Tomorrow’s election may be the biggest no-brainer I’ve ever seen in this country since I’ve been alive.
On the one hand, we have someone who (wherever you stand politically) has proven herself to be dishonest, who’s campaign is based on being a strong negotiator but cannot face her political opponents to debate her policies, who takes pre-vetted questions, runs away from journalists, sells arms to the most fundamentalist Islamic state in the world and wants to bring back fox hunting. They are dedicated to the most extreme wealth, and are laughing in the face of every working class person who votes for them.
On the other hand is a party that (again, whatever your views) wants to raise the minimum wage, abolish tuition fees, protect the NHS, invest in education, stop selling arms to regimes that commit war crimes, nationalise the railways, reduce the scandalous gap between rich and poor, and a hell of a lot more. Seriously just look at both manifestos if you haven’t already. Then make your decision.
Nevertheless I have come across online and in person a few counter arguments put forward in favour of voting Tory. Here are the main ones I can think of, along with quick responses. Hope it helps anyone undecided on how to vote.
These are all fantasy land hard-left extremist policies that might sound nice but will never work in practice:
The amount of people I have seen say they cannot vote for Corbyn, and then, even in the same comment, add that “if I believed Corbyn could pull off all the things he says I would vote for him because he has a lovely outlook” — is staggering.
It’s not a surprise that the major newspapers repeat this mantra over and over again (without evidence), given that they are owned by tax avoiding billionaires who have every reason to be outraged and frightened by the prospect of a Corbyn-led Labour government.
But all we need to do is look around for a few seconds at the rest of Europe, like Norway for example, where Corbyn would not be considered a hard-left radical at all but just a run-of-the-mill mainstream social democrat. His policies could literally be lifted from the current Nordic model. So let’s ask, how have these policies worked out for Norway? Just take a look at the UN Human Development Index to see how they are doing. Just Google it now, and you’ll see Norway ranked at the very top in the world.
There is no magic money tree. How are they going to pay for it?
Interesting that this question is never asked about decisions to invade other countries or spend tens of billions on upgrading Trident or cut taxes for corporations.
Nevertheless it is a fair question for anyone who is actually concerned about the country, and what might happen under a Labour government. One simple two sentence response to the magic money tree question is given by Jonnie Marbles:
“Mate we were able to afford this stuff *twenty years ago*. It’s not magic. We’re not talking about filling the Thames with champagne or gold-plating Cornwall. It’s well paid nurses, decent social care and free education.” And again, other countries can afford this stuff. Just look around.
The detailed answer is found in the Labour manifesto, and there are simple breakdowns you can find, like one from Paul Mason here. Also note there are NO COSTINGS IN THE TORY MANIFESTO.
The Pileus points out that the Tories have their own magic money tree. It’s in the Bahamas, and other offshore tax havens, where more than £100bn is lost annually, and where people like Amber Rudd have two accounts:
Nobel Prizewinning economist Joseph Stiglitz is the latest to come forward today and point out that actually it’s austerity for the public, not overspending, that has devastated the country, that Labour is the only party that gets this, and that the plans to finance these policies are “not on the basis of ‘magic money’, but on carefully thought-out proposals based on taxing those at the top and ensuring that corporations pay what they should.” It’s actually very simple.
And if you’re worried that taxing corporations a more reasonable amount will scare businesses away, I’ll just leave this here:
But Dianne Abbott is not fit for high office! I could not bring myself to contemplate the idea of her being in government, so therefore I’m going to vote Tory.
I won’t pretend that Dianne Abbott has not had a rough time, including a couple of bad interviews. Indeed, it must be hard being a hate figure to a big sector of the country during an election — I’m sure I would have cracked long ago. And if this is such a sticking point for you, Dianne Abbott has just been replaced today as Shadow Home Secretary following a period of ill health.
Just ask yourself though, if your barometer for being fit to govern is somebody who remembers their figures under pressure and does not get flustered during an interview, what do you think of Andrew Mitchell here, not knowing what the minimum wage is, or Phillip Hammond, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, here, getting his figures wrong by £20 billion? Or how about buffoon supreme Boris Johnson here, admitting to making up quotes, lying and providing an address to have a journalist beaten up. Or what about Theresa May’s recent car crash interview with Andrew Neil?
Then ask yourself why the Dianne Abbott interview was the number one story in the country, and why none of these ever became an election issue. And then remind yourself who owns the newspapers, and who they want to win.
And then vote Labour!
