didn't have to know that. “I’d be happy to meet his child, should I pass inspection.” That information hadn't been as much from Jim. “Some might say the same for your profession. I’d know - did you look into me at all?” He really hoped so, or he'd be sincerely disappointed. She'd shown initiative so far and it'd be unfortunate if that ended up being a false lead. Time for a little bit more of a gamble. “He did mention you, by the way. As a detail. Youthful mistakes, you know.”

Nothing about her expression, her demeanour, changed. She didn’t miss a breath or move a muscle. Not quite relaxed, because from her posture it was clear that she meant business, but authoritative. Refusing to be riled. Did you look into me at all? Ha. She wanted to scoff—the Dubliner in her who’d grown up in the wrong part of the city wanted to spit—but she didn’t. Instead, she smiled. “Of course. Sebastian Moran, graduated top of his class from Magdalen College, Oxford. Fast tracked into politics, no doubt helped by his Daddy, who’s the Labour Whip in the House of Lords. Sebastian Moran who dislocated his shoulder climbing up the drainpipe of his family home during a scrap with a sibling.” The information about Oxford and his father, she could have got from anywhere. The more personal details, though, they’re not such common knowledge. She could feel his eyes scanning her face, trying to determine her source. “Your sister told me. Moira. Well, obviously. Alex doesn’t talk, does she?” Kate’s smile grew wider, more pointed. “Still managing to cause a lot of trouble up in Manchester though, I hear. Moira and I work the same cases occasionally—opposite sides, of course, but it’s always good to have a glass of wine and catch up. I’d heard rumours about you and James and she all but confirmed them, but he’s never been one for commitment, so.” The comment about her being a mistake more than stung, but she couldn’t let herself lose her cool just yet. She brushed the hair out of her eyes and looked at his steadfastly across the wide expanse of his desk. “You’ll understand if I don’t want my family being dragged into the centre of a political scandal just for the sake of some fling?”

She didn't react, which told him only so much. Either it could be that neither of his hits had landed or that some of them had - and he wasn’t going to be able to tell which ones until she’d started on the offensive again. He didn't like her, but he had to admit she had at least done her research. Plenty of it, it seemed, given the much more personal anecdote tacked on the end. “A good summary of my CV. I’d keep the assumptions to a minimum, if I were you, though. I have an entirely different constituency from him - no handover there. Speaks just a little bit to his position on merit, wouldn't you say?” It was a blow that set him off each time he heard it, but Sebastian wasn't going to reveal weakness. “It's hardly surprising that it'd be easy to find inspiration in his work.”

An eyebrow raised as he stared, wondering just who she might have had access to - ah. Moira. Of course. No family loyalty - he should have known. They'd have to talk about that next time he saw her. In all, the story wasn't too damning, as long as no one looked too closely at how old he'd been at the time. The fact that Moira somehow approved of Conway was both a red flag and a promise that this would be interesting, no matter the way it turned out. “Oh, no, Alex simply has better judgement of who she speaks to.” The jab at Alex was another blow that landed. Conway really had done her research. A smile. “You know, given how close she and Jim are?” Just how far he’d gone since leaving Kate. He wouldn’t give her information that she didn't deserve - that Jim had been committed for far longer than the press knew. “I think he can be, with the right person. Maybe you didn't have enough faith.” The personal angle seemed a far richer vein for now. “I understand perfectly, though really it's up to you - when have I ever been implicated in a scandal, after all? It’d be awful to lose the reputation you've made, wouldn’t it? And I'm sure the scrutiny on the rest of your family would be uncomfortable as well.” It wasn't an outright threat. “All the same, I do understand the value placed on family - did Moira neglect to tell you about the times I've looked after her children?”

