Forum menu
Offering up opinions that conflict with your own narrow world view?
Who said that I disagree with the "opinions" they publish? They get their clicks by feeding into and amplifying differences within the Labour party. Easy way to keep their readership clicking and liking. But they help reinforce the wider public's view of Labour, and the left more generally. It's a business model that works, good luck to them. But they are part of the problem Labour faces.
Who said that I disagree with the “opinions” they publish?
How do you know what they are, if you don't read them?
Well… duh!
Kelvin you said taxation was spent. It's not. The government spends before it taxes. That's how it works.
Perhaps they should instead report on wheat harvests and tractor production.
Russian agriculture joke...
The farmer says “Oh Commissar, the wheat crop is so bountiful that stacked on top of each other they reach all the way to Heaven.” The commissar stopped and said “Have you forgotten your communist teachings!? There is no God!” To which the farmer said “Exactly, that’s why there’s no wheat.”
Boom, and quite possibly, Tish...
Because I doubt most people even know or care about him being Jewish.
I don't think he himself cared or knew he was Jewish until he realised he could use it for political ends to help his billionaire friends.
I’m not watching the Novaramedia piece, because I think they are part of the problem
Missed this. From someone who presents himself as an objective, intelligent observer of politics that's a pretty silly position to have. I occasionally read Daily Mail pieces and before the paywall was a keen Times reader (it's still the best Sunday paper IMO). If you're looking for objective unbiased journalism you won't find it.
Theres a Tory MP presently on Five Live. On answering the question as to why the Torys have done so well in the 'Red Wall' seats, he said that it was because... "the labour party had set fire to itself"
I used to read/watch Novaramedia content a lot. I don't click/share/engage with it anymore.
I have no problem with their "bias", it was a very good fit for me. I'm part of the target audience. None of that negates my current opinion about how they work, and why I don't want to be one of their eager, or even occasional, consumers from here on. They thrive on "Labour eats itself" content, it drives clicks and engagements very successfully.
Agree about the Sunday Times. They are smart enough to have a very wide range of columnist, and reasonably (compared to much of the other print press) straight forward news coverage.
I have no problem with their “bias”, it was a very good fit for me. I’m part of the target audience. None of that negates my current opinion about how they work, and why I don’t want to be one of their eager, or even occasional, consumers from here on. They thrive on “Labour eats itself” content, it drives clicks and engagements very successfully.
I'm still struggling with your notion that Novaramedia are 'part of the problem'. Do you not think that being critical of how the party is run, and what direction it is taking, is essential in the debate about how wider politics is being formed and enacted? There have always been internal divisions within Labour; it's a very 'broad church'. But the left of the party have been systematically hounded and demonised by what is actually a small minority of rich, powerful right-wing figures who seem to want the Labour party to be the vehicle for their own political ambitions. Labour are increasingly not seen as the party for the 'people', and the real problem, which you either cannot see of choose to ignore, is that further movement in this direction will ultimately render the party utterly irrelevant (as per the LibDems), and cause it's political destruction. Yet Novaramedia are 'part of the problem'?
“the labour party had set fire to itself”
He's right isn't he? How else do you describe smearing your own leader and most of the membership as racists with the same sentiments as the nazis?
I don’t think he himself cared or knew he was Jewish until he realised he could use it for political ends to help his billionaire friends.
Given that his grandfather founded a synagogue and his dad edited the Jewish Chronicle, I think your character assassination may a bit wide of the mark there.
Those jews eh, what are they like.
The little scamps. God only knows what they get up to that we don't know about
Makes you think....
I don’t think he himself cared or knew he was Jewish until he realised he could use it for political ends to help his billionaire friends.
Wow. That feeds right into actual anti-Semitism. To suggest a Jewish person could use their 'Jewishness' for political and financial gain? I think you need to seriously rethink what you just said there. Yes, he is as guilty as any of weaponising anti-Semitism against Corbyn and the left, but that's an entirely separate matter, and has everything to do with his increasingly right wing leanings, not because he's Jewish himself.
