Just going to remind everyone of this post from well over a year ago:
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, both on the front bench and behind the scenes, and actually appoint some people who are capable of finding their own arses using both hands.
I’m also hoping that involves firing Richard Burgon into the sun.
There needs to be a Kinnock/Militant style purge to even think dragging the labour party back from its Corbynite political irrelevence, where its presently languishing in its own delusional ‘we won the argument’ bullshit
Worked out really really well, that plan by Starmer, didn't it?
Will the Tony Benn Memorial University ever be built?
Blair will have taken the money to build a monument to himself, instead. Oh, he did; it's called the Tory Party.
Bless the Bedwetters, for they knoweth not even their own delusion...
Richard Burgon. Next question…
When did you move to Leeds?
Yes after they succeeded in the job at hand. So major impact on legislation.
Except the legislation was written by others and many in UKIP thought it a sell out. They may have got the "not this" vote, what they didn't do is design what was next.
The greens are good at the "we can't continue like this" PR but their policies are a turn off for many and they have the usual left wing kryptonite issue scything though their leadership
Bless the Bedwetters
FFS.
Then you look at whats going on in the Parliamentary party and think WTF has this got to do with the real people that the Labour party are actually meant to represent?
FFS how long have I been saying this? And every time your response was tinfoil helmets and sixth formers etc and came down on the side of the people you now say are out of touch.
Anyway, welcome to the club. The problem with the labour is not its members and activists. The problem is the majority of its MPs who think their own interests and views are more important than the members and the working people who they’re supposed to represent.
The problem with the labour is not its members and activists. The problem is the majority of its MPs who think their own interests and views are more important than the members and the working people who they’re supposed to represent.
Don't they represent the entire constituency as well?
It's a nuance really, the system is always going to be imperfect no labour MP can be all things to all people or even all labour party members. Some MPs will be making the most of personal opportunities, most don't.
I'd recommend Isabel Hardman's book "Why we get the wrong politicians", you might not agree with it all but there are some interesting observations
I've no problem with a system that weighs MP votes more heavily in leadership contests. Who the leader is makes more of a difference to them than it does me. and each of those MPs is representing 60,000 folk, their opinion should count for more That's fine.
It's just not the most pressing thing that they can do with their time, is all.
Raynor vs Raab in the house right now, a good listen for anyone who thinks it doesn’t matter which party is put in position by voters to set government policy.
As was the case with Corbyn, I’m less bothered by what he is or isn’t, ideology-wise, what I’d like to see is a basic level of competence.
Competence is utterly pointless without an idealogy to push back in a different direction.
You can clearly have competence in fascism.
Competence is utterly pointless without an idealogy to push back in a different direction.
Not really. I'd happily hand the running of the country over to Tesco or Amazon. At least they'd be better at sorting the logistics
Not really. I’d happily hand the running of the country over to Tesco or Amazon. At least they’d be better at sorting the logistics
For their own ends though.
Raynor vs Raab in the house right now, a good listen for anyone who thinks it doesn’t matter which party is put in position by voters to set government policy.
I'm not with you on this.
It doesn't translate to the real world.
You think that replacing Raab&Co in government with Raynor&Co wouldn't make a difference to the real world we live in? The one where we increase the tax burden on the working poor... and tell them they can just "work harder" or work longer hours to make up for the negative effects of government policy on their lives?
Not really. I’d happily hand the running of the country over to Tesco or Amazon. At least they’d be better at sorting the logistics
Well that's what you've got now, under the tories, so what are you moaning about? You're a tory; just embrace it and then you can happily be on the 'winning' team.
You think that replacing Raab&Co in government with Raynor&Co wouldn’t make a difference to the real world we live in?
Not really, no. Labour are currently a neoliberal party, whose current leadership is following the Blairite vision set out in 1997. And that's gone well, hasn't it?
I’m not with you on this.
It doesn’t translate to the real world.
I think it might if they build some coherence around the reality of life for the low paid/ UC recipient. They also need to fix the issues with the marginal tax rate they pay if they earn more.
