So there’s no war… but he’s failed to engage with key people on the left of the party, and refused to reiterate policies that those on the left hoped would live on under his leadership? If that’s what you’re saying, I agree.
But when it comes to “unity” that requires two things of party members… a willingness to compromise and allow a shift in position, and the time and space to form policy ahead of the next general election. Those leaving the Labour Party, either to ‘abstain’ or support other parties and candidates are offering neither. I’m no better mind you, as I’ve not joined at all, so I can’t in anyway begrudge those leaving. In fact, I’m worse, as despite now voting Labour, I refuse to give up on the idea of plurality and to commit to only proposing people vote for one party.
Kicking out JC and RLB on highly tenuous grounds is pretty ‘war on the left’ in itself no?
Kicked out? They're both still party members, no?
It also depends how you define the word 'tenuous'. Both were effectively kicked out of their jobs (not the party) for their stupidity and pig-headedness with the whiff (rightly or wrongly) of antisemitism
The fact that this is seen as a 'purge' in any way just emphasises the need those on the left feel to constantly define themselves as victims who've been wronged. They love it! Oh boo hoo... poor me... I'm being oppressed. LOOK! LOOK! I'M BEING OPPRESSED!!
If either of them possessed an ounce of self-awareness or were prepared to perhaps countenance the idea that they might have actually done something really ****ing stupid, and shown some contrition they'd have been ok.
But we know that people like that don't do contrition because they've spent their lives completely convinced of their own almost divine righteousness and moral superiority
I'm new to this thread.
The problem with Starmer is that he appears to be totally meh. Grey. On the fence. Forgettable.
In this time of national crisis he should either stand in unity in support of Government or call them out for their contempt and incompetence. He has done neither.
Now, more than ever, we need effective, robust and professional opposition of the Government. I honestly thought Starmer would provide that. He hasn't. He's just limp.
In this time of national crisis he should either stand in unity in support of Government or call them out for their contempt and incompetence.
It’s not one or the other. And Johnson has expertly played on the idea that it should be. Both social distancing measures and vaccination uptake require cross party support to work as best as possible. This does not mean that being critical of the government always undermines those national efforts, and shouldn’t happen at all. Starmer has done both of the things you suggest, and in this world of simple politics, that has left voters forming one of the following views, depending on their starting point…
- he’s opposing nothing the government does
- he just opposes everything the government does
- I don’t know if he opposes or supports what the government does
I’ve heard all three. There’s been no three word slogan way to navigate through the pandemic for Starmer, even if he had the charisma to sell one to the public (he doesn’t).
Kelvin, It shouldn't be one or the other but, in this situation, it is. The Government have done an appalling job, this is evidence by pretty much every statistical measure going. Deaths, economy, contracts to mates. The only credible reason for not calling this out is if he has chosen to take the unity approach. But he seems content to wallow in non confrontational middle ground, which a pointless existence.
If Her Majesties Opposition won't challenge fatal incompetence and corruption in government, who will?
Labour have supported measures as regards social distancing legislation and vaccination roll out. Should they have voted to hinder either?
As for calling out the government on the things you detail, Labour have been doing exactly that.
But you are right, there has been been no big reward in terms of public sentiment for walking the tightrope between supporting measures that need public support to work and criticising what the government gets wrong and the deceits and lies they weave. As I said… it results in one of three reactions from voters…
- Labour are not opposing the Tories
- playing politics with the pandemic
- no idea what Labour stand for
Or sometimes all three.
To unify the party he had to work inclusively with the left
2 things. 1. Why should he? You hear this argument a lot with factional politics, and only have to look at the say the Republicans who have it down to a fine art: In power they trample over everything and everyone, and out of power just complain that they're being excluded, and 2, how do you know that he hasn't, and has been turned down?
dazh
Full MemberThe fact that this has and is happening is all the proof you need that Starmer has completely failed in his goal of ‘unifying the party’.
And tell me, who has ever succeeded in that? In any of the major parties? Labour is worse than most for sure and it's completely self-inflicted, as I mentioned over the page they've worked hard to make sure they don't even understand their own past so everything's built on previous messes. But it'd take miracles for any leader to unify the party reliably.
"Unifying the party" is an impossible dream but it's also something you really have to say as leader and have to be seen to be open to. Starmer's approach has been, uh, erratic let's say. I think at times he's both widened divisions but also given the tories and press more ammunition. It's something that even though he could never win, it would be good if it were showing more clarity and leadership than it is. I mean, that's basically the entire job, everything you do is not just about getting that one thing done but also about creating a track record.