I think you need to apologise, and at least explain yourself there, dazh.
I think your character assassination may a bit wide of the mark there.
I think I'm fairly safe in my assessment of his character.
He's not very good at flower arranging, is he?
And back onto Starmer - hopefully the Queens speech will give labour something to oppose and get their teeth into!
Unfortunately the gammony bastards will probably love the thought of voter I/d's and reigning in the judiciary so it'll be a hard sell 😕
I think I’m fairly safe in my assessment of his character.
That's fine; he is truly vile, no question. But why did you feel the need to comment on his cultural heritage in the way you did?
Because he's worse than Hitler! That's why!
hopefully the Queens speech will give labour something to oppose and get their teeth into!
It appears to be an open goal really, Voter ID, unpopular protest reform, judiciary reform, and no mention of social care reform, which given the calamity our appalling provision proved to be during COVID seems to be a bit more pressing!
hopefully the Queens speech will give labour something to oppose and get their teeth into!
Optimistic. That's assuming Labour actually had any teeth...
Because he’s worse than Hitler! That’s why!
Who, Dazh? That's a bit strong.
You don't know him. Beneath that cuddly vegan, tree-hugging, anarchist, environmentalist exterior lurks the dark soul of a monster
Who, Dazh? That’s a bit strong.
It's true. When I saw binners in the pub a couple of weeks back I spent the whole time quoting passages from Mein Kampf at him. Sadly I failed to convince him.
But seriously; you've made quite an offensive comment there, yet seem completely unapologetic. You may well not care at all, but I, and I'd imagine others, do. I'd really like you to explain your comment.
How else do you describe smearing your own leader and most of the membership as racists with the same sentiments as the nazis?
You can't keep blaming Labour's poor electorial showing on sabotage from the Blairite right. It's been well over a year since they have stopped trying to cripple Labour's electorial chances.
Other factors must explain why there was a ten percent drop in Labour support in Hartlepool compared to 2019.
A lack of vision perhaps. An inability to understand what they would be voting for maybe. And to be perfectly honest I'll be ****ed if I know what the people who voted Labour in Hartlepool last Thursday were voting for - an MP who on their behalf would go to Westminster and abstain from voting?
On reflection perhaps that's what happened in Hartlepool last Thursday - many Labour voters took a leaf out of Keir Starmer's book and decided to show their opposition to the Tories by abstaining from voting?
Plus of course imposing a short list of one wasn't exactly a genius strategy, especially when that one person had already lost a seat a year earlier for being pro-Remain in a pro-Leave constituency. Perhaps that's what they meant by Labour setting themselves on fire.
I reckon accusations of anti-Semitism against Corbyn must have been very low in people's minds last Thursday.
You can’t keep blaming Labour’s poor electorial showing on sabotage from the Blairite right.
Don't worry it's mostly tongue in cheek. I just feel duty bound to remind everyone of what a despicable and self-defeating strategy it was, and how it exposes the right wing as the real 'enemy within' rather than those on the left. I think you're right in that AS wasn't high on the agenda in these elections, but that being said, the damage to labour's brand inflicted by it is still there and will be for a very long time.
As for what happened in Hartlepool, I think it's a straightforward lesson that when politicians lose sight of what they're supposed to be doing, the electorate will eventually cotton on and kick them out. Labour have been taking working class votes for granted for 20 years in places like Hartlepool. All it needed was someone on the other side to do something they liked. Boris did that with brexit, and that's why they voted tory. As I've said before, it's not rocket science.
Plus of course imposing a short list of one wasn’t exactly a genius strategy
Some-one certainly needs to having a chat with whoever decided that Labour's candidate would be a remainer-supporting doctor who was on an NHS panel who decided to close Hartlepool's maternity ward. I think the local paper ran a headline that said something along the lines of "Labour's candidate is the reason no-one will have Hartlepool on their birth certificate"
And I think the local Labour council have been fighting like rats in sack for years now with expulsions and resignations...One was recently up on assualt charges and another tweeted that being in Labour wasn't good for your mental health.