As always any good ideas will be stolen by Johnson, so they'll hold off, so people think labour have no policies, etc etc
Well that’s what you’ve got now, under the tories, so what are you moaning about? You’re a tory; just embrace it and then you can happily be on the ‘winning’ team.
A left wing troll telling a labour party member he's a Tory.......,
It's almost as if the left want revenge for the treatment of the secular saint, the outcome for labour's electoral chances don't even register, it's just about revenge.
One of the key advantages the conservatives have is the existence of UKIP/ Reform UK, it gives a home for those with more "ideological" views and to enable the party to operate as a broad coalition.
Labour need the same otherwise the infighting will tear up it's chances of getting 326+
Will the Tony Benn Memorial University ever be built?
Dunno, but Tony Benn House used to offer a great value lunch.
Well that’s what you’ve got now, under the tories, so what are you moaning about?
This is the most ideologically driven government this country has ever seen. It makes Thatcher look like Jeremy Corbyn. Its power is derived from the chaos it has created through Brexit, who's overarching philosophy would, 15 years ago, have been the exclusive preserve of people like Nick Griffin and the BNP
You’re a tory; just embrace it and then you can happily be on the ‘winning’ team.
According to you, everyone to the right of Tony Benn is a Tory.
Labour are currently a neoliberal party,
The US has a neoliberal economy, yet so does Germany. Other than the basics of capitalism, they have very little in common. You blanket condemn all forms of neoliberalism and then get your petticoats all ruffled when you're accused of sixth form level politics
As always any good ideas will be stolen by Johnson
But I thought "if you aren’t the government you aren’t legislating, if you aren’t legislating you cannot make significant changes to the way the country is run"
Now you seem to be admitting that actually providing alternatives can force the party in government to adjust and use those policies.
It’s almost as if the left want revenge for the treatment of the secular saint,
Or, more likely, its just if someone has spent the last few years attacking you I would doubt you would feel like working with them. Actions have consequences and unfortunately the right wing of the labour party have made it clear their idea of cooperation is getting their own way.
it gives a home for those with more “ideological” views and to enable the party to operate as a broad coalition.
No their key advantage is that the majority of the more moderate members will go along with the hard right rather than break away. The fear of the left seems all consuming.
have made it clear their idea of cooperation is getting their own way.
Sounds familiar. The Labour Party has always been an uneasy alliance between groups that in any other system wouldn't be forced to work so closely, or even be in the same party. Labour either learns that lesson and learns to co-operate is doomed to fail repeatedly.
I wonder why he wants to change the leadership election rules now? Could he be planning an exit?
Bloody stupid idea unless he is planning to go in which case it kind of makes sense (assuming he is an establishment stooge)
I think the one thing we're all unanimous on, whatever your position on the other stuff, is that right now this is a profoundly stupid idea.
It sends out a clear message to the electorate that as the nation struggles out of a pandemic, with all manner of other problems to contend with, the labour party is much more concerned with inner party wrangling than with any of that. A serious party that saw itself as a government in waiting certainly wouldn't be embarking on such self-indulgent, divisive and destructive nonsense.
It's an absolute gift to the Tories. The labour party shoots itself in the foot yet again
FFS.
Really? After all the abuse of 'Lefties' that's taken place on this thread, all the comments about 'sixth formers', 'tin-foil-helmetted nutters', the insinuations that anyone on the Left has mental health issues, the ageist abuse towards Corbyn, etc etc etc; and what upsets you is 'Bedwetters'?
Really?
(Don't anyone tell him about the unfounded and extremely offensive insinuations and accusations of anti-Semitism that also took place on here, eh?)
Oy vey.
A left wing troll telling a labour party member he’s a Tory…….,
Lol! In the last 24 hours, I've been called both a right wing and left wing troll. Make your minds up! 😀
Oh, and if someone espouses neoliberal values, is a fan of Margaret Thatcher's Greatest Legacy, and hates Lefties, then, y'know; if it looks like a duck and quacks...
I wonder why he wants to change the leadership election rules now? Could he be planning an exit?