“I have plenty of faith, thank you. Actually, I found it was his that was lacking.” Tucked beneath the sharp collar of the severe white shirt ( court clothes; really, she should be at the hotel, prepping her closing statement for tomorrow ) was the battered gold crucifix her parents had given her for her First Communion. Her fingers tighten around one another in her lap so they don’t fly up to fiddle with it. No clues. “And reminding me about his lifestyle choices—" As if that was necessary. “—Won’t help you make your case, Mr. Moran.” Once upon a time, it had been James’s lack of conventionality that she had loved, the fact that he wore leather and make up and made her mother spit with fury whenever she saw them together. When had that changed? When she’d found out she was pregnant and the father of her child had fucked off to England, leaving her unmarried and in trouble and—

Kate took a deep breath to calm herself, recentre her thoughts, and continued. “I’m sure you’re a fine babysitter,” she said stiffly. “But this is different. And the fact that you can sit there and threaten my family tells me everything I need to know. Unless you have anything else to add, this interview is over.” She pocketed his pen and bent down to retrieve her bag, getting back on her feet before she said, “You can give James my answer, and that is if he ever brings up introducing her to you—or attempts to do it behind my back—I shan’t let him anywhere near her again. We can take it to the courts if we have to; we all know who’s going to win.”

“A strong judgment, I'd say.” Perhaps not entirely unfair, depending on what sort of faith they were discussing, but still. “No, I suppose it wouldn’t. But one of my sisters is willing to avoid gossip about the family, and it’s not the one you’re friends with.” He’d really have to talk to Moira about tattling like that. It was annoying, more than anything, but all the same. She took a breath and - clearly, he’d set her off with one his remarks - this wasn't really how he'd wanted this to go. “I don't see how it's different. In fact, I'd say it's even more low risk than babysitting, given that all Jim has asked of you is an introduction.” He considered asking for his pen back. With her standing, ready to go, he’d have to take this seriously - more seriously than before. He might have told her not to be so sure about the outcome, but that would drive the wedge further between them. For Jim’s sake, he shouldn’t.

“I know the statistics of custody awards, Miss Conway. There is no need to threaten.” Really, there was no need to resort to outright threats. “You do realize a court case would bring exactly the sort of eyes you’d like to avoid?" He stood as well, finally. “I appreciate how much you're willing to do to protect your family and I won't tell you how to do so, but I do think it incredibly unfair of you to not tell him your decision yourself. Not because I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but because he - maturely - asked you for permission to do the barest minimum of actions and you're making assumptions based on a five minute interview that you began with no pretensions of civility.” She’d come in on the offensive and he’d replied in kind. "You don't have to like me - I hardly expect you would, but that doesn't seem like just grounds to punish Jim. Or your daughter, really, who I believe is old enough to ask questions. If I find that you've ever actually prevented him from seeing her because of me, then I really will take issue." Maybe a bit of a threat.

“Mrs.” She paused with her bag over her arm, glowering down at him until her got his feet, and then, even in heels, she was forced to look up. “I don't know what kind of woman you think I am, sir, but I'm not a single one, that's for sure. I've been married eleven years next month.” For their anniversary the year before, she and Richard had hoped to go to Italy. Perhaps this year, if they could find someone to mind the children for a long weekend, they'd actually make it to the art galleries in Florence, the catacombs under Rome. Maybe if Jim could take them ... There was no one else she trusted, but could she even trust him anymore? “You said you were short on time and I believe in getting straight to the point, so please forgive me if I didn't pause to make small talk; we're busy people and there's not a whole lot to say. I don't like to be threatened and that’s twice in five minutes you've threatened me and my family. I don't like you, and your attitude certainly isn't helping. How long have you and James been together?”

“Mrs. Conway, then.” They were past pretending to polite, but he might as well be correct. "Yes, that is what the records say, isn't it." Seb hadn't looked into Jim, but he had done some digging. Just to see what he could find. He'd looked less at her, still trying to keep from directly disobeying Jim's wishes, but the brother had been an opportunity. “I did, didn't I. It's still true, but at the same time you did say it could take a while. You seemed less bothered by time limits at the beginning of this.” Which meant most likely that he'd offended her. Which he'd been trying to do, to be fair. “Neither of those were direct threats, Mrs. Conway, but neither of us have time to argue semantics. You rudely marched in here, implied that I was courting scandal and have since mentioned cutting Jim off from his daughter as well as the possibility to take all of this to court. You're hardly innocent.”

