Increased party membership to its highest ever levels, making Labour the largest political party in Europe. Managed to engage many younger people with politics and activism. Helped shift the political focus onto corruption and greed amongst elites. Helped expose most of the UK media being under the control of said elites. Helped expose the fact we don’t really have real democracy. And shown that what the UK needs is a viable left wing alternative to right wing politics.
And where has any of that got any of us? Where has it got the labour party?
A huge membership? The party in power, with a huge majority, has a membership that constitutes a couple of thousand senile old racists in retirement homes on the South Coast.
All that stuff may play well on Twitter but the reality is that we're presently under the rule of a completely corrupt Tory regime with a whopping great majority meaning it can do pretty much what the hell it likes. Thats where all that got us.
The irony of it being that the main thing that's done - taking us out of the EU - is something that Jeremy Corbyn would have loved to have on his CV, and to be fair he can take a large dollop of the credit for.
The fact of the matter is that Starmer, or whoever else received the poisoned chalice, inherited a smouldering train wreck. The rebuilding job required to restore even a modicum of credibility is absolutely huge after the electoral car crash of Corbynism.
Do I think he can win an election? Not in the present climate, no. I'd love to believe that he could, but right now I can't see it.
His job - and its a huge one - is the same as Neil Kinnocks was. To set off down the long and torturous road to making the party electable again.
If you don't appreciate what an enormous task that is, and what an utter shambles Jezza left the party in, then you're absolutely delusional. All those things you mentioned count for pretty much nothing with the majority of the electorate, and they're the ones who ultimately make the decisions.
We'll have a more realistic idea of how far down the road Starmer has got when the local election results are in.
Increased party membership to its highest ever levels, making Labour the largest political party in Europe. Managed to engage many younger people with politics and activism. Helped shift the political focus onto corruption and greed amongst elites. Helped expose most of the UK media being under the control of said elites. Helped expose the fact we don’t really have real democracy. And shown that what the UK needs is a viable left wing alternative to right wing politics.
Sounds great. I must have missed the bit where he won the election for Labour.
Step 1. Get into power
Step 2. Do all the stuff above when it will actually make a difference
Absolutely. The electorate really went for it.
A large number did, yes.
Now whats the alternative being proposed and how do you propose retaining all those who went for the left wing option last time?
If he’s not the right leader he needs to go now.
Labour leaders don't get long before the case against them becomes fully formed in the press. Any new leader taking over this year will already be done in by the time a general election is called. This is one of the lessons ignored with Cornyn's tenure... 2017 was good timing for him... 2019 awful.
Starmer can't win a general election. I can't see anyone else coming forward to take over his current role though... I just hope that he and the Party understand that he needs to handover for a new leader to have a run up to the the next general election... a forlorn hope.
The electorate really went for it.
In 2017 they did, but because they didn't quite get over the line, all the positives to be taken from that campaign have been ignored in favour of something the electorate rejected over 10 years ago, and the results of this reversion to outdated new labour managerialism have been entirely predictable.
Shall I ask again? Which policies from 2017, that were broadly positively received, have been "rejected" by the Labour Party since Starmer became leader? Building on 2017, but "under new leadership" looks to be all Starmer is doing... nothing more, nothing less, nothing particularly "blairite" or "right wing" beyond what Labour were offering in 2017.
Step 1. Get into power
Step 2. Do all the stuff above when it will actually make a difference
The problem with that idea is, that if you play the game as it is now, you will a) only win an election if you have the support of the (mostly right wing controlled) media etc, and b) once you're there, you will do as you're told, and nothing else. So, even if Starmer did win, he'd only be able to act within whatever narrow agenda is set for him, as his lack of balls means he'll never stand up to his puppeteers, so you'll only get more of the same. He won't make any difference. So, if you genuinely want something different, you have to change the game. And Starmer isn't a game changer.
Word salad. How do you "change the game" from the sidelines? How do you counter the power of the press (these days it's the media more widely, not just the papers) from the sidelines? And your accusation about "not having balls once in power" is just conjecture... the kind of thing people said about Biden before he won.
