Well, it turned out much as expected; Labour got back in, although with a severely reduced majority down by about 100 from 165, giving rise to speculation about Blair's leadership. The Lib Dems gained about 8 seats, going up to 59, though hopes that the Tories may wither away to third place were dashed, as the bastards got the lion's share of Labour's losses. One of the biggest swings against Labour was in the Welsh seat of Blaenau Gwent, where the Labour party machine tried to impose a centrally-selected candidate on the electorate, only to get trounced with a 49% swing by the now-independent MP. On a more ominous note, the we-are-not-neo-Nazis British National Party doubled its vote, and odious Stalinist-turned-Islamofascist George "I never met an anti-Western despotism I didn't like" Galloway took Bethnal Green.

Posted by: datakid | http:// | Sat May 7 01:59:54 2005

wow, so the bethnal green guy is a loser - I've only been following the fringes of this election, but the Sat Age and Sat Mercury (the excuse for pay-as-you-go-toilet-paper here in taswegia) both painted him as some sort of mildly radical leftist - more bob brown than islamofascist.

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org/ | Sat May 7 20:34:00 2005

They haven't been paying much attention. He has been outspoken in his admiration of Stalinism and Fidel Castro, is on record as praising Saddam Hussein's courage, and now has jettisoned pesky issues like women's rights and gay rights from his version of socialism to attract the Islamist demographic.

Galloway is one of those radical leftists who hates liberalism/capitalism so much that he is willing to join forces with anything, up to and including Taliban-style islamofascism, that opposes it. Bob Brown he ain't.

Posted by: Dick Fitzgerald | http:// | Sun May 8 03:10:17 2005

xymphora's column 5-7-05 deals w/ your mindless and untrue remarks about Galloway.

Posted by: psychbloke | http://psychbloke.blogspot.com | Sun May 8 09:19:10 2005

Ah, we've every right to be suspicious of Galloway -it's not just the Tories who trade on fear.....

Posted by: mike munk | http:// | Sun May 8 21:29:22 2005

Would that we had more Galloways in the US-sounds like you prefer "ColdWar liberals"

Posted by: Graham | http://grudnuk.com/ | Mon May 9 10:00:23 2005

He seems like a left-wing Pauline Hanson to me.

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org | Mon May 9 10:29:33 2005

If "Cold War liberals" are those who don't openly favour repression as long as their particular ideological ends justify it, then I'm all for that.

Mind you, Galloway is not a liberal, except in the FoxNews-neocon-pejorative sense that Stalin and Mao are as well. Given the stories about his thugs intimidating the opposition in Bethnal Green, his commitment to democracy and pluralism is about on a par with Robert Mugabe's.

Posted by: comsomol | http:// | Sun May 22 19:51:48 2005

To acb: You say Galloway 'has jettisoned pesky issues like women's rights and gay rights from his version of socialism to attract the Islamist demographic.'

A shame that you haven't actually read Respect's manifesto quoted below. You obviously don't do a great deal of research before bandying accusations around...

"Our overall aim is to help create a socially just and ecologically sustainable society. A society in which social justice is defined as incorporating: <snip> the fight against, and ultimate abolition of, racism, sexism and all forms of discrimination on grounds of religion, disability, age or sexual identity." http://www.respectcoalition.org/index.php?ite=418

Posted by: datakid | http:// | Thu May 26 22:09:12 2005

While this is a fair criticism that I would like to see acb respond to, i've always been suspect of people that claim to be agents of change et al yet refuse to dispense with democracy or voting - two concepts that are getting more flawed by the day/election....

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org/ | Thu May 26 23:41:53 2005

As far as Galloway's liberal credentials go, actions speak louder than policy statements, and there's a lot on Galoway's deeds and other statements at http://www.livejournal.com/community/swp_watch/

And as far as dispensing with democracy/voting goes, what would you replace them with? Wise and benevolent philosopher-kings? A Supreme People's Soviet making all the decisions for them? Central planning by supercomputer a la Iain M. Banks' Culture novels?

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org/ | Thu May 26 23:48:51 2005

More on Galloway's anti-liberal stances from the Communist Party of Great Britain, of all places:

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/576/respect.htm

If their stand against women's reproductive choice (a standard part of most socialist platforms since the time of Lenin at least) doesn't count as them selling out their progressive principles to woo the conservative Islamist vote, then what does it count as? And talking fluffily about abstract "equality" whilst drafting concrete anti-feminist policies doesn't cut it.

Want to say something? Do so here.

Note to spammers: This comment system applies the rel=nofollow attribute to the poster's URL and all links. Posting links to this page will not improve their search engine rankings.

Display name:
URL:(optional)
To prove that you are not a bot, please enter the text in the image on the right in the field below it.

Your Comment:

Remember my details.

Please keep comments on topic and to the point. Inappropriate comments may be deleted.

Note that markup is stripped from comments; URLs will be automatically converted into links.