Forum menu
More “the US are the secret masters of Israel, Israel is just an American colony” conspiracy theory nonsense.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but my comment was merely an 'assumption' that the well-documented Israeli nuclear weapons are ultimately controlled by the USA. Which really does not want a nuclear war kicking off anywhere. Given that there are some absolute extremist nut cases in the current Israeli government, who would be only too happy to turn Gaza to glass, it's really not much of a stretch to assume the US does have some control over the use of those weapons. I very much doubt that Israel would have any nuclear weapons without US approval; bearing in mind the US doesn't like the fact that Iran, ****stan and North Korea have such weapons. The USA has enormous influence over Israel, this cannot be denied. I could well be wrong re the nukes, but none of us really know the truth. Trying to dismiss my idea as 'conspiracy theory nonsense' only shows up your own partisanship here. What's your view of Kier Starmer standing in support of a nation whose leaders want to 'burn Gaza'?
[Mod] Everyone, please keep this on topic. Thanks.
Yet nothing has actually changed.
Indeed. Yesterday I googled "expelled from the Labour Party for anti-semitism", I found a multitude of examples including of course Jews who have been expelled for anti-semitism.
I then googled "expelled from the Labour Party for islamophobia" I couldn't find a single example.
Good opening statement from Starmer on Gaza at PMQs today.
All following questions on NHS waiting lists and spending on mental health services, especially for young people.
George Monbiot articulating what Labour can't - in the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/22/britain-money-bank-bailouts-state-failure
The most robust argument that should be made, now.
^ Good arcticle.
A crushing defeat for Labour in Newham yesterday:
The crisis which the ongoing genocide in Gaza has caused Starmer now goes beyond the sole issue of calling for a ceasefire, the whole moral integrity of the Labour Party is now being questioned.
The by-election material shown in the Express article also refers to social and financial justice. Starmer is losing grip of both the agenda and the narrative.
In the last two to three weeks politics local to me changed very dramatically with two completely new organisations springing up.
Gaza might have been the catalyst but one is now looking way beyond that with the aim of forming a grand alliance across the community to oust shadow minister Steve Reed and replace him with someone who can be held accountable.
I did suspect that other similar and under reported local developments might be occurring across the country, events in Newham yesterday suggests this could be the case.
Blimey, now they've dropped the green agenda I'm struggling to think of what they stand for apart from fiscal conservatism, more privatizing of the NHS and making the desert boom.
They're totally boxed in with their utterly ridiculous fiscal rules. Reeves is behaving like a clown over all of this.
Fiscal rules are a total work fiction, self -imposed and without reasoning. Further to that - damaging, if you want a functioning state.
They banged on about 28bn for Green stuff (not enough) and non-dom pay-fors'. And now it's coming home to roost.
The country is in a dire situation and the next government needs to damn well start admitting that we can do it and afford it.
We can't afford not to.
If they did - they might even get their beloved growth that both parties mince on about.
It's so easy to take apart the mess that are the Tories but the hope that Labour should be - must also be challenged.
Anyone know what Reeves means by a 'fiscal rule'? Never saw it in a textbook or tutorial. I can only imagine it means she can't be challenged.
The original interpretation was
1) never *borrow for day to day spending. (Whatever that means because day to day things need money. Doh.)
2nd: can *borrow to invest.
*( the caveat that borrowing is simply matched debt/gilt issuance to what the government has already spent. I.e Government spends £100 which happens first, Government then issues £100 of gilts. Government borrowing is a throw back to gold standard, and is not borrowing as we would understand it. The Government can't borrow what it issues or has already issued.)
Most state spending is simply investment anyway as the return comes via the money circulation through the economy.
Either way - Rach believes wrongly the economy can expand without spending, to generate the tax to then invest in public services.
She has it totally back to front. Government has to spend first to make the investment so that the non-government sector can grow.
I also think 'fiscal rules' will become a vague moving target to justify not doing things.
If the voters hold labour accountable for the actions of israel, letting in the tories, the world really has gone mad……
Think a lot on this thread deserve Sunak et al for another 5 years, their hatred of the current labour leader outweighs anything the tories have done.
If the voters hold labour accountable for the actions of israel
This is something which worries you?
It's all a bit confusing.......
Labour denies abandoning £28bn green pledge
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-67528894
Labour ‘unlikely’ to ever meet £28bn a year green pledge
Still, I guess it doesn't really matter how confusing it all is as voters will just vote for whatever Reeves and Starmer eventually decide.
