Nike: 'turning rebellion into money'

We should of listened closer to the 90's Chumbawamba song That's How Grateful We Are when they said 'they're not concerned with what is to be learned, they sell 501s (Levi jeans) and think it's funny, turning rebellion into money. Can I kick it?'. We should of listened closer to Naomi Klein when she wrote in here book No Logo about brands. We should of listened to the Situationists like when Guy Debord wrote in The Society of the Spectacle 'dissatisfaction itself becomes a commodity' We should of listened but we didn't.

In 2016 Colin Kaepernick, a professional NFL player, refused to stand during the national anthem before American Football games. Protesting during a time of several high profile cases when US police shot young black men he said "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color to me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder."
This was a bold protest that I am sure he knew could trigger negative repercussions to his career which it definitely appears to have happened. What Nike are doing with their Kaepernick advertising campaign is the opposite and while just as bold it deserves scorn not praise.

Companies like Nike aren't shoe makers they are brands, their advertising focuses almost exclusively on brand image and not the products they sell. Do you think the ad men at Nike sat in meetings discussing how they can best support Kaepernick and the values he believes in? I suspect the discussion was how it helps build their brand image and drive sales just like it has done. They would have discussed the inevitable backlash to the adverts; what it would say about their brand and how to use that to advertise more. The backlash and media frenzy has been a huge brand building exercise and there is nothing new or good about it because it is just the continued expansion of commodification and consumerism. These actions should be the end of Nike not the making of them.

Are Party members who don't vote Labour 'scabs'?

Since joining the Labour Party I have learnt a lot and my experiences from being actively involved has dramatically developed my thinking. The way 'activists' and 'The Party' should treat its own members is one of them.

The Rule Book is quite clear about members who lend their support to opposition forces:

'A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an
official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands
against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against
a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member'

Which in theory makes indisputable sense because if you are a member of an organisation it is self defeating to vote in opposition to it and could be an indication you aren't truly supportive of it.
However UK voters and even Labour Party members don't live in the realms of theory but in the real world where things are often more complicated. I will set out a few examples of this below and although I don't necessarily agree with all of them they are at least valid points of view that many people have.

Tactical voting
The First Past the Post voting system has created a situation of safe seats and marginals where in reality overall election results are swung by a small numbers of votes. In many elections it is very hard to change your representative and often there is only one alternative way to vote that might do this. For this reason many people vote tactically like the estimated 6.5 million in the 2017 General Election. So if you are a Party member why is it any different? People don't want to waste their vote and would rather the 'lesser of two evils' if they can't see their favourite party winning.

Some candidates aren't very good
Ever political party has this same issue and it normally directly correlates with the size of the party in different areas. For example in an area where Labour dominate the Conservatives will likely have few members locally so it is harder to find good candidates and this is exacerbated when often a party will want to stand a candidate at every election.

Labour is a 'broad church'
Labour has always been a coalition of different ideologies and traditions so it includes a wide variety of people. This can mean a member can find their local candidate has some very differing views to them and even that another candidates views are more aligned with theirs.

Single issues
Some issues are so big that they become vitally important to an individual eg the EU, war, the environment and large planning applications etc. Sometimes party members might have the opposite view on such large issues while being in agreement with a different candidate. 

There are lots of counter arguments to the above reasons, which are applicable to all the larger UK parties, sometimes these debates need to be had however often such debates can come across in a very negative manner which is not very inspiring or persuasive. What I am more concerned about however is when a small minority of often vocal activists call members who are even fleetingly considering not voting Labour scabs, traitors and other insults or generally portray a hostile attitude, reach for the rule book and say they should be thrown out the party. Telling someone, even a party member, they HAVE to vote Labour is not persuasive but damaging. I have seen first hand how this puts off members and other voters who hear about it.

I am not necessarily suggesting Labour rules need to be changed only that if members aren't sure about voting Labour they are approached with respect, understanding and a positive argument as to why they should vote Labour. This attitude might change their mind where as a hostile one will only alienate them. This is something that doesn't only occasionally happen in the Labour Party but other political parties too.
Labour generally is a fantastic positive force for good and this is why people should vote for Labour.

UKIP are Cat-egorically wrong

Letter in KM 30.08.18:

'I recently picked up a leaflet from UKIP which includes a rather odd column from the 'UKIP cat'. Is he their latest leader perhaps?

The feline asserts that 'typical left-wingers' are good at admiring other people's cultures but not their own English culture, as someone that could be described as a 'left-winger' I don't have this trouble at all. In my opinion our culture is one of diversity and tolerance. Our country includes many cultures which have developed from many origins just as we have Cornish or Devonian Cream Tea and Indian or Nepalese Curry. Our many cultures make up our one society which embraces pluralism and it's many benefits.

UKIP reject this idea of multiculturalism and seek an 'Englishness' which never existed, except in elite groups or in rose tinted glasses, while often making certain groups scapegoats for our country's woes. For this reason we should continue to reject UKIP just as we have done in nearly every election.'