Most importantly... because there is a pretty obvious theme to your posts Bridges... who are "his puppeteers"?
as his lack of balls means he’ll never stand up to his puppeteers
Can you clarify for us exactly who these dastardly 'puppeteers' are who exert such complete control over the leader of the labour party?
I gather it's Rupert Murdoch, as obviously he's behind everything, like some kind of evil omnipotent supreme being? And also, I presume, a secretive sect of zionists, yes? As we all know that they're apparently behind everything too?
Anyone else to add to your paranoid list of lefty bogeymen, or is that it?
nothing particularly “blairite” or “right wing” beyond what Labour were offering in 2017.
You're joking right? See my post yesterday with Chomsky's comments. Under Blair the labour party was a top-down organisation where policy was formulated by diktat, party members and activists were sidelined, and the party was completely controlled by the PLP. Corbyn went some way to turning that on it's head, reducing the power of the PLP (which is why they turned on him) and empowering the activist base resulting in the policies of 2017 and a vastly increased membership. Starmer has dismantled that and is doubling down on PLP dictatorial control resulting in party infighting, mass resignations, the creation of competing parties, and empty policies like british recovery bonds and flag shagging. Labour today couldn't be more different than it was in 2017.
Labour today couldn’t be more different than it was in 2017.
Which 2017 policies have been dumped?
resulting in party infighting, mass resignations, the creation of competing parties
So.. these things have happened under both Starmer and his predecessor... have they not?
Most importantly… because there is a pretty obvious theme to your posts Bridges… who are “his puppeteers“?
I'm intrigued by your assertions that there's a 'pretty obvious theme' to my posts. Care to elucidate a bit on that point?
I gather it’s Rupert Murdoch, as obviously he’s behind everything, like some kind of evil omnipotent supreme being, and a secretive sect of zionists?
Still hungover? It's Wednesday mate...
Care to elucidate a bit on that point?
If I really must...
https://twitter.com/IfNotNowOrg/status/1305992488654704641?s=20
The thing is, it's an actual fact that he was funded by wealthy pro-Israeli lobbyists with ties to the arms trade, and that he kept it secret.
It's a useful shield to suggest anyone who questions that is an anti-Semite isn't it.
Word salad. How do you “change the game” from the sidelines?
Quite effectively on occasion. Just ask the **** Farage.
That actually providing alternate options can force the other party to move your way isnt exactly radical thinking though so its surprising people still have problems with it.
as his lack of balls means he’ll never stand up to his puppeteers
Anti-Semitic trope of the day award goes to....
It’s a useful shield to suggest anyone who questions that is an anti-Semite isn’t it.
No, but the use of terms like "puppet masters" or "his puppeteers", in combination with a such a strong and repeated focus on Israel in a thread about a UK pollution, is something I find interesting. I was giving bridges the chance to explain why he uses that term, he pushed me to say what I see in that term.... and so I have. He can explain why I shouldn't make that link if he wants, and why he didn't mean to make that link if that is the case.
If I really must…
Ah. The Margaret Hodge approach. How amusing.
Actually; I sensed that was what you were wanting to get at. I just needed you to admit it. Little tip; don't get into playing poker. 😉
I could be offended. You're so wide of the mark, it's really very funny. You really, really want me to be something you can attack. And now; you see how you've been manipulated into imagining something that's not real. But now you have to ask yourself; why did you come to such a conclusion? What external forces are influencing and dictating the way you think?
Anti-Semitic trope of the day award goes to….
Oh this just gets better and better... 😀
Quite effectively on occasion. Just ask the **** Farage. That actually providing alternate options can force the other party to move your way isnt exactly radical thinking though so its surprising people still have problems with it.
So Labour should just try and move Conservative party policies, and accept that Tories will stay in power, but with some policies put in place that they only do so as to stop support for Labour growing? I think that's were we currently are. Greedily, I want more, and would rather Labour were in office effecting change directly.