Plus of course imposing a short list of one wasn’t exactly a genius strategy, especially when that one person had already lost a seat a year earlier for being pro-Remain in a pro-Leave constituency. Perhaps that’s what they meant by Labour setting themselves on fire.
Shooting themselves in the foot head more like. I don’t think anyone will be arguing that his selection made sense to anyone on the outside of the decision making. Baffling.
When I saw binners in the pub a couple of weeks back I spent the whole time quoting passages from Mein Kampf at him. Sadly I failed to convince him.
You must have fitted in very well with the racist regulars that frequent the pubs that Binners chooses to go to.
It appears to be an open goal really, Voter ID, unpopular protest reform, judiciary reform, and no mention of social care reform, which given the calamity our appalling provision proved to be during COVID seems to be a bit more pressing!
Sure. You can point all this out, but even when the popularity of the Furlough scheme finishes, when the vaccine bounce ends, when they will inevitably start gerrymandering the election boundaries, there will probably still be enough people who will not give a monkey's about the above, or either think this is still the conservative party of old, and vote for them.
You can’t keep blaming Labour’s poor electorial showing on sabotage from the Blairite right. It’s been well over a year since they have stopped trying to cripple Labour’s electorial chances.
The sabotage started in 2010 with the election of the wrong Milliband, and continued in 2015 with Corbyn. At some point you are going to have to take some of the responsibility for this Government with a large majority.
Ten of those years under the aforementioned leaders, though they are not totally at fault as they weren't in Government.Labour have been taking working class votes for granted for 20 years in places like Hartlepool.
I suppose the inevitable answer from you will be the way to win back these voters who have just voted for an increasingly right-wing authoritarian regime is to take the Labour party further left?
And back onto Starmer – hopefully the Queens speech will give labour something to oppose and get their teeth into!
You would think so, but Starmer needs to grow a spine. If you are going to sack people, do it properly. Labour can do without the luxury left getting suckered by vote leave divide and conquer tactics and do their dirty work for them.
At some point you are going to have to take some of the responsibility for this Government with a large majority.
Is that directed at me?
Can I expect a call from Andrew Marr sometime soon asking me to come to the studio to explain myself?
The Independent: Keir Starmer’s leadership ratings now worse than Jeremy Corbyn’s, polls show.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-polls-corbyn-labour-b1845588.html
I can't deny it I'm starting to feel guilty, Starmer's leadership ratings are now worse than Corbyn's, I've clearly got a lot to answer for.
Luckily only the Independent appears to have reported this pretty earth-shattering revelation, no one else seems to feel that it's newsworthy. So I'll just try to keep my head down for a while.
Legislation to enable an early election to be brought forward this parliamentary session as well. Labour don’t have the time to wait and see how it works out for Starmer, and nor do they have someone suitable ready to replace him imminently. Checkmate.
Labour don’t have the time to wait and see how it works out for Starmer? He's been leader for over a year and he's now apparently even less popular than Corbyn was. How many years do they need to be sure?
Johnson is outmanoeuvring Labour on many fronts. The proposed animal welfare legislation is clearly designed to broaden Tory appeal to bearded vegan cyclists.
Labour needs to sort out its act out sharpish
He's been there a year but it's not been a normal year and the Parliamentary process has been far from normal.
Well as long as the excuses keep rolling in I guess it's okay..... it's Corbyn's fault, it's Angela Rayner's fault, it's Covid's fault, it's Boris Johnson's fault.
When they run out of excuses they can have a rethink.
Events in the ME are leading to calls to 'boycot Labour' so the pressure will be on in ethnically diverse constituencies (Rushanara Ali eg made a statement on Palestine) whereas they got royally booted out of ethnically uniform Hartlepool. He is not dealing with AC in the party and does seem to be eviscerating the traditional LP supporters in an attempt to gain votes. Whose bright idea was that?