I'd just like to ask the Starmerists what they think would actually change in the UK, if he did by some chance, become PM. Given that the actual people who run the country, IE the media barons, bankers, CEOs of massive corporations etc, many of them not even resident in the UK let alone UK citizens, won't allow anything that upsets the status quo. So; things like the privatisation of the NHS, education system, and public services, the increased authoritarian nature of social control, and the increasing social, cultural and economic divisions in our society, will continue unabated, unless somebody actually stands up against that, and takes steps to curb their power and influence. Given that Starmer isn't anywhere near capable of that, he can't even lead his own party effectively, what do you think would actually change?
1. Why should he?
Because if he doesn't they'll leave and start they're own party, which they are now doing.
2, how do you know that he hasn’t, and has been turned down?
The fact that many previous Corbyn voters voted for him that would seem to indicate the opposite. I strongly suspect he agrees with binners and thinks it would be better if they all pissed off. It won't win him power but at least he'll have a ready made excuse.
I’d just like to ask the Starmerists what they think would actually change in the UK
The biggest change will be that we will be governed by a party that actually gives a shit about people and won't see the sort of bullshit the tories continually come out with. Just not having people like Priti Patel around would be a good enough change.
The biggest change will be that we will be governed by a party that actually gives a shit about people and won’t see the sort of bullshit the tories continually come out with.
O...k.
What makes you believe that?
The biggest change will be that we will be governed by a party that actually gives a shit about people and won’t see the sort of bullshit the tories continually come out with.
That's not what I see when I look at the parliamentary labour party. I see a motley crew of careerists elevated far above their station who will do anything for a taste of power. Do they really give a shit about people? Or do they only give a shit about their own careers and the glamour it brings them?
careerists
That's a term you can throw at any MP, and for experienced ones belittles the work they do for the constituents, and assumes a motivation that simply can not be proved or disproved. It's not a real accusation, it's just the lazy language of populism. There are MPs of all parties trying to improve the lives of others, not just in it for themselves. Far fewer than there used to be on the Conservative benches, but still a few. A hell of a lot on the opposition benches, including the Labour front bench.
What about:
Ending donations to political parties.
Political reform, (PR, Lords reform)
Politician rules eg no second jobs etc.
Could Labour campaign on these things?
I'd love them to feature as Labour Policies.
But most people don't care about any of them.
Plus they all need nuance...
- how do you start a new political party with no donations?
- which form of PR? what replaces the Lords?
- do we want doctors etc to give up their careers?
It's a whole world of politics nerdery that will not win over most voters, quite the opposite.
Because if he doesn’t they’ll leave and start they’re own party, which they are now doing.
Cool, along with all those other wildly successful splinter parties that dominate our political system...
I tell you what, Tories read threads like this and wet themselves laughing.
pondo +1
What makes you believe that?
What makes you believe that is not the case?
binners Full Member
But we know that people like that don’t do contrition because they’ve spent their lives completely convinced of their own almost divine righteousness and moral superiority
Luckily no one could ever accuse you of that binners.
So basically what you are saying is that you expect Labour to do worse in Harlepool under Starmer than it did under Corbyn not because your man isn't up to the job, which is what a lot of people seem to think, but because of splitters.
Shouldn't you be posting your well-loved Monty Python "splitters" picture? Have your picture posting skills grown weak old man? Or have the copywrite owners finally caught up with you?
I’d just like to ask the Starmerists what they think would actually change in the UK, if he did by some chance, become PM. Given that the actual people who run the country, IE the media barons, bankers, CEOs of massive corporations etc, many of them not even resident in the UK let alone UK citizens, won’t allow anything that upsets the status quo. So; things like the privatisation of the NHS, education system, and public services, the increased authoritarian nature of social control, and the increasing social, cultural and economic divisions in our society, will continue unabated, unless somebody actually stands up against that, and takes steps to curb their power and influence.
You can only curb all that by taking power, you can't do that unless you protect the interests of those above who hold the power. This is the fine line that Starmer, in fact any other party leader must now face.
And its not like this is a new thing. The accumulation of power from the media barons, corporations, bankers etc, has been decades in the making, a softly, softly approach that has passed largely unnoticed by the UK public, then accelerated by individuals, groups, and certain data analysing companies using social media to spread misinformation and outright lies, propagated within friend groups, or whatever other interest groups, topped off with 'think tanks' making up reports and statistics to suit their agendas.