The AS thing is a distraction, as ever. It's a simple fact that Starmer was almost entirely funded by a very small number of wealthy right-wing/Blairite Labour donors who had previously done their best to undermine Corbyn at every opportunity.
I wonder what they think they will get in return for their donations?
I wonder what they think they will get in return for their donations?
They've already got it.
why did you come to such a conclusion?
It's an age old trope. Now, feel free to explain why I was wrong to think of that, and that you weren't making that connection, it would be very welcome.
It’s an age old trope. Now, feel free to explain why I was wrong to think of that, and that you weren’t making that connection, it would be very welcome.
I don't actually need to defend myself in any way, to you. Your ignorance and delusion here is just incredible. I'm content to sit and watch you make a fool of yourself, with your ridiculous assertions. It's your own credibility you're destroying. It might be an idea if you apologised for your comments though, so we can all move on from this unpleasantness.
Greedily, I want more, and would rather Labour were in office effecting change directly.
Well it depends on what happens then doesnt it? If you get power by using tory policies then what happens to the "centre"? After ten years how will your centre left policy of today now be defined?
It might be an idea if you apologised for your comments though, so we can all move on from this unpleasantness.
Apologise? For what? Asking you why you use the term "puppeteers" when talking about links between Israel and a UK political leader? That term absolutely brings that trope to mind, when used in that context, because, you know... history. You just had to say that you didn't mean to make that connection, and you were unaware of it (unlikely), or slipped up (we all do), or I suppose you could try and claim that the trope doesn't exist, or that awareness of it is being "over sensitive" or something... crack on... it would be interesting to hear.
So.. these things have happened under both Starmer and his predecessor… have they not?
There weren't any splits in 2017. There were a few labour MPs kicking up a fuss but everyone ignored them as the party was largely united behind the transformative manifesto and energised by the election campaign. And then the defeated right wingers pressed the AS nuclear button. Everything that is happening today is a result of that. I try not to think about it too much as I can barely contain my rage and hatred for these scumbags who put their own petty egos ahead of the interests of the millions of working people they are supposed to represent.
Apologise? For what?
Funny that people tend to get a bit defensive when accused of being an anti-semite. Again, if you refer back to that Chomsky interview, you should read and absorb what he says. AS is too serious an issue to be used as a weapon in a petty political squabble.
There weren’t any splits in 2017.
Broadly true. And I hope Starmer continues from that 2017 policy base, as Labour should be able to build support around a tweaked version of it. But those leaving, or setting up other parties, now, are angry with Starmer for reasons that are nothing to do with the 2017 manifesto.
I try not to think about it too much as I can barely contain my rage and hatred for these scumbags who put their own petty egos ahead of the interests of the millions of working people they are supposed to represent.
I'm not surprised. But why isn't that also true of those setting up another 'party' to run against Labour now?
AS is too serious an issue to be used as a weapon in a petty political squabble.
Indeed. Hence why it's important not to use classic antisemitic tropes when describing UK politics. Why use the term "puppeteers" in the context of links between a UK political leader and Israel?
Quite effectively on occasion. Just ask the **** Farage.
that's not the first reference I've seen about effecting change from the "cheap seats" and Farage seems like the obvious poster boy, but he started banging the drum in the 90's and only really got going in 2006 when he became leader of UKIP. So; willing to give Starmer that long?
Apologise? For what? Asking you why you use the term “puppeteers” when talking about links between Israel and a UK political leader?
Ah. You see, I didn't mean Israel specifically, when I used that term. I was referring more to the powerful corporate interests that really rule society. Unfortunately, in seeking an opportunity to attack me, you've added numbers and come to the wrong conclusion. You allowed yourself to be influenced by propaganda, and didn't think it through enough yourself. But you are probably not even aware of this happening. It has served a purpose though; it shows just how easily people can be manipulated into thinking what others want them to.
Now you're a little more enlightened, you can apologise. And we can all move on. And hopefully, you will reflect on this, and not make the same mistake again. Cos, y'know, false accusations can be very, very offensive. And you don't want to be offensive, do you?
