Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 25:
Line 25: + + + +
Talk:Labour Party (UK) (view source)
Revision as of 03:45, December 21, 2016
, 03:45, December 21, 2016→Methodism owed more to socialism than Marx? Seriously?: new section
==Needs revamping==
==Needs revamping==
This article is massively outdated - Labour have been out of government for half a year now (thank God) and this needs to be recognised. However, I can't edit the article. Can someone please change this/unlock the article. Many thanks, [[User:ChelseaR|ChelseaR]] 13:26, 1 November 2010 (EDT)
This article is massively outdated - Labour have been out of government for half a year now (thank God) and this needs to be recognised. However, I can't edit the article. Can someone please change this/unlock the article. Many thanks, [[User:ChelseaR|ChelseaR]] 13:26, 1 November 2010 (EDT)
== Methodism owed more to socialism than Marx? Seriously? ==
Morgan Phillips obviously has a right to his own opinion, but I don't buy his view that Methodism contributed more to British socialism than Marx did [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party&curid=15138&diff=1295191&oldid=1239159]. First off, the Labour Party was formed in 1900, right at the same time that socialism (Marx's forerunner to communism) was taking root in all the west. Other countries had labor or socialist parties springing up at the same time. Also, unbiblical [[theological liberalism]] was popular among Protestants during this time (a major departure from Church fathers such as Wesley, who actually was politically conservative, even by 18th Century standards). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:45, 20 December 2016 (EST)