Labour needs to sort out its act out sharpish
It won't, obviously. Thats simply not the way the labour party conducts its affairs. When the Tory's move, its quick, brutal and ruthless. Labour will dither and delay, as always, and indulge in endless naval-gazing, blame-storming and factional warfare. All while the Tory's laugh in grateful disbelief from the sidelines
Grandad should have been history after one election defeat, but was allowed to declare it a victory instead. Can you imagine the Tory party allowing an election-loser to continue in post as their poll rating plummeted further and further? Not a chance! It'll be the same now.
No wonder Boris is looking so pleased with himself. I bet that pre-vaccine he couldn't see himself being safe as houses like this. I bet he never thought he'd be listening to another queens speech, riding high in the polls.
The one thing I think we can absolutely guarantee is that whatever the Labour Party decide to do, it'll be the wrong move, and make things even worse.
It's getting to the point where the party just needs putting out of its misery. At a national level it's a basket case that looks totally incapable of modernisation or reform. A 20th century anachronism, adrift in the 21st, with no idea what its meant to stand for
The only question it presently seems to be asking itself is who to blame. The voters? Corbyn? Blair? Ed Milliband? Peter Mandleson seems a popular bond villain.
How about 'all the above'?
I despair
And when it does decide what it stands for that needs to be something that people actually want.
They seem quite happy with Johnson and the tories at the moment.
Labour needs to be a coalition of two different political groupings, but there have always been significant numbers in both those groupings that would rather force out the other group than get into government and make (compromised) changes for the better for the people of the UK. The noise made by those who are more focused on battles between those groupings than beating the Tories is only getting louder and louder, and the voters aren't coming back while that is the case.
The one thing I think we can absolutely guarantee is that whatever the Labour Party decide to do, it’ll be the wrong move, and make things even worse.
Well you've certainly changed your tune binners. I thought Keir Starmer was the Messiah who would save Labour?
The people who are crippling Labour are the "centrists" who are determined to stop Labour offering a radical alternative to the Tories.
They did everything they could to sabotage Labour's 2017 manifesto and will continue to fight any attempt to offer a radical alternative, whoever the leader is.
This plays right into the Tories hand. The Tories can propose radical policies because they are Tories. The animal welfare legislation is actually quite a good example of this.
The "centrists" in the Labour Party would never have agreed to policies as far reaching and as radical as is being proposed, they are simply scared of such radical policies.
Boris Johnson however can get away with it because he's a Tory. Being both radical and Tory is apparently just fine.
Labour don’t have the time to wait and see how it works out for Starmer?
I don't think swapping leaders is going to anything for Labour's fortunes. Johnson is (at the moment at least) v popular. I just need to go to the vaccine centre of down to the waiting room, and I can hear how people are connecting Johnson's govt directly with the vaccine rollout. They don't care about Labour. And this where the local MP Afzal Khan is hugely locally popular, and our surgery extension was opened by Gerald Kaufman, the previous MP. This is Labour heartland...Still Johnson is popular.
Johnson's luck won't last forever, politics isn't like that.
Apparently the message from last Thursday's elections was that many people saw the Tories as the party of change.
You have to ask yourself why.
Johnson’s luck won’t last forever, politics isn’t like that.
This is absolutely true. Politics isn't like that.
But does it matter though?
Thatcher won 3 elections for the Tories. Eventually her luck ran out and they sacked her.
Does it matter though?
Well you’ve certainly changed your tune binners. I thought Keir Starmer was the Messiah who would save Labour?
I've never said anything of the sort. What I've said (more in hope than anything) is that I thought he might lend some gravitas, professionalism and credibility to the party after 5 years of almost comedic amateurism and ineptitude
They did everything they could to sabotage Labour’s 2017 manifesto and will continue to fight any attempt to offer a radical alternative, whoever the leader is.
And there you go. The reason labour is ****ed. Still banging on about some ridiculous tinfoil-helmetted conspiracy theory from 4 years ago. It seems more people are interested in endlessly feeding some mythical betrayal than taking on Boris and co...