That's how it's supposed to work, no?
This is something which worries you?
I would be worried if i was held accountable for something i had no responsibility, or even an ability to have any influence, reality is Netanyahu and Israel probably have no idea who Starmer is, let alone why him calling for a ceasefire would mean anything to them.
Think a lot on this thread deserve Sunak et al for another 5 years,
Dunno about anyone else but you deserve a Braverman or Farage led quasi-fascist government with a massive majority in five years time after Labour get unceremoniously kicked to the kerb because they did nothing to improve people's lives and made no to attempt to fix the broken unrepresentative system that allows governments like this into power.
It's not a football match. The most important thing isn't that one team or another win.
Dunno about anyone else but you deserve a Braverman or Farage led quasi-fascist government with a massive majority in five years time after Labour get unceremoniously kicked to the kerb because they did nothing to improve people’s lives and made no to attempt to fix the broken unrepresentative system that allows governments like this into power.
You're right, seems pointless to vote labour in, you've already worked out what they'll do over a 5 year term, might as well stick with Sunak, Cameron et al and just slowly go from centre right to further right
The Isreal/Gaza thing is a complete red herring, as far as this thread is concerned. It’s the same people attacking Labour as it has been for years now.
And if it gets as far as unseating Labour MPs, well that’s great if it means another independent voice, or someone with policies closer to their own in parliament… if it just means more Tory MPs… well… frustrating as that is… you have to let them get on with it. That’s UK politics. A divided opposition letting the Tories rule on minority support is one of the “joys” of our demographics and voting system. Where the Tories will take us next if given a chance… place your bets, if you can afford that gamble… many can not.
reality is Netanyahu and Israel probably have no idea who Starmer is, let alone why him calling for a ceasefire would mean anything to them.
So you don't agree at all with Starmer when he claims that it is absolutely critical that Labour doesn't call for a ceasefire?
I can't believe the level of criticism that Starmer gets on this thread, and from all sides.
Btw I bet they also had no idea who the previous leader of the Labour Party was.
You’re right, seems pointless to vote labour in, you’ve already worked out what they’ll do over a 5 year term, might as well stick with Sunak, Cameron et al and just slowly go from centre right to further right
I haven't worked anything out. I've just listened to what they've said they're going to do (or more likely not do).
The UK is going to go further right if people insist on only voting for centre right parties (like Labour) or far right parties (like the Tories and Reform).
The Isreal/Gaza thing is a complete red herring, as far as this thread is concerned.
You do realise that a third of Labour MPs went against Starmer and vote for a ceasefire, don't you?
I doubt any of them post on this thread, or bother to read it.
I am not sure why you want to dismiss the greatest rebellion and crises under Starmer's leadership as a "red herring".
And who has just brought up this red herring onto this thread?
The UK is going to go further right if people insist on only voting for centre right parties (like Labour) or far right parties (like the Tories and Reform).
Ah right, so really it's just centre right for labour, and now, centre right for the tories with the recent changes, does seem pointless even voting if the outcome is all but assured either way.
You do realise that a third of Labour MPs went against Starmer and vote for a ceasefire, don’t you?
I’ve listened to some of those MPs, and find myself agreeing with them. People with integrity, still working to defeat the Tories and wanting to start the long difficult process of changing the course the country is on.
But this thread is just the same few people attacking Starmer and others in Labour over and over again… nothing new to add, just looking for an angle to attack Labour on. Not improve the governance of this country. Not improve the policies of the Labour Party. Not improve the lives of anyone in the UK currently struggling day to day, and in the longterm. Just moan about those who are the only ones who could be in a position to make a difference soon… labelling them as failures before they’ve had the chance of a single day in office as a UK government (something that still might not ever happen, if enough people can be convinced not to give them a chance).
But this thread is just the same few people attacking Starmer and others in Labour over and over again… nothing new to add, just looking for an angle to attack Labour on.
They do have an argument though, with labour being centre right now, would them coming into power benefit the country, or just cause more upheaval with more of the same?
I'm also starting to think that Starmer needs to have a Bono moment, and maybe do a press conference calling for a ceasefire whilst clicking his fingers every few moments, what the middle east desperately need is more white saviours from around the world to come and fix their woes, from a safe distance of course.
ernielynchFull Member
A crushing defeat for Labour in Newham yesterday:
The crisis which the ongoing genocide in Gaza has caused Starmer now goes beyond the sole issue of calling for a ceasefire, the whole moral integrity of the Labour Party is now being questioned.