And all linked to this culture war Government, fragile in nature, hence the wrapping themselves in flags business, who now hold the kind of majority to keep parliament out of the executives decisions, who have set about dismantling judicial independence, who have not only assaulted our rights(and economy) with Brexit, but will continue to erode our rights, and will define their future voters not in values shared with themselves, but with those who are not in the perceived high priority groups the opposition party's target.
So judging after the government backed 'race report' , white people, and the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary investigating themselves saying the Police did nothing wrong on Clapham common the other week, more specifically, white men.
When it comes to Starmer, with all the above to fight against, a media that can at its leisure will fully ignore him, and other real issues, a muted BBC, I have said already that Starmer was not going to rock the boat during the covid pandemic, so he wasn't going to be visible during this time, and if he did rock the boat the press will be all over him for the wrong reasons.
Starmer will not win an election, the goal is to stablise and re-build the party. However:
Those leaving the Labour Party, either to ‘abstain’ or support other parties and candidates are offering neither.
Let them go. They can form their own party and get nowhere with it. And that's why this fight is going on now, they need the party infrastructure to win elections, but there must only be their ideology within it. And I challenge those here talking of, or wanting Starmers failure, to pick out a replacement that can go on to fight all of the above and win.
There is a total failure to understand just how far the political landscape has shifted here in the UK, well England at least. There is talk of understanding change, and wanting change, but when it comes to the left and a lot of the centre, change is for others. Well the tories changed. And people voted against the progressive social change promised by others at the last election, well in the numbers that mattered within broken voting system anyway.
So to the left I would say 'winning the argument' didn't win votes or the election did it? Speaking of which:
The fact that this has and is happening is all the proof you need that Starmer has completely failed in his goal of ‘unifying the party’. He’s split the party, and it is weaker as a result. He’s achieved something no other leader has, so perhaps he and his supporters should start taking some responsibility for it.
Isn't it time the left took some responsibility for assisting the tories win by a landslide at the last election?
Now, more than ever, we need effective, robust and professional opposition of the Government. I honestly thought Starmer would provide that. He hasn’t. He’s just limp.
My view too.
He rightly can, and has, supported actions that were needed, like lockdown, distancing etc.
He has consistently failed to use the ample opportunity the government has given him to give them a proper kicking for the dithering, delays, corruption and incompetence that has seen us achieve one of the worst death rates and economic damage in the world.
Isn’t it time the left took some responsibility for assisting the tories win by a landslide at the last election?
I’ve long been saying that given the catastrophic results of their ‘project’ that some humility might be in order. An acknowledgment of the scale of the disaster and the utter shitshow that Starmer was bequeathed by them.
Yeah, right. Fat chance of that
They’re as piously convinced as ever in their own righteousness and that they ‘won the argument’.
It’s the electorate who were wrong, not them, and the Labour Party should carry on as they wish, and march on down the same political cul-de-sac until the electorate realises the error of its ways and embraces socialism.
They don’t put a time limit on this.
Next time, comrades, next time...
It’s the electorate who were wrong, not them, and the Labour Party should carry on as they wish, and march on down the same political cul-de-sac until the electorate realises the error of its ways and embraces socialism.
And with the recent success of the Labour party as it tramps ever more towards the right...
Your argument is utter nonsense.
The Labour Party is Democratic Socialist party, or supposed to be. Why not just carbon copy the Tories if power is all that is needed?
Ah, yeah they're trying that aren't they.
Lib Dems, Chukka and co needed your support.
When you can't find anything positive to say about KS in a thread that's supposed to be about him, slag off Jeremy Corbyn and all his former supporters yet again (while moaning about factionalism).
Excellent stuff guys.
“ They’re as piously convinced as ever in their own righteousness and that they ‘won the argument’.” That is almost always the case with most political threads on this forum surely. People are so entrenched in a political format that we’ve had for decades that any compromise on either side is seen as treason of the highest order. We agree that we cannot go on with the current system or certainly agree it’s not fit for purpose to move us forward but we are unwilling to change or compromise because of course our view is always the correct one.
Except that it's a total straw man and no one is arguing that we just need Jeremy Corbyn/1970s socialism back.
Apparently if you are unimpressed by limp centrism and flag-shagging then you're a communist.
The Tories don't compromise their ideology.
Also, I like to remind people of the likes of Ian Austin - the vile Labour MP who directly sent a letter telling us not to vote for Labour - and take Boris.
The non-existent war on the left...
Apparently if you are unimpressed by limp centrism and flag-shagging then you’re a communist.