The labour party really is well and truly screwed
You have to ask yourself why.
Because that's how the Tories win elections, they're very good at being "establishment" but at the same time "radical" it's the reason they're one of the most successful political parties ever, Lots of wildly different groups of folk think the Tories stand for them.
Still banging on about some ridiculous tinfoil-helmetted conspiracy theory from 4 years ago.
Oh I'm sorry binners it's just a "conspiracy theory" right-wing MPs didn't do everything possible to undermine the party leader? They didn't stage coordinated front bench resignations, brief against him, denounce him as a racist, etc etc?
In fact they were four-square behind him and took every opportunity to sing the praises of his radical vision. Gawd bless em all.
Anyone who can't see that is obviously some sort of conspiracy nut.
It’s getting to the point where the party just needs putting out of its misery. At a national level it’s a basket case that looks totally incapable of modernisation or reform. A 20th century anachronism, adrift in the 21st, with no idea what its meant to stand for
The only question it presently seems to be asking itself is who to blame. The voters? Corbyn? Blair? Ed Milliband? Peter Mandleson seems a popular bond villain.
How about ‘all the above’?
Corbyn attempted the necessary reform. The wealthy right of the party deliberately sabotaged him at every turn. The Blairites, Mandelson, etc. So blame them.
And there you go. The reason labour is ****ed. Still banging on about some ridiculous tinfoil-helmetted conspiracy theory from 4 years ago. It seems more people are interested in endlessly feeding some mythical betrayal than taking on Boris and co…
But it's fact. Not 'mythical'. You have it in black and white, from Mandelson. Ask your friend Dazh why Mandelson is so bent on screwing over Labour voters; he might have an answer. The real reason Labour is ****ed is because the wealthy elite of the party want it as their own political vehicle, to serve their own ends. Hence the failed neoliberal project. Trouble is, that's now a busted flush and they are offering no effective opposition to the tories. These are the people you seem to support. That's where the problem lies; I know you want to blame Corbyn/the left/anyone else etc, but the real reason is right there, staring you in the face. And you know it. That elite don't want change; this is the situation that suits them best. They get to stay wealthy, to have others subservient to them in order to do their bidding. To continue to enjoy privilege, to holiday in Tuscany, to send their kids to posh schools, to live in nice areas without any 'undesirables' spoiling the view. Nah; the status quo suits them down to the ground, they don't want anyone upsetting the applecart.
The labour party really is well and truly screwed
This, I think we can all agree upon. Unity for once.
It turns out that the Independent are in on this ridiculous tinfoil-helmetted conspiracy theory...
You know where your elaborate conspiracy theories fall down, don't you? And its all pretty bloody obvious...
Ask yourself... if you were a member of some shadowy rich and influential cabal, hell bent on having governments bend to your will, and sabotaging democracy for your own evil ends, why on earth would you bother with the labour party? What on earth would you hope to gain by that?
You'd have to be a pretty shit bond villain to think that your ends are best served by HM opposition at present or any time soon.
Why even consider those serial losers when you've got the Tory Party in power that have spent the last 12 months dishing out billions and billions in taxpayers money to their mates without even attempting to hide it? Boris might as well have stuck a billboard on the side of number 10 saying GOVERNMENT FOR HIRE! ENQUIRE WITHIN! BRING YOUR CHEQUE BOOK
They're literally begging for your ill-gotten gains. They've even now launder it for you. And if you've got the cash, nothing is now off limits. Just leave a list of your demands with a blank cheque and we'll sort out the rest
You know where your elaborate conspiracy theories fall down, don’t you?
I notice you dont actually counter the statement but just rant on and on producing some childish images to prove that you are far above those six formers.
I would say its amazing that you actually try and argue the right wing of the labour party didnt do their best to undermine Corbyn but then again I recall you actually believe a public inquiry would be effective.