The by-election material shown in the Express article also refers to social and financial justice. Starmer is losing grip of both the agenda and the narrative.
In the last two to three weeks politics local to me changed very dramatically with two completely new organisations springing up.
What happened in Newham is a repeat of what happened in Tower Hamlets, multiple times. A large swathe of the local electorate becoming disillusioned and feeling unrepresented by Labour, so exercising their democratic rights and showing their dissatisfaction at the ballot box. Many people in those boroughs have expressed deep concern about the situation in Gaza, as they did with the illegal wars waged by Tony Blair, yet their concerns have clearly fallen on deaf ears. Well, if you want people's votes, it's a good idea not to ignore them, or dismiss them as unimportant. See; one Gordon Brown.
The Labour Party is meant to stand for things like peace, equality and freedom. It has within its own charter, a stated commitment to fight racism. But the truth is, that this is clearly not much of a concern for Starmer and the leadership; they have taken the brown vote for granted, and surprise surprise it's now come back to bite them on the arse. But they haven't learned their lesson; they were humiliated by George Galloway, who manipulated local anger toward Blair's illegal wars (which many people in Tower Hamlets, myself included, saw as part of a wider move to demonise Islam and create a new enemy for right-wing populism to rail against), and lost not once, but twice, to Luthfur Rahman. If you can lose twice to someone of the utter ineptitude as Luthfur Rahman, then you must surely realise you are doing something wrong?
My personal fear is that if Labour were somehow to lose the next GE, that the right of the party will scapegoat such minority communities, to deflect from their own failings. Which will further embolden the far right even more. I really do hope the tories are ousted as soon as possible, but I'm not going to hold my breath that much, if anything, will change. I just hope I, and millions of others, are wrong. So far, signs aren't very good in that respect.
But this thread is just the same few people attacking Starmer and others in Labour over and over again…
And it's the same few people moaning over and over and over again about how don't like other people's comments. If you disagree just make your point and move on, what is the point of constantly complaining when it obviously isn't going to make any difference?
You obviously believe that Starmer is above criticism, others don't necessarily agree, and some people on stw won't vote the same as you, shocking as that might be. Deal with it 💡
Let's tidy up at least one bit of nonsense, it's Starmer who's been attacking Labour.
Or, you know, vote for someone who will actually do what you ask.
Crazy, I know, would never work.
Apart from in Scotland of course but as we all know that doesn't count.
Do you, genuinely, think that a Labour led Government, under Starmer’s leadership, would be worse than five more years of this?
It would be better, not even worse. The problem people have, me included, is that Starmer is failng to actually be Labour which is very disappointing as he could have stayed with his more Labour like pledges and still be in the position he is now but has thrown that away to try and get those tory votes.
The only hope is that his strategy gets him the tory votes in the key seats while not losing Labour votes in other seats which enables him to win the election and then have a bit of a change of heart and rather than do worse things than promised (tory party) do better things than promised. Does anyone really care (not pedantic political nerds) what was promised if any changes not mentioned in manifesto are generally seen as for the better
The argument about Starmer only being slightly better than the Tories is not good enough.
He's allowing the country-wide drift to the right, and potentially encouraging even more deprivation over the long term by giving a signal to the Tories that their economic model (and other nasty concepts) is the correct one.
If you believe there is a benefit to current Labour replacing current Tory - yep fine. But if you detest what the Tories have done then following the path of Conservatism just to get elected is utterly doomed because the policies are terrible, and you will come full circle.
There are so many good arguments about fixing things that attract public support - why take his current path other than you want to encourage a conservative environment?
Centrists will never see this until it's on top of them. There is no push back from the effects of Thatchery ideas until we push back against them.
So that leaves us with the idea that once he's in power he will do some sort of left-wing gymnastics.
Why would he?
Not only this but Labour refuse to use the power of the state - because the Tories have shown them how to do things badly!
That's the current narrative, and it's shockingly inept.
The tories are worse for the country .
Labour ( in reality Starmer’s version of the Labour Party ) will be worse for me personally.
I really don’t want either.
Labour ( in reality Starmer’s version of the Labour Party ) will be worse for me personally.
From the very few things he has given any clue about what things will be worse for you personally?
what is the point of constantly complaining when it obviously isn’t going to make any difference?
I dunno. Maybe it's your idea of fun? 😁
Do you, genuinely, think that a Labour led Government, under Starmer’s leadership, would be worse than five more years of this?