Here was the choice. They were at the rumor stage of the plan. Technically they'd been more or less together for a year by now, but no one else knew that. “You said you read the news - if they're to be believed, then I think you have your answer - that it all came together after his track.” A breadcrumb. “Moira would perhaps tell you that over a year ago, I was in charge of driving him to and from one of our family's gatherings.” And another breadcrumb dropped. If she wanted to pick them up, follow the trail, she could. Everything he'd said was true in its own way. The interpretation was up to her.

One of Kate's eyebrows went up. “If all I was interested in was second-hand gossip and the suppositions of the press,” she said coolly. “Do you think I'd be here? No. So, it doesn't take an Oxford-educated intellect to infer that what I would like to hear is the truth, straight from the horse's mouth, as it were. An alien concept to you maybe, but I’ll wait if I have to.” And so saying, she slipped out of her coat and sat back down, making a show of settling in for a long stalemate. “How did a politician and a musician who has publicly lambasted him on more than one occasion become a serious item?” Her tone was cold, but she was genuinely curious. Not so much in the how, though, more the, why this man, James? What the hell does someone like you see in him?

That had gotten her back, at least. Sebastian sat as well. “I haven’t lied to you, Mrs Conway,” he replied. He had perhaps misrepresented the truth, omitted, assumed, but he hadn't outright lied just yet. And sure, he'd threatened too, but only vaguely. “And did you ask Jim for the truth?” That was - though perhaps a bit of an attack - mostly just curiosity. “Or is he next? Making sure we can't coordinate our stories?” That was an unfair accusation, but he saw no reason to play fair with her. He shrugged, seemingly relaxed. “Maybe it's the public lambasting that makes it fun,” he replied, trying to think of just what he could or should tell her. She didn't deserve the details of their relationship - certainly no more than the general public did. “As much as it may shock you, we get along well. I think we represent a bit of a challenge to each other, and that's what keeps things interesting.”

TO BE CONTINUED ...

#epiitaphs #( i. drabble )#( i. save )#kate. | muse #the sun will come shining through. | happy verse ( musicians )#( iv. kate & sebastian )

4 notes · View notes

confusingfuturehistorians · 7 years

Text

A House Divided: A Pre-Election Plea

Recently I was re-watching Lincoln and a particular quote from Thaddeus Stevens (played by Tommy Lee Jones) jumped out at me due to its relevance to our current political climate. (1) The scene takes place outside the chamber of the House of Representatives after a debate on the proposed Thirteenth Amendment (which outlawed slavery in the US) when Stevens went back on his position that he believed all men were created equal; instead insisting he believed that all men should be equal before the law. This astounded his faction of radical Republicans and prompted claims of dishonesty from most Democrats. Stevens backtracked on his position however, in order to try to get Democrats who may have been potentially sympathetic to the 13th Amendment to vote for it, as without some Democrat support, it would not have gained the two-thirds majority necessary for it to pass. Stevens therefore said what he said to ease their concerns that abolishing slavery would be too radical a move which would destroy the fabric of American society as they knew it.

After the debate he is confronted by Asa Vintner Litton (a fellow radical Republican Congressman) who says to him: “Have you lost your very soul, Mr. Stevens? Is there nothing you won't say?”

To which Stevens replies: “I want the amendment to pass, so that the constitution's first and only mention of slavery is its absolute prohibition. For this amendment, for which I have worked all my life and for which countless colored men and women have fought and died and now hundreds of thousands of soldiers... No, sir, no, it seems there's very nearly nothing I won't say.”

Of course, as the pedant I am, I have to point out that I have no idea whether this conversation ever happened (I doubt it did, or at least, I doubt there is a verifiable record of it happening); but it is certainly true that Stevens was willing to compromise his values in order to get the amendment through. This film depicts this as more shocking than it actually was (despite his undoubtedly radical positions, it was neither the first nor the last time Stevens proved himself willing to compromise in order to get results), but what I took away from it is that in the context of contemporary British politics, I think something like that would be a lot more shocking than it was in Lincoln.