Which policies from 2017, that were broadly positively received, have been “rejected” by the Labour Party since Starmer became leader?
You're kidding, right? We're talking about a man who has publicly disowned his leadership election manifesto.
Farage also had an easier job. Stirring up the racists and self interested to get behind ideas based on hate is a lot easier than getting those same people to feel as passionately about a more equal society.
You’re kidding, right?
So, which 2017 policies have been dumped? There seems to almost be a census here that those are the popular polices that should now be built upon, to try and get Labour back up to, and hopefully well beyond, that 2017 "high" watermark in pubic support. So which have been dumped?
Now you’re a little more enlightened, you can apologise.
You keep bringing this thread back to Israel, even when talking about British Jews, and used the "puppeteers" phrase. That brought to mind that trope instantly for me, and I'm very glad to hear that you didn't mean for your words to be taken that way. Thank you for explaining that you didn't "just" mean Israel when talking about puppeteers... but instead the "powerful corporate interests that really rule society"... so who are they? Who are these puppeteers that make you so sure that Starmer isn't his own man? Or can we drop the "puppeteers" word, and say what we mean... is it donors? Political advisors and allies?
So, which 2017 policies have been dumped?
Any of those which cross-reference with his leadership pledges. At first glance: a tax increase for top earners, a commitment to public ownership and abolition of tuition fees.
@Kelvin: Wow. What an incredible lack of self awareness. So you're not actually going to apologise for accusing me of anti-Semitism, even though you have absolutely no evidence other than an imagined idea in your own head? Forming a judgment about someone with absolutely no knowledge of who that person really is, their background, culture, religion etc? Simply because you have some sort of need to 'demonise' anyone who thinks differently to yourself? And you say it's the 'left' that are the problem in Labour?
Wow.
All this tit for tat over the flat refurb with what we have really going on around us is utterly repugnant.
David Lammy and other Labour MPs ought to know better what the priorities for opposing are.
an imagined idea in your own head
I asked why you used the term "puppeteers", you then asked why I was asking, rather than answering, so I told you what that phrase brought instantly to mind. Yes, that trope is "in my own head", it should be in all our heads.
David Lammy and other Labour MPs ought to know better what the priorities for opposing are.
Corruption is what will bring Johnson down, if anything does. I think he'll ride over it just fine... but if Labour MPs weren't challenging where the PM was getting his money, they'd be accused of "not opposing", wouldn't they?
@Kelvin: Don't keep digging, just apologise. It's all you have to do.
What would my apology be? Sorry for asking why you used the word "puppeteers"? Sorry for telling you why, when you asked, it rings alarms bells "in my head"?
I'm stepping away from this, as it's clear you lack the humility to admit you've made a mistake. But try to think on how making accusations against people you know nothing about, might not be such a great idea. Best of luck with that.
Corruption is what will bring Johnson down
This may very well prove to be true. It won't, however, necessarily result in a change of government. As someone mentioned earlier, or perhaps on a different thread, people should be careful what they wish for.
Now, would I love to see a transparent government in charge? One whose policies are genuinely for the better of the masses not just the affluent few? Absolutely. Labour should be this party. Labour should be the party for the masses. Currently its more reminiscent of a drunken, pub squabble over who's turn it is on the pool table. Such a shame. Root and branch reform of UK politics is long overdue.
All this tit for tat over the flat refurb with what we have really going on around us is utterly repugnant.
David Lammy and other Labour MPs ought to know better what the priorities for opposing are.
They got Al Capone on tax evasion. In this sort of case the 'how' does not matter.
So; willing to give Starmer that long?
Why would I need to do that? I am not really sure how that translates to me pointing out that it is perfectly possible to change things from the side line and that, in fact, it can be amazingly effective. If you look at some tory think tanks for example they got rather worried.
Why would I need to do that?
Because it took Farage over 30 years on a single issue by pushing on a door that was already partly open, that's why.