But hoping that you get a reach around whilst you're getting ****ed is a shit reason to vote for someone. Why not vote for someone that isn't out to **** you in the first place?
IN Scotland ( where squirrelking is) labour or tory will make little difference. Starmer thas committed to tory spending limits so no more money for Scotland and Starmer as ruled out as too expensive numerous things the Scots government have done on their limited and basically fixed budget.
so here labour or tory will make little differnce. No return to the EU, No increase in spending and no increased democracy - the three key things to make the UK more prosperous
Also Scotland will not return very many Tory MPs if any - so not voting labour does not let tories in.
From the very few things he has given any clue about what things will be worse for you personally?
We have recently won a battle against a housing development on local green belt land.
No one wanted it except for a few corrupt councillors.
Starmer has declared war on us nimbys.
Our green spaces will be under attack.
^^^ yeah, the actual position: ...
Speeding up the planning for critically important infrastructure by updating all national policy statements – which set out what types of projects the country needs – within the first six months of a Labour government.
Fast-tracking the planning process for priority growth areas of the economy, such as battery factories, laboratories, and 5G infrastructure
ensuring local communities get something back by providing businesses and communities with a menu of potential incentives, which could include cheaper energy bills
Tackling unnecessary, egregious, and time-consuming litigation by setting clearer national guidance for developers on the engagement and consultation expected with local communities.
Strengthening public sector capacity to expedite planning decisions by raising the stamp duty surcharge on non-UK residents to appoint 300 new planning officers.
We come under Saint Helens council which is Labour controlled and has been for as long as I can remember. They have a passion for throwing up warehousing on green belt which always fails to deliver the number of promised benefits. Our local councillor is a passionate advocate for the destruction of nature.
Rawnsley in the Guardian being a being bit dim by acknowledging Labour are trapped by Tory finances but at the same time confused as to where money comes from to help fix the problem.
"Then the pressures will begin to build on Sir Keir and Ms Reeves to find the money needed to renew Britain while not ramping up taxation even higher. The ultimate success or otherwise of a Labour government will be determined above all else by whether it can deliver a more vigorous economy. You could even call it Sir Keir’s holy grail. His government will fail if the quest for growth eludes him as dismally as it has the Tories."
The pressure to 'find money. ' Totally self imposed - based on failed Tory doctrine.
So many nutty Telegraph articles going on about the cost of servicing public debt. Lmfao. The Government's very own central bank has the power to not make 'debt' as expensive. The 'BoE' - the Telegraph encouraged to increase rates!
Monetarists stuck in their own trap because of their fictional loop of how the economy works.
Greens win landslide byelection in Keir Starmer's constituency with candidate who defected from Labour
"Ms Russell increased her party's vote share in the ward by 15 points, while Labour's dropped 13 points."
That must hurt.
🇵🇸
Caught Starmer getting a quick question on CH4 news last night. He started by saying we need to be very clear with the general public and was then asked would he reverse the recent tory fossil fuel licenses and he completely avoided the question and waffled about something else until they changed to next item.
Just the sort of person we need...
Hang on... that story of Ernie's is... Green Party wins seat held by Green Party since 2014. I mean, good on them, but I'm not sure it's very telling of what's going to happen in Tory/Labour marginals up and down the country.
As for oil and gas licenses... I thought Labour had already said that any issued by the current government will be honoured, but no new ones will be issued if they get to form the next government. Missed CH4 news last night, so no idea how slippery the reply was. He does often sound overly evasive though, especially in sound bite type interviews.
EDIT: hang on... I did see CH4 news last night... I don't remember Starmer being on at all... which doesn't mean he wasn't... 😉
I’m not sure it’s very telling of what’s going to happen in Tory/Labour marginals up and down the country.
Who mentioned anything about up and down the country?
This is a landslide byelection victory in Keir Starmer’s constituency, in which the Labour vote fell by 13% and the Green vote increased by 15%. To rub salt into the wound the Green candidate was a former Labour Party member.
And to add further significance to the Green Party big increased share of the vote the previous Green councillor was a very high profile Green Party member having stood in the London Mayoral elections.
I mean good on them
Well you don't sound particularly congratulatory.
In fact I get the distinct impression that you resent me even providing a link to the story.
What news have you got concerning the Leader of the Opposition? This thread had been dormant for 4 days, has nothing been happening which is of any concern to the Leader of the Labour Party?