Don't you just love it when Free-market Capitalism keeps the country running in times of a pandemic?
Peski socialism messing stuff up.
Corbyn and his bloody broadband communism how the hell would that have been any use in a pandemic? It's the stuff of unaffordable Marxist 6th form wet dreams.
The state should stop interfering in the pandemic. The left really do need to take the blame for this. They lost the argument.
When you can’t find anything positive to say about KS in a thread that’s supposed to be about him, slag off Jeremy Corbyn and all his former supporters yet again (while moaning about factionalism).
Excellent stuff guys.
If only there was a thread for them to slag of Corbyn...
It's instructive that the usual suspects are unable to mount a defence of Starmer.
binners
Full MemberYeah, right. Fat chance of that
They’re as piously convinced as ever in their own righteousness and that they ‘won the argument’.
It’s the electorate who were wrong, not them.....
One of the problems with engaging in regular ranting is that you are very likely to have forgotten what you said in a previous rant.
Before you decided that it would all be the fault of "splitters" binners, before even the date had been announced, you claimed that Labour would lose the Hartlepool by-election because the electorate there, according to you, were "thickos" and "racists". You asked the question :
"Is their anyone who honestly thinks that in the present climate, Labour can retain that seat?"
Here is your first post on the thread in which you very clearly spell out that Labour will lose Hartlepool because the electorate are all "thicko racists". I think it only does justice to the rant if it is fully replicated in its entirity.
When the pubs are back open, come and spend an evening in my local. I don’t go in there any more after having a massive barney with the regulars in there. They are what seems to be the ‘new’ tory voter that has delivered this and many other northern constituencies to the Tory Brexiteers
They’re a delightful bunch. Really bright. ‘Salt of the earth’. You can sit at the bar and listen to them endlessly bemoan the problems of this country. Invariably everything is down to 3 groups of people
1. *ing *’s (derogatory term for our local Asian residents)
2. *ing * (derogatory term for our local black residents)
and:
3. *ing **s (derogatory term for our local homosexual residents)Women get mentioned too in a ‘phwooooar, she’d get it!’ way, obviously, but thats their only place in the world
They all voted UKIP in the past – I know this as they delighted in telling the sole Guardian reader in the pub this – but since Boris converting the Tories to an English Nationalist party, they all voted Tory last time out.
Thats the reality of the situation. From an electoral point of view, its genius from the Tories. Convincing the thicko casual racist that they’re the party for them. Where its taking the rest of us… god only knows.
Nowhere good, thats for sure
Surely... the appeal of Bluekip in some locales, and the Labour candidate losing votes to the "NIPS" candidate, can both be things at the same time? No? Of course Labour losing ground because Starmer is even less popular than his predecessor in the seat could also be true. All three could be at play.
Surely… the appeal of Bluekip in some locales, and the Labour candidate losing votes to the “NIPS” candidate, can both be things at the same time? No?
Absolutely not! Everything’s binary. Black and white. For or against. That’s why those on the left have always been so brilliant at winning elections. You’re either a fully paid up member of their idealogical purity or you’re the enemy. There’s nothing in between
It’s an absolute mystery to everyone why calling everyone ****s then telling them to vote for you doesn’t result in huge landslide electoral victories
I guess we’ll never get to the bottom of that one, eh?
You’re either a fully paid up member of their idealogical purity or you’re the enemy. There’s nothing in between
It's not about ideological purity. It's about offering the possibility of a solution the effects of a right wing race to the bottom.
There is zero point in replacing one Tory Government with a luke warm version of itself.
You want to actuaully improve society - then fight for something better - or just ape your adversaries?
We have the worst of both worlds currently - an unelectable Labour party (despite previous cries of make Starmer the the leader of a unity Government) that also offers nothing useful.
How on earth is that a way forward? It's the exact opposite of anything progressive.
You might have 10% of an argument if Starmer was actually 20Pts ahead, but he's not. The rebranded Tory-esq centrist Labour party has failed the test just when the nation might have needed them the most.
If you want to see maligned liberal 'logic' - then spend time reading Ian Dunt. My god, does that guy miss the mark by constantly picking the right sides of an argument at exactly the wrong time.
Good to see the commitment to anti racism in the Labour party only applies when it's anti semitism, for some reason.
And binners complaining about reductive binary politics - my poor irony meter...
And binners complaining about reductive binary politics – my poor irony meter…
Aww we love that anti-traveller vibe up here in the land of ex-John Mann (super Tory anti-Semitism Czar). The local Labour council promises pot hole filling too.