Compromise is a very difficult thing, and given that I’m just as stubborn as I am pedantic, I would certainly have to admit that I am not an especially good compromiser. However, politics needs compromise because things simply don’t get done without it. And given the myriad of different opinions people can hold, even within a single political party, this is unsurprising. But one of my biggest worries about the way that the political climate has been changing recently has been the lack of willingness to compromise, particularly in progressive circles. (2) This is why in the UK, despite the fact that the Conservative lead has been massively reduced following a horrendous campaign, it looks unlikely that anyone except the Tories will win tomorrow’s General Election for the simple reason that those of us opposed to them have not done a good enough job of working together to prevent it. We already saw this happen to certain extent with Brexit, and we definitely saw it happen across the pond where a number of Democrat voters potentially cost Clinton the election by either not showing up or voting for another candidate. We would far rather argue amongst ourselves about how those guys aren’t “real progressives” because of that one thing one of their candidates said 17 years ago and so there’s “literally no difference” between voting for them and voting for Tories. It’s pathetic! And it’s not just pathetic, it’s downright dangerous.

I appreciate that most people have a clear favourite party that they support. And I appreciate the need for an active political discourse, which includes criticism of things that you find objectionable. But it’s getting to such a ridiculous extent now that people’s objections to some policies will enable situations that are far worse. From what I’ve seen, this has been most noticeable with the die-hard Corbynites for whom compromise appears to mean “everyone should compromise their values and agree with Corbyn on every issue”, but they’re not the only ones. Whether they are drawing their inspiration from Corbyn, or whether Corbyn has been drawing inspiration from them is difficult to tell. But either way, the gains made by Labour during the last month will mean absolutely nothing if Corbyn is not prepared to work with others who don’t share every single one of his policies; and this situation will not change if his most vocal supporters refuse to criticise him for this. The most obvious example is his unmoving (and seemingly un-negotiated) stance on Brexit, which completely goes against what the majority of the people likely to support him want. Most people (myself included, although I never thought I’d be saying this a year ago) would tolerate a soft Brexit if it meant it could be negotiated by a party that isn’t the Tories (or UKIP, but I’m not mentioning them after this because this Tory party is essentially the same thing). But that’s not good enough for Jezza or his comrades. It’s up to us to change our views to suit them, remember.

Now, I do appreciate the irony of me strongly criticising a particular faction of the progressive movement while also arguing that doing so is a problem. The problem does not only exist within the Corbynite movement by any stretch of the imagination, but my experience is that this is where it has been most obvious. Moreover, it is where the problem is most significant because any alliance formed in opposition to the Conservatives would have to be led by Corbyn and so his unwillingness to compromise means that unless he wins an outright majority (which no poll, however optimistic towards his chances) has predicted, his gains mean absolutely nothing. Reducing the Tory majority will not matter if he can’t convince some Tories to work with him to vote against the Government, and even a hung Parliament won’t help the cause if he refuses to form a government with other parties. (3) Perhaps I’m doing Corbyn a disservice and Stevens in fact had it far easier, as he was looking to change his country rather than simply stopping his opponents from getting in; but ultimately I think it still comes down to the same thing. How on earth can you achieve anything in politics if you won’t compromise? And that isn’t a rhetorical question, by the way. Look through your history books and I guarantee you will not find a political movement that achieved its aims without it.

So part of this mini-essay is an attempt to plead with the like-minded people who I am aware make up the majority of my social media contacts to go out and vote for the party most likely to stop the Tories, EVEN IF it means voting for someone you would generally rather not vote for. This is the only way that we can stop what will possibly turn out to be the most destructive British government in recent years (yes, including the Thatcher years). But there is another plea that I feel I need to make. This is to centrists and the centre-right who are also refusing to compromise in a different way, in the sense that they are refusing to compromise their party identity (or in some cases their “patriotism”) in order to do the right thing. Let me be crystal clear here, I am not saying that you should change your beliefs or values to mine because mine are right and yours are wrong. So you can save your “holier-than-thou-Lefties” speech for another day. I’m happy to accept the fact that you as a moderate Tory have different values from me as someone who is a member of the Green Party. What I am saying is that this current Tory Government under Theresa May does not represent your values and that the right thing to do is admit this and vote accordingly.