Well, Wednesday's PMQs and Today's Cop28 appearances are worth checking out by anyone considering who we need to have running the UK from the next General Election onwards. Not relevant to everyone here, admittedly, but it's all Starmer's going to be about for the next 12 months or so. I hope.
What news have you got concerning the Leader of the Opposition? This thread had been dormant for 4 days, has nothing been happening which is of any concern to the Leader of the Labour Party?
Hey where you been - Rachel Reeves is going to make sure communities have access to high street banks !!
I mean there's **** all to put in your account but don't worry about that.
No I didn't hear that, but I did hear that Labour lost control of Norwich council this week, which with Burnley and Oxford now makes three councils that Labour has lost control of in the last month.
Quite an achievement when you consider that there has been no nationwide local elections.
Why not make the case for whoever you think that is?
It doesn't matter who I think that is, my point is that there is more choice than just Labour or the Tories and people simply have to vote for what they want rather than what they don't.
We did up here.
So if they vote for what they don't want they might get what they want?
Reeves had her parliamentary credit card suspended so she knows all about hardship.
Local council elections are always basket cases, through defections, scandals, whatever way the wind blows, etc, they will not be a very good barometer for parliamentary elections, which tend to be a lot more black and white.
Anyway, worst case is labour have a proper blowout a la Kinnock or Corbyn at the election and we get 5 more years of the tories,
Local council elections are always basket cases, through defections, scandals, whatever way the wind blows, etc,
Ah, so it is perfectly normal for a political party to loose control of three completely unrelated local councils over a period of a month, without even any elections taking place?
Well as long as you convince yourself of that I guess there is nothing to worry about.
going by folk on here wouldn’t be a bad thing compared to the muslamist baby killing right winger that is Keir Starmer 🤣
When you stop crying with laughter over your joke which references the over 5 thousand dead children in Gaza, you might ponder that Starmer's problems reach beyond this thread. Nearly 60 Labour councillors have resigned from the Labour Party in the last month and a third of Labour MPs rebelled against a Labour three-line whip in parliament.
Many things amaze me about UK politics but No.1 is how labour consistently manage to miss open goals
Ah, so it is perfectly normal for a political party to loose control of three completely unrelated local councils over a period of a month, without even any elections taking place?
Pretty much, there are way more metrics involved with local elections than national elections, that's just a simple understanding, especially when you get defections running on populism campaigns.
When you stop crying with laughter over your joke which references the over 5 thousand dead children in Gaza, you might ponder that Starmer’s problems reach beyond this thread.
I find it distasteful that people on this thread politicise issue like the Gaza conflict to try and make out that Starmer is against it as he hates muslims or some other crap, a month ago he was pushing for pauses in the conflict to allow aid and so on in, but that was roundly ignored by politics pushing this whole political ceasefire vote in parliament, as if Netanyahu would even care, or the international community aren't already working on trying to push this through in some form, through appropriate delegates.
The only thing i laugh about on this thread is the constant bitching about Starmer at every opportunity, without any solutions being offered on how to improve the chances of beating the tories at the next election, always reminds me of times at work where you can tell the people you want to avoid by how they tend to focus on finding who to blame when something goes wrong, rather than fixing the issue.
I find it distasteful that people on this thread politicise issue like the Gaza conflict to......
You think that your joke concerning Starmer and "killing babies" was tasteful? No one mentioned the conflict in Gaza until you decided to for the purpose of a cheap shot.
I merely drew attention that the Greens did well at the expense of Labour in Starmer's own consistency yesterday. There was no mention of Palestine.
There is clearly a growing malaise within the Labour Party which you have decided to dismiss as inconsequential, presumably to suit your preferred agenda.
A third of the Parliamentary Labour Party rebelled against Starmer's three-line whip recently and approximately 60 Labour Councillors have resigned from the Labour Party resulting in Labour losing control of 3 councils, but you want to pretend that the only problem is a thread on some random cycling forum.
Btw I have no idea why you appear to believe that everyone posting on STW should be a Labour Party supporter.
[Mod] please stay on topic. Thanks.
Is Israel/Gaza off limits here? I did wonder why there wasn't a thread
Fair. People should be able to disagree without being dicks about it but this is the internet so probably a fools hope.
It got closed after some folk couldn’t play nicely.
I don't think that is strictly true. The last thread which was closed because the subjective was being discussed was perfectly polite and civilised when it was closed:
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-far-right/
It is the subject which appears to be the problem.
If that's true I guess it's a wider internet censorship issue which probably deserves its own thread.