And its all pretty bloody obvious…
This should be worth a giggle and yes it fails on the obvious basis. Leaving aside the inane attempt to smear the person you are arguing with you dont even manage to put forward a coherent argument. I mean even a secondary school kid could see the obvious gain in nobbling the opposing team.
Ask yourself… if you were a member of some shadowy rich and influential cabal, hell bent on having governments bend to your will, and sabotaging democracy for your own evil ends, why on earth would you bother with the labour party? What on earth would you hope to gain by that?
You don't really understand how politics works, do you? Not that that should stop you commenting on here; your posts do at least serve as light hearted relief from what is a truly depressing reality. But just so you know; we're laughing AT you, not WITH you.
The real reason Labour is **** is because the wealthy elite of the party want it as their own political vehicle, to serve their own ends. Hence the failed neoliberal project.
GMB bosses Paul Kenny and Tim Roache split earnings of £263,000
TUC chief Frances O’Grady earns £152,365.
Stephen Cotton, head of the International Transport Workers Federation took home £149,005
Cathy Warwick was paid £147,139. head of Royal College of Midwives
RMT union general Sec. Mick Cash paid £137,349.
The wealthy right of the party deliberately sabotaged him at every turn. The Blairites, Mandelson, etc. So blame them.
Maybe so. But Corbyn and some of his closet aids were "wealthy" as well, and, before they were in position, sabotaged Labour and its previous leaders "at every turn".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Murray_(trade_unionist)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seumas_Milne
GMB bosses Paul Kenny and Tim Roache split earnings of £263,000
TUC chief Frances O’Grady earns £152,365.
Stephen Cotton, head of the International Transport Workers Federation took home £149,005
Cathy Warwick was paid £147,139. head of Royal College of Midwives
RMT union general Sec. Mick Cash paid £137,349.
Far too easy:
I really can't be bothered to list any more. That'll do you for starters though. Quite telling that you're attacking union leaders, who if they were in similar level positions in corporate jobs, would probably be earning multiples of those figures. So; what was your point again?
Maybe so. But Corbyn and some of his closet aids were “wealthy” as well, and, before they were in position, sabotaged Labour and its previous leaders “at every turn”.
Absolutely desperate. Is that really the best you can come up with?
The people who are crippling Labour are the “centrists” who are determined to stop Labour offering a radical alternative to the Tories.
Do the voters actually want a radical alternative to the tories. What if people are happy with the tories? (which they seem to have been for best part of 70 years)
You need to at least try and provide what people want rather than just assume they all want what you do.
So; what was your point again?
Oh, I see, you meant a different set of wealthy elites, So your problem isn't so much that many people in the Labour party are wealthy beyond the dreams of most folk, but that the wealthy elites you don't like, are wealthier than another group of very wealthy people.
Glad we've established that.
Oh, I see, you meant a different set of wealthy elites, sorry, as you were.
Do you really believe that those union leaders, or Corbyn, Murray and Milne, are even in the same league as the trio I mentioned, in terms of absolute wealth and further political influence? Nowhere near. Again; absolute desperation from the right.
So your problem isn’t so much that many people in the Labour party are wealthy beyond the dreams of most folk, but that the wealthy elites you don’t like, are wealthier than another group of very wealthy people.
It's how those people use that wealth. And beyond mere wealth, how influential they are. And it's laughable that you attempted to compare the salaries of those union leaders, with the wealth owned by the likes of Blair, Mandelson, Hodge etc. You really have no idea of what I'm talking about, have you? That's pretty obvious.
Ask yourself… if you were a member of some shadowy rich and influential cabal, hell bent on having governments bend to your will, and sabotaging democracy for your own evil ends, why on earth would you bother with the labour party
What the hell are you on about binners? Have you lost the plot? Who's talking about "some shadowy rich and influential cabal"?
I'm talking about right-wing Labour politicians such as Mandelson :
Although presumably the Guardian, a newspaper that you apparently greatly admire, was lying. All part of some great conspiracy.
Or perhaps Peter Mandelson was lying?