Of course, we progressives don’t spend our entire time arguing amongst ourselves. We do occasionally argue with those on the Right and in the centre too, and having engaged in many of these friendly discussions myself, I’ve noticed a number of themes that often emerge in these situations. While the far-right trolls are busy hurling the sorts of insults one might expect them to, the centre-right is busy claiming that in fact, it is us who are the unreasonable ones. Those right-wing trolls are just a few bad apples, whereas the vitriol in circles which claim to be progressive is systemic. (4) These people claim that it is unfair to insist that the Conservatives are “The Nasty Party”, it’s unfair to claim that they all hate poor people and it’s unfair to claim the moral high-ground when the Left is always shutting down honest debate through no-platforming and political correctness. Meanwhile they insist that they could not possibly vote for a party that is so politically weak, so economically inefficient and so dangerous to the security of the nation (not to mention in sympathy with the SNP and the IRA). (5)

Again, I am absolutely not asking people in this case to change those views. I do disagree with them, and before now I would have been happy to have had that debate (and indeed have done so on a number of occasions). But unless something drastic happens on June 8th I refuse to debate it anymore, because I cannot believe that you are being genuine with any of those concerns. If you knowingly vote for a party that wants to bring back fox-hunting and has willingly scapegoated immigrants ever since Theresa May became Home Secretary, then yes, I do believe that it’s fair to say that you are supporting the Nasty Party. If you’re going to vote for a party which has led to deaths of 30,000 people in 2015 alone through its harsh and unnecessary austerity policies, then yes, I do think it’s fair to say that you must have something against poor people. (6) I also think it’s hypocritical in the extreme to vote for a party whose leader has refused debates and public scrutiny at every possible opportunity if you value open discourse so much. As for values of free speech, I cannot even begin to comprehend how you could truly hold those values and still vote for a leader who has openly admitted that she wants to regulate the internet. If they don’t wish to vote for a politically weak party, how can they justify voting for a leader who U-turns on everything that the Daily Mail criticises her for? If they don’t wish to vote for an economically weak party, how can they justify voting for a party who have presided over the worst decline in real wages of any developed country other than Greece? And if they really value security so much, how can they vote for a leader who is obsessed with tearing up our human rights and who has supressed a report on how Saudi Arabia finances terrorists in Britain, because it would embarrass her party? (7)

Despite Theresa May’s extraordinary attempts to avoid as much engagement as possible in an election she called after repeatedly ruling it out, her intentions for the direction she wants to take the party (and therefore the country, if they get elected) have been made clear. These are not simply the rantings of a tin-foil-hat-wearing-conspiracy-theory-loving-Left-wing-lunatic. This is public information, which you should (and in my personal experience of centre-right voters, do) know. In 2015, the severity of the impact austerity cuts were having was nowhere near as widely known and the Conservatives did not make a big thing about their plans to spy on the entire country and crash headlong out of the EU (which, incidentally, most of the centre-leaning Tories I know voted to stay part of) even with the very real-looking possibility of deal whatsoever to go along with it. Now we know. There are no more excuses. The only thing holding you back from voting against the Conservatives is not your values, but you unwillingness to compromise on who you’re voting along with. I don’t profess to know the centre-right mind-set, but there is simply no way I can grasp how anyone in that group can profess to hold the progressive values that so many of them claim to hold and still vote Conservative this time around with a clean conscience. If you really want to show us Lefties how much more tolerant you are of other people’s beliefs, now is your chance. Vote for what you believe in, even if it means allying with people like me, and I’ll believe you. Refuse to take this opportunity and condemn this country to the most draconian government Britain has had is recent history, and I will not.