Only the natives are allowed to fly tip ya know.
Local issues for local people.
It’s not about ideological purity.
There is zero point in replacing one Tory Government with a luke warm version of itself.
And how do you do anything else in a country that votes for a Tory party and therefore wants a Tory party/likes the way it does things?
You won't be going anywhere with radical changes as a) people don't like change and b) majority are happy with what they have
You can scream at them that they are wrong or even try and convince them (have you spoken to any?) but one day you have to face the reality of what the people in the UK are actually like...
It's not 100% the people though it's often the media speaking for "the people". I think the people are up for some leftist policies. Even Corbyn managed to sell some.
If Keir wants to be seen as patriotic why doesn't he talk about the Tories selling water/energy/transport infrastructure off to foreigners? Buying PPE from China (through intermediaries based in tax havens of course) when there were perfectly good UK suppliers/factories.
There is zero point in replacing one Tory Government with a luke warm version of itself. <span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">You want to actuaully improve society – then fight for something better</span>
...But the undeniable truth that Binners points out time and again; the electorate were offered that in 2019 and overwhelmingly rejected it. When offered an alternative after 10 years of austerity and Tory rule, and they asked for another helping. Why then, if you were the leader of the Labour party would you continue down a path that the voters clearly don't want?
If Keir wants to be seen as patriotic why doesn’t he talk about the Tories selling water/energy/transport infrastructure off to foreigners? Buying PPE from China (through intermediaries based in tax havens of course) when there were perfectly good UK suppliers/factories
And a 100% tax on house sales to foreigners that don’t live in them.
That should burst the London bubble and drive house prices down.
'I’m just hoping the rumours are true (IIRC it was in the Guardian) that the first thing Kier(!) Starmer is going to do is have a night of the long knives to clear out every last one of the utterly useless Corbynites'
'It’s an absolute mystery to everyone why calling everyone ****s then telling them to vote for you doesn’t result in huge landslide electoral victories'
Quite so.
…
But the undeniable truth that Binners points out time and again; the electorate were offered that in 2019 and overwhelmingly rejected it. When offered an alternative after 10 years of austerity and Tory rule, and they asked for another helping. Why then, if you were the leader of the Labour party would you continue down a path that the voters clearly don’t want?
It's not clear they don't want better a better society delivered through Socialism. Look, all there is when said and done is the state. The state kept us ticking along nicely when the private sector folds.
It always does. That applies on non-pandemic times too.
All Government spending is ultimately a private sector surplus. The is only one currency issuer in the UK and it is owned HMG.
The people have been told we can't have a better world for all the economic, racist and elitest rubbish our press has rammed down there throats. When the likes of Ian Austin in your own party tell you not to vote for the leader - what do you expect?
(Starmer, by the way has gone down a path voters don't want.)
All that's clear is Brexit created an unwinnable war in 2019. Things got close in 2017.
The answer to neolibralism is not more neolibralism even if the establishment tells us it is.
Binners' has distilled his world view of Socialism = Corbynism = Communism.
Solution: neolibralism!
Hardly a progressive way of fighting against the Tories. In fact it's exactly the same line of argument the right wing press use.
Labour (even under Corbyn) were obsessed with balancing the books.
Because that's what voters understand*. (and there's nothing "wrong" in spending money wisely or frugally) I don't think you can offer folk their own gilded unicorn, and when asked how it's going to paid for, say "Oh don't worry, money is just this made-up thing that we invent" No-one is going to buy that.
Labour's more and more shrill spending pledges that seemed to be made up on the hoof was partly the reason they weren't seen as "responsible" last time around. After the huge "spaffing up the wall" of all the COVID spending, I think voters will regard grand spending plans with even more suspicion next time around.
* however wrong that is.
When the likes of Ian Austin in your own party tell you not to vote for the leader – what do you expect?
I would expect that outside of political nerds, most folk wouldn't know who Ian Austin is. Corbyn was the reason Labour lost the last election, and that's the start, middle and end of that story.
Because that’s what voters understand*. (and there’s nothing “wrong” in spending money wisely or frugally) I don’t think you can offer folk their own gilded unicorn, and when asked how it’s going to paid for, say “Oh don’t worry, money is just this made-up thing that we invent” No-one is going to buy that
Ugh. When you're a currency issuer spending money is not limited by accountancy.
It's just a fact of how the monetary system works. Prudence will be used at all the wrong times when the Tories don't want to fund something.
Play straight into their hands with that argument.