Many things amaze me about UK politics but No.1 is how labour consistently manage to miss open goals
It's a nurtured talent to be sure. Leadership needs to realise that it is possible to be popular without being populist. Membership needs to realise that the point is not merely to critique the world, but change it.
Leadership needs to realise that it is possible to be popular without being populist
I agree.
Labour's lazy arse approach to not changing the narrative is putting them in a corner with what they can offer, and articulate they can offer.
It really isn't hard to construct an argument for state owned water is it?
People want stuff to be better but they've given up the expectation. If we can get over the 'communist' framing of any public benefit (which is frankly ridiculous and set in motion by the right) we can all benefit here (apart monetarists who will scream about private investments being needed to prop the state up - go home.)
If Starmer wanted to be a populist he'd have been banging on about ceasefires in interviews to gain the popular opinion at the time, same with sticking with the rules for finances instead of just coming out with a populist statement like 'tax the rich to pay for whatever', i'd say labour just now suffer from not following the populist route.
'not merely to critique the world, but change it' (Theses on Feuerbach!)
i’d say labour just now suffer from not following the populist route.
I'd say their primary concern is to avoid taking a strong position on anything.
You're confusing populist with popular.
The former tends to be a load of unattainable nonsense (or comes with a heavy debt), the latter is attainable.
Populism is sticking with the Tories policies and rhetoric to chase votes, being popular would be the result of actually offering a decent alternative.
They seem to be taking a strong position on continuing with the neoliberal agenda. Reeves is governed by 'rules' so austerity is not up for debate, it's what we're going to get.
If Starmer wanted to be a populist he’d have been banging on about ceasefires in interviews to gain the popular opinion at the time
You are not following events very closely.
“The levels of death and destruction over the past weeks has been intolerable. Far too many innocent Palestinians, including women and children, have been killed as part of military operations. There must be full accountability for all actions.
As fighting sadly resumes, Israel must not besiege or blockade Gaza. They must comply with international law by protecting innocent lives and civilian infrastructure like schools and hospitals." - Keir Starmer
So Starmer has shifted from 100% unqualified support for Netanyahu and his far-right government to a position where he now criticises blockades and talks about the need to comply with international law.
Although to be fair this changing position is no doubt more connected to the crisis within the Labour Party (which you claim doesn't exist) than a need to chase votes - Labour's huge lead over the Tories remains totally solid.
They seem to be taking a strong position on continuing with the neoliberal agenda.
I meant not taking a strong position on anything challenging the status quo. You're right of course, but it won't be seen that way. Overton window...
100% unqualified support for Netanyahu and his far-right government
Only in your head.
talks about the need to comply with international law
The Labour Party forced a debate in parliament to say that international law should be applied to Israeli actions. The government did not back it, and ministers spoke against it. Current UK and a series of USA governments continue to block ICC investigations where Israel is concerned.
Never had these problems with Jeremy Corbyn .... (unless you're jewish)
Didn't work out so well in UK elections though, but no point learning from the past it seems in some quarters
Edit - that's prettty mean, but you can pin a lot of the entire sihtshow from Brext -> Boris -> Liz Truss -> Rishi Sunak on Corbuyn and his inability to take a firm position on Brexit (well he e did, he supported it ), then failing to provide an electable , effective opposition. But don't let that bother you
Only in your head.
Yes of course..... Starmer has been criticising Israel from the very start of the current conflict!
That's why the Labour Party is in a crisis!!
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/sir-keir-starmer-hamas-terrorism-israel-defend-itself/
Starmer has been calling for humanitarian pauses since the start of the conflict, an actual ceasefire is almost unworkable, hence why that wording was not used for the last pause, there are a lot of countries and people pushing for further pauses, withdrawals, etc as we speak, the UK may be involved in those one way or another, one of those is the push for UN peacekeeping forces to be deployed to Gaza, and also provision of aid.
Edit – that’s prettty mean, but you can pin a lot of the entire sihtshow from Brext -> Boris -> Liz Truss -> Rishi Sunak on Corbuyn
You could but you would be wrong and, frankly, dodging that the lunatic "moderates" with their hatred of the left did far more to enable the hard right. I can see why those "moderates" are unwilling to accept the outcome of their actions though and, copying the hard right, seek to blame anyone but themselves.
As for learn from previous elections. Perhaps you could do so yourself and particularly brexit. Sadly though I expect we will just get "wahhhh Corbyn" and "who else can you vote for" as democracy gets further screwed.