I have always prided myself to a certain extent on my stubbornness and my principled nature. And for a long time, I believed that those two things were one and the same, but they are not. Principles are things which you would be willing to do anything to avoid or achieve, whereas stubbornness is being unwilling to change what it is that you are doing. In many cases they are the same, but at some point there comes a point of no return where principles can no longer be safeguarded by stubbornness. I’m sure most people can think of a situation where they put up with something that should have been unacceptable to them simply because they were unwilling to change. And I’m also sure that everyone in that situation would act differently were they given a second chance. What we need to continually be asking ourselves is “Where is our line in the sand”? I think that if they really thought about it, more people would have actually gone past that line with regard to current politics than they are willing to admit. For me, I live in the Salford and Eccles constituency, which is an incredibly safe Labour seat, so I am someone who would gain nothing through voting tactically. As a result I intend to vote for my party, the Greens. However, if I still lived where I did during the last General Election (in Oxford West and Abingdon), then I would vote for the Lib Dems, despite there being two parties I agree with more. This is because, quite simply, with the stakes being as high as they are, my principles would not allow me to be stubborn. And whichever way people plan to vote, I strongly urge each and every person who reads this to think very carefully about why they are planning to vote the way they are. And in many cases, they may well need to channel their inner Thaddeus Stevens.

1. Unfortunately I couldn’t find the scene anywhere online, so I’ll just leave this with you instead. Ad hominem attacks aren’t ever productive in reality (and indeed the real-life Stevens rarely resorted to them, at least in Congress), but it nevertheless makes for a satisfying scene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Brh9iWajc

2. I’m using “progressive”, purely in want of a better term, to describe any party or set of beliefs which does not align with the far-right of Britain. This includes centrists and even the centre-right, which is why I’m avoiding “Left” as a term here. I’m not overly sure “progressive” is much better, but it’s worth arguing the semantics, as long as everyone knows what I mean.

3. I’m not making this up – he genuinely said this at a time when his popularity was at his highest. It’s times like this that make me genuinely convinced he and his supporters want to lose the election and watch the Tories dismantle the country just so they can say “See, we were right!”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/01/corbyn-vows-no-deals-no-pacts-if-there-is-a-hung-parliament

4. It’s worth pointing out here, of course, that many people who would describe themselves as card-carrying Lefties and progressives would also make the same arguments here. Rightly or wrongly, it is another example of how progressives seem far more willing to argue amongst ourselves than actually achieve our aims. The Judean People’s Front / People’s Front of Judea bit from Life of Brain springs very vividly to mind.

5. Ignoring the completely false claims of the Left being IRA apologists, it is certainly true that there is a lot of support Scottish Independence among progressives. For me though, it’s ironic for Conservatives to take such a strong stand on this when their policy of unnecessarily pursuing a hard-Brexit is the thing that is most likely to bring about the collapse of the union. Thaddeus Stevens would certainly have disapproved.

6. This case is particularly poignant at a time when the country is mourning the loss of over 30 people in terrorist attacks, yet the government seemingly gets a free pass for killing a thousand times that many in a single year.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2017-02-20-30000-excess-deaths-2015-linked-cuts-health-and-social-care

7. All of the above points come with a delicious side of evidence. Enjoy!

https://www.ft.com/content/e021c208-3ede-11e7-9d56-25f963e998b2

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-workers-have-had-the-worst-wage-growth-in-the-oecd-except-greece-a7773246.html?cmpid=facebook-post

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/theresa-may-terrorism-human-rights_uk_5936ec0be4b0099e7fafd14d?1zz

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/31/sensitive-uk-terror-funding-inquiry-findings-may-never-be-published-saudi-arabia

#general election #politics #conservatives #labour #theresa may #jeremy corbyn #general election 2017 #UK politics #may #corbyn #progressive alliance #green party #liberal democrats #tories out #make june the end of may #lincoln #thaddeus stevens

0 notes