Maidstone needs to recycle more

KM 22.03.2018

I am passionate about the environment and believe we need to become a sustainable society as soon as practically possible.

Although it will only help bridge the gap to an extent, recycling will play a vital role in achieving this but in Maidstone the household recycling rate has stagnated at around 50% for the last year or two which is well behind many others in England. 

I was pleased when the Maidstone Labour Party agreed to set a target to achieve at least 75% by 2023.

My letter in the KM:

Recycling can have many benefits, including conserving natural resources, ecosystems and wildlife, protecting vulnerable people from being displaced or exploited, saving significant amounts of energy and reducing carbon emissions and the need for incineration. Maidstone Labour Party wants the town to achieve at least a 75% household-recycling rate by 2023 and go waste-free in the longer term. I believe that one of the ways in which this can be achieved is to work with residents to encourage community groups and businesses to provide more recycling facilities. These could be at no cost to themselves and help raise funds for charities. With the growing pressure on manufacturers to reduce excessive packaging, times are a-changing and we must push recycling further and faster, for the sake of both people and the environment.

Tim Licence

Labour's Prospective Maidstone High Street Ward Candidate

www.maidstone-labour.com

Greens should join Labour

Every week now I am hearing of Green Party supporters who make the switch to the Labour Party but this is something that has been happening for years now.

I bumped into two Jonathans in a pub the other week and knowing I am active with the Labour Party one said to me how he had switched from backing the Green Party to the Labour Party because 'they might actually get to change things and I like Jeremy Corbyn too'. Which I think neatly sums it up. People want change and are 'behind Corbyn' though not not necessarily meaning the man but the politics which he represents.

I have a lot of respect of several Green Party politicians including their one MP Caroline Lucas and strongly agree with some of their policies although others I strongly disagree with or don't believe are practically possible. I have often been told that you will never agree with everything a political party stands for but you should pick one that you agree with most but for me this is only part of it, otherwise I'd of joined the Greens or a small socialist party many years ago during the New Labour era. 

When Corbyn became leader of the Labour Party and put the party under new management I quickly joined up as a member and became active within the party. This was politics I strongly agreed with and a political party which could gain power to change things. I had long admired the likes of John Mcdonnel, Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott, Michael Meacher and Dennis Skinner but not Blair and Brown.     

Although I still don't agree with all of Labour's policies I agree with many and know that Labour are within touching distance of putting them into practice. While the strong direction of travel toward a member led mass membership party is also extremely encouraging. 

I'd encourage anyone who believes in environmental justice, social justice, equality, socialism, and democracy to join the Labour Party. Change is coming and you can either be part of it and influencing exactly what it is or in the Green Party which remains on the electoral fringes.

Shareholders shouldn't profiteer from the running of public services

Kent Messenger 01.03.18

My letter in the paper briefly highlighting some of the reasons against private companies running our public services:

'Cllr Harper was right to raise the issue of who runs our public services because the demise of Carillion once again brought the millions of pounds that are paid to private companies into the media spotlight. When these stories break it is surprising to see just how many public services are being provided by private companies and how many millions of pounds in dividends their shareholders receive, this is the case both nationally and locally.  

Private companies have an interest in making profit in order to be able to pay dividends to their shareholders to whom they are accountable. While publicly run services can be more democratically accountable, transparent and have a public good rather than private profit motive.

If it is ideological to think that shareholders shouldn't profiteer from the running of public services that are ultimately funded by taxing people's hard earned income then call me ideological. 

Tim Licence

Labour's Prospective MBC High Street Ward Candidate'  

www.maidstone-labour.com

Watershed Moment for Privatisation in Westminster.... and Maidstone!

I am really pleased to see the Leader of Maidstone Labour, Paul Harper, write about privatisation in a letter in the KM this week.
 
Maidstone Borough Council pays millions of pounds to private companies to run public services in Maidstone, from bin collection to the leisure centre run by profit driven private businesses. The same companies that pay millions of pounds in dividends to their shareholders.

The collapse of Carillion highlights some of the many issues that arise when involving private businesses in public services.

It is great that Maidstone Labour are embracing Jeremy Corbyn's politics of ending rip-off privatisation.

You can read Maidstone Labour's press release 'Watershed Moment for Privatisation' here.

UKIP reject what we celebrate

UKIP reject what we celebrate  

Kent Messenger 18.01.18

While UKIP have heavily featured in the news recently it is important to remember what they stand for. UKIP undoubtedly helped bring about the long overdue referendum but I don't believe the rest of their politics are as poplar. 

Many of us are proud of the multiculturalism in Maidstone which showcases itself in vibrant events like the Maidstone Mela and also exists all year round in Maidstone, the proud home of The Queen's Gurka Engineers. While UKIP rejects multiculturalism I believe it can be the building blocks of a strong society. We shouldn't make multiculturalism a scapegoat. The real issue is the financial and social inequalities within our society exacerbated by underfunded and badly run public services.

Tim Licence

Prospective Labour Party Candidate for Hight Street Ward

www.maidstone-labour.com