Or perhaps both the Guardian and Peter Mandelson were lying?
Maybe it's a very big conspiracy.
The point is that when Blair was in the left were attacking him, voting against him (see Corbyn for big offender) but then when Corbyn was in the right were attacking him.
They need to stop attacking each other and just get on with it. A party is always a compromise and it ultimately needs to work that out quickly and quietly.
I thought he might lend some gravitas, professionalism and credibility to the party
How's it going?
before they were in position, sabotaged Labour and its previous leaders “at every turn”.
Did they? Its rather telling if you look at those times Corbyn voted against the Labour government which way the tories were voting.
And it’s laughable that you attempted to compare the salaries of those union leaders, with the wealth owned by the likes of Blair, Mandelson, Hodge etc
Er, I think you'll find it was you who's compared their wealth, not me. I've just pointed out that there are very wealthy people in the Labour party who have influence.
RMT union general Sec. Mick Cash paid £137,349.
He's no longer the general secretary and the RMT isn't affiliated to the Labour Party.
Worse still, those salaries are from 2017 (the most up to date I could find)
Did they?
Well, one of them was a core member of another party, so yes, he absolutely was not working to help Labour and its leaders. As for Corbyn himself, he's always openly rebelled against the party leadership for his long political career, with a short break while he was leader.
I'm not denying that a big part of Labour's problem is people described here as "the right" and "centrists" fighting against those being called "the left" and undermining Labour's reputation in the process... it's the idea that the battle is one sided, and legitimate on one side but not the other, that I'm questioning. The fight for ideas and control in the party will never end... that's a given, but it's the endless focus on it, rather than outwardly working together to get into government and provide the UK with a (yes, compromised) executive that works better for us than a succession of Conservative ones that is letting people (especially those that are far from "wealthy") down.
'Give them what they want' was apparently a frequently used phrase in the Blair household. Not unlike having focus groups of first-time Tory voters to influence policy (defence, identity, nationhood, blah blah). What's needed are challenges to the ineptitude and corruption of the current government and a vision of a more egalitarian and progressive society but it won't happen with Starmer. Hence the flagging vote due to people not knowing what Labour stand for.
The real reason Labour is **** is because the wealthy elite of the party want it as their own political vehicle, to serve their own ends.
I think the reason Labour is ****ed is because it's actually a coalition of very different groups with only some common ground. So people want different things. And this is because FPTP demands it.
Spot on molgrips.
Sadly, theres an awful lot of truth in this
Covid-19 is probably a Chinese-Tory-Democrat conspiracy.
I'm off to Tesco's to get some bacon foil.
‘Give them what they want’ was apparently a frequently used phrase in the Blair household.
Which is sort of what democracy is. Offering people what they don't want is not really every going to work well outside of a dictatorship is it?
I can't see a Labour dictatorship anytime soon so they need to realise what Blair did.
I think the reason Labour is **** is because it’s actually a coalition of very different groups with only some common ground. So people want different things. And this is because FPTP demands it.
EDIT: It would be interesting to see, even with FPTP, what a division of the established parties' factions would be if they followed their own ideology and created their own manifestos for the electorate to decide upon. For example, lets say that the current LP split into 4 other parties - Left, Centre left, centre right, right - (not picking sides here or lines etc. and nor are my descriptions of the divisions meant to be an accurate portrayal of the LP in reality), would the pledges/manifestos/ideas actually have some influence on voters. We could, theoretical I know but I'm just hypothesising) see a parliament of MPs voted in from a wide range of different parties - perhaps even drawing away some of the current Tory voters who maybe would align more to one of the new parties as they only vote CP as its the 'closest' to best fit if not the best fit.
I would much rather see PR as the electoral method I will add, but I do not expect to see it in my lifetime.