It’s obvious, they’re scared of a snap election next year which they’ll lose. If that happens Starmer will have to resign and the membership/left will be empowered. This conference is their only chance to finish the job of returning control of the party to the PLP.
The US has a neoliberal economy, yet so does Germany. Other than the basics of capitalism, they have very little in common. You blanket condemn all forms of neoliberalism and then get your petticoats all ruffled when you’re accused of sixth form level politics"
Oh dear. Do you really think that repeating the term 'sixth form level politics' makes you look clever? 'Petticoats ruffled'; nice bit of misogyny to go with the ageism and ableism too...
Please; feel free to explain to us thickies how well 'neoliberalism' (perhaps 'ordoliberalism' in Germany) is going in both the US and Germany, as well as the subtle yet distinct differences between the two nations economies. And how neoliberalism is going to bring us into a wonderful, shiny capitalist utopia.
Or, more likely, its just if someone has spent the last few years attacking you I would doubt you would feel like working with them. Actions have consequences and unfortunately the right wing of the labour party have made it clear their idea of cooperation is getting their own way.
IIRC the secular Saint and serial labour rebel would vote against his parties whip quite frequently, but when leader got very upset when others did the same
But it's clear that there is a lot of animosity in the party that's going to play out at conference. Starmer may indeed get his Kinnock moment.
This conference is their only chance to finish the job of returning control of the party to the PLP
The conundrum here is that the PLP have worked in parliament with the prospective leader, they will have a sense of who can balance the need to come up with ideas, persuade MPs, build alliances, handle PMQs, manage the parliamentary activities, deliver when in government. The rest of the party won't see the candidate for leadership in the same way.
So do you surrender completely the decision on who will be leader to the membership, or do you give the people who walk the parliamentary corridors with them more influence?
The first conference after covid isn't the time to be doing this however.
It’s obvious, they’re scared of a snap election next year which they’ll lose.
there will be no snap election, as much of a clueless idiot as Johnson is, why on earth would he risk his 80 seat majority?
made sense for Trudeau thinking he could get a clear majority government, but even he failed.
No one with any sense thinks johnson wants a snap election, it wont happen
meanwhile instead of the labour conference being a chance to set out some clear policies........
the headlines coming out of it are already all about various Labour factions calling each other names,
It seems that a large chunk of labour care far more about their own internal politics than actually gaining power
The man on the clapham omnibus couldnt give two shits what method labour uses to elect its leader, (I cant imagine there is anything lower down on any rational persons priority list) all he sees is a bunch of 6th form student shouting 'splitter' at each other!
binners was right
And how neoliberalism is going to bring us into a wonderful, shiny capitalist utopia.
Assuming they won't, which country's model should we emulate? Or does the alternative utopia not exist either?
It seems that a large chunk of labour care far more about their own internal politics than actually gaining power
And the non-labour left wingers, there are plenty on the left who see labour as a bunch of red tory neoliberal establishment stooges.
I'd love for someone to call Angela Raynor that to her face just to see the explosion
all he sees is a bunch of 6th form student shouting ‘splitter’ at each other!
The move to change the rules has come from the right of the party. Those on the left would much rather be talking about policy and vision. Like stopping benefits cuts and bringing energy supplies under common ownership. In fact everyone on the left has been screaming for months for starmer to start talking about what he believes in and the response has been more factionalism culminating in this latest suicidal clusterf***.
None of this can be blamed on the left. All they’ve ever wanted is for Starmer to do what he promised when he campaigned for the leadership.
It seems that a large chunk of labour care far more about their own internal politics than actually gaining power
The leader is the prime example.
IIRC the secular Saint and serial labour rebel would vote against his parties whip quite frequently, but when leader got very upset when others did the same
What is it with the need for insults? Can you not manage to discuss things with throwing in tedious slurs?
The odd thing though when you look at his votes against the whip what stands out is how infrequently they were in line with the tories whip as well.
Also for him getting upset. I think it was more the people throwing temper tantrums and launching attacks in the media which was the problem.
binners was right
Apart from blaming the wrong side, which is a fairly key point I'd say.
