A Labour lesson in winning from Harold Wilson 

Absolutely correct

British troops served in Vietnam.

His social reforms were a disaster.

@MarkHarrison733 your comment says a lot about you and all of it negative. Clearly a right wing fundamentalist who would be happy in a regime similar to that operated by the mad mullahs in Iran or the bearded men in Afghanistan. Your day is over. Go away.

@@roscomeon3965 British troops served in the Vietnam War, and Wilson's vile social "reforms" destroyed the UK.

He was paid enough by the USSR.

I never knew this as my relatives was affected by this and my late dad's side of the family was destroyed by the war. This happened years before I was born in 1975....

Clueless nepo journalist who probably only got the job because of daddy probably

Only due to Scotland.

@@MarkHarrison733 Scotland is part of the UK and still is

@@huwdavies6153 Nope.

@@huwdavies6153 Not since Labour's one-sided devolution broke up the UK, and caused Brexit.

He ended up PM and the highest number of MPs, so yes, he did win.

@@zeddeka He lost, which is why there had to be a second GE that year.

@@zeddeka Only after Heath's talks with the Liberals had broken down.

Is that on RU-vid?

@@Da1Dez I haven't found the interview but the statement about Benn is confirmed in 'Harold Wilson Night part 3' here. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-syksAKpeOFc.html around 1:17:40

Dennis Skinner confirmed Wilson knew he had dementia by 1975.

He was joking. Get it. He had a massive brain unlike people who can't understand a super mind and when he was joking.

@@roscomeon3965 I know. It was a good joke but I bet Benn saw it , probably correctly, as patronising and a put down. Those shows stopped because in them you could plainly see Harold was suffering the onset of dementia.

Stick to the political facts not Tory fairy stories

@@willhovell9019 He only won one GE out of five.

Scotland is part of the UK and still is

@@huwdavies6153 No.

And? What’s your problem with Scotland?

Everyone else can count four, if you become PM with 4 seats or 96 majority, you won.

@@grahambuckerfield4640 He only won due to Scotland in 1964. He lost in 1970, lost in February 1974, and only won due to Scotland in October 1974.

Scotland was and currently is a part of the UK and the Tories had the advantage of Northern Ireland in 1964 and 1970 until Heath lost the UUP. You play by the rules of the game and Wilson won the most seats (A.K.A won) 4 of 5 elections by those rules. Also I'm pretty Churchill and the Tories would have lost the 1951 election if Scotland wasn't included which likely would have lead to more Labour dominated politics in the 50s and 60s which makes your argument seem even dimmer. Anyway Wilson = Successful PM while Heath isn't even well regarded among Conservatives. It is what it is.

@@Pipwit27 Wilson lost in February 1974. He was a complete failure at everything. Heath is hated by Conservatives because he was a Europhile.

@@Pipwit27 Wilson only won in 1966. Churchill lost in 1951. Wilson abused children, enabled genocide, and sent troops to Vietnam and Northern Ireland.

Well he was right to bringing you into the EU but you guys like ruining your country 😂😂 I guess that’s where Americans get it from. We also like ruining great things

@@ccutehoney We joined the EU under Major.

I want a Local Social Democracy One were local people rule and one were parliament asess in joining the people and allows us to grow Harold wilson understood this perfectly as he kept the Yorkshire accent and wore Tweed Jackets and smoked the pipe an man who know his power He bring something to our generation's take for granted Harlod Willson is my personal hero

@@sglenny001 Explain your concept of a local democracy and how it roles up into a larger country?

@@stephensipe5405 a local democracy focus on having a very murch federation and allows there to be money that got via tax. A system that allows growth will be the system that has Nationalise inthucture and has local businesses grow. I would rather a local bakery in my Town. An anlow an open market to grow just as a local market grows. Local Schools learn local history and National History. The thig will have pretty much every legalise along as it can be tax. an integrated public transport system form buses to tram to train. A national government will still be in power but would be the decision makers on were to spend The National Annual Budget. Private companies can invest in to local areas but up to local people what they want. MPs will only have vist Parliament once an month to see the PM on National events. MPs will meet with there Countcy every wendsday to Friday the last Saturday of every month will be a National day of every month become an day of for workers. The country will only Centreslize in advent of War or Emredcy.

@@sglenny001 You vision will not happen as you see it. Local control is good for certain local issues. However, villages/townships, towns, and cities all have different funding streams. Counties have other funding streams. National governments have still further funding streams. In the UK health coverage is by NHS. Not all government levels can fund NHS. Your concept of devolution is therefore hopelessly flawed unless you work through many critical pieces of social organization. The UK has sub-populations which are distinct yet also interrelated. Could the UK devolve into a federal-state structure like the US or Australia? This is a possibility. My suggestion was for the House Of Lords to be removed completely from politics. It should be a club of significant contributors to the UKs success. They would be knighted by the Monarch as an honor. They could meet annually for social interaction and to add a member(s). They would have no political role. In place of the House Of Lords would be the UK Senate. The Senate would represent regional areas of the UK which would be politically organized as States. The States I envision are: Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Cornwall South England, North England, England, and London. Each State would have 5 Representatives 3 elected directly by the people of that state, 1 appointed by the Governor and 1 appointed by the Legislature. The Senators have to approve all laws passed by Parliament and confirm all appointments by the PM. The Senate controls no revenue but can ask questions. My concept as actual organization compared to your plan. It does not mandate nationalization not prevent chain stores or an Amazon. It sets up a framework for more State control and less Federal control. However, I did not specify particular State rights which only Parliament can initially determine.

@@stephensipe5405 I actually like your ideas

Lies

@@roscomeon3965 In 1966.