Worse still, those salaries are from 2017
It's not a surprise that the labour party and wider movement has been used as a gravy train by all and sundry. That's why Corbyn et al were trying to turn it into a grassroots based activist party with full demcratic control of policy and governance. It's what I've been banging on about for god knows how long. It wasn't perfect, but under Corbyn the party was making progress to reorganise itself from the bottom up so that it could proplerly represent the interests of normal people and communities. That's why there was such a strong reaction from the right and those who previously had an iron grip on policy and strategy so they could exercise it in the interests of their corporate sponsors.
It’s getting to the point where the party just needs putting out of its misery. At a national level it’s a basket case that looks totally incapable of modernisation or reform. A 20th century anachronism, adrift in the 21st, with no idea what its meant to stand for
I've only been saying this for months. Glad you finally agree though. What should replace it though? If you ask me what we need is a broad-based progressive movement united around electoral reform, combating climate change, and massive devolution of power to regions/cities/communities. If there's one thing the labour party has proved it's that trying to hold together a hierarchical top-down coalition of diverse interests and then trying to keep everyone happy is impossible. The answer is to unite around some core issues, and allow communities/towns/cities/regions to do their own thing where they differ.
molgrips
Full MemberI think the reason Labour is **** is because it’s actually a coalition of very different groups with only some common ground. So people want different things. And this is because FPTP demands it.
Yup, as ever FPTP causes huge problems.
But it's not unique to Labour of course- the Tories are also extremely diverse. It's just that they are far better at working together/going along with the current group so they can have a go later. I think probably this is mostly due to one group being cynical, self-interested and dishonest and the other being idealistic and each is more convinced that they're right and that it's important that their version be heard (and, worst of all, that they can sell their idea on merit and that people it helps will vote for it)
I think the reason Labour is **** is because it’s actually a coalition of very different groups with only some common ground. So people want different things. And this is because FPTP demands it.
I concur. But getting rid of the wealthy elite right wingers, would at least allow for a more diverse range of voices to be heard. Because it's those who control the party, who dictate the direction the party has been going in for the last 20 years or more. For Labour to become relevant once more, it needs to become a party that truly represents working people, not a vehicle for neoliberal elitist ambition. By getting rid of the elite right, you'd perhaps lose some 'funding' (read: paying for political influence) from the likes of Lord Sainsburys, Alan Sugar, Richard Branson etc, but then closer affiliation with trade unions could fill at least part of that void, and give greater voice to the underrepresented. The cycle of wealth and privilege that rules out political system must be broken, if there is to be real social progression. And that can't happen the way things are.
What about getting rid of the wealthy elite left wingers? This expulsion and control obsession by people on both ‘sides’ of the party ignores the reality that while we still have FPTP a coalition of these differing views and interests are essential, because voters that could be won over by either ‘side’ are required to win the wide range of seats required to be in government. Without the Left, in key seats many voters will either stay at home or split the vote by giving their vote to other parties that can not win their seat. And if Labour is to be only of and for the Left, then there are many other seats they need that they can never hope to win.
What about
Whattaboutwhattaboutwhattabout.
It's the right wingers who've done the damage. Under their control, the party cannot be truly democratic, or representative of working people. And will therefore never offer any real alternative to the tories. Ergo, it's the right that must either step aside and abide by the wishes of the majority of the members (which they refused to do under Corbyn, who was, let's not forget, democratically elected by those members), or leave. Or failing that be forced out. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
And if Labour is to be only of and for the Left, then there are many seats they can never hope to win.
As it is, it's only representing center-right elite interests. And tell me; how well is that panning out?
You could probably benefit from listening to (apparent right wing) comedian Geoff Norcott interviewed yesterday by Nihal on Five Live
He's working class, bought up on a council estate in London who's dad was a shop steward but votes conservative. He says that like himself a lot of people from his background don't vote labour because they're sick of being patronised by lefties telling them that they apparently need liberating from their capitalist oppressors.
Most people don't feel like that at all, and so aren't responsive to ever-so-earnest Corbynite style hectoring, labelling them as victims. Much to the obvious annoyance of those on the left.
You can talk about revolution all you like. People just aren't buying it.