Criticism of Starmer from the left is pretty bloody muted considering what he's doing and how well he's doing it. The factionalism is mainly coming from fanatical Blairites, just as it did under the previous leader.
None of this can be blamed on the left. All they’ve ever wanted is for Starmer to do what he promised when he campaigned for the leadership.
cuts both ways im afraid
starmer shouldnt be wasting his time doing it, but equally the left or whoever is objecting should just shrug & say, OK whatevs, this isnt ideal but Ill keep schtum because policies matter more
Lol
Yes it's just the small matter of how the leader is chosen! Policies are more important and he's been spot on so far!
It looks like the party is presently having a fight with itself about trans rights
Finger on the pulse of the nation, as ever
but equally the left or whoever is objecting should just shrug & say, OK whatevs, this isnt ideal but Ill keep schtum because policies matter more
You mean follow the example of what the right did during Corbyn's leadership? Oh.
No, people should object loudly because the leadership might just be forced to backtrack from gerrymandering and think about some actual policies instead.
If you're told you're not bright enough and/or suitable for sixth form studies that's pretty brutal and may well leave you with a bitter sense of exclusion and discrimination. But to carry on into adulthood engaging in discussions with petulant insults and disparaging people who study may well suggest that they got it right.
Bum two hands, Monty f Python, 'idealogical', oh the tedium of it. It's the right of the LP attacking, spying on and expelling the left when a government is engaging in crushing the lives of working people and that seems to be less of an issue. At least when even more shit hits the fan people will know how the forces are aligned. Starmer is not on your side.
binners
Full Member
It looks like the party is presently having a fight with itself about trans rights
yep, 100% falling into the culture war trap!
conference is the chance to reset & show labour are grown up enough to get stuff done if they were in government
instead we have........
You mean follow the example of what the right did during Corbyn’s leadership? Oh.
No, people should object loudly because the leadership might just be forced to backtrack from gerrymandering and think about some actual policies instead.
conference is the chance to reset & show labour are grown up enough to get stuff done if they were in government
Instead, the leadership is more interested in saving its own skin, which apparently we should support in the name of unity.
but equally the left or whoever is objecting should just shrug & say, OK whatevs
So it’s the left’s fault for forcing starmer to change the rules because they won’t do what they’re told by their PLP betters? Honestly if this is the laughable logic behind this clusterf*** then they’re even more stupid and incompetent than I thought.
Apart from blaming the wrong side
The sound of one hand clapping. All "sides" are complicit.
Labour fighting amongst itself while Rome burns is a cycle that will never stop, whoever is leader. And while that is going on, the Tories are changing the voting system, and moving boundaries, to ensure that a divided opposition results in Conservative rule based on a minority vote becoming more entrenched.... from city mayors to county councils, to Westminster.
"But is was they who wouldn't compromise, not us. And the voters were wrong as well."
Starmer promising to "unite" the party is increasingly laughable, and that's not just on his head. No one can. And without it happening, entrenchment of FPTP, boundary changes, VoterID, will increasingly ensure that Labour (and all and every alternative) will stay away from government... not just at the UK level, but at all levels in England.
So it’s the left’s fault for forcing starmer to change the rules because they won’t do what they’re told by their PLP betters?
The leadership has set about removing the left from any positions of prominence within the party, and in response the left should show gratitude. I think it's a policy of Stockholm Syndrome.
The sound of one hand clapping. All “sides” are complicit.
Ah yes, 'there are some very fine people on both sides'
There is nothing that's happening now that even remotely resembles the vilification and active undermining of the previous leader, despite Starmer conducting the kind of 'purge' Corbyn was continually accused of but didn't actually do.
It's ridiculous to try and claim equivalency.
Starmer pretended to be a unity candidate, hiding the fact he was up to his eyeballs in highly partisan blairite cash, then kicked numerous people out of the party on utterly spurious grounds, while rewarding others who've done worse with plum jobs - but we should just ignore all that in the name of unity. Hmm ok
The crime of the previous leader was not agreeing with every part of a report from an organisation that is 'colluding in the denial of institutional racism' BTW.
