Forum menu
Anyone care to explain the difference?
calling you a 6th former is (slightly) funnier than calling you a slightly chubby smug middle class comedian...is my guess.
allowing our opponents to paint all those who want a system reconfigured to work for all as anti-capitalist and against our current way of life
It seems to be our 'comrades' doing that most vociferously. On this thread we can see numerous examples.
It seems to be our ‘comrades’ doing that most vociferously.
It comes back to the careerist thing. The labour membership (ie 'the left') pose far more of a direct threat to those running the party and the power and influence they enjoy than the tories do. It's why I keep saying Starmer et al have no interest in government, they're happy where they are, and to stay there they need to focus attention on their own members rather than the tories.
They have bugger all power or influence.
But he still has a point, there are those in the Labour movement (or increasingly those that have returned to hectoring from outside it) still wanting to overturn capitalism, rather than accepting that all (real) politics is now differing meldings of capitalism and socialism, never a pure version of either
But aren't those people a very small minority, in reality? Reducing the argument to only talk about 'loony' lefties' just drags it down to playground level, and ignores so much more nuance and depth of debate and ideas. Corbyn, for example, was nowhere near the 'extremist' position some commentators and media barons etc want to portray him as, the reality is he's far more 'centrist' in terms of economic theory. This is certainly the perspective that many commentators outside the UK had. And ultimately, should Labour only be about the interests of a small elite minority within the party, or represent those for any many members as possible? That the current leadership seems intent on only indulging the former, explains who the party is where it is. Perhaps Labour has become to much of a 'broad church'; this has happened because of that swing towards the right, with its laissez-faire neoliberal economic ideology, which has led us to the disaster we see now. So maybe it's for the elite right of the party, to give way to the greater majority of the membership? Because this standoff isn't helping anyone, not least those who most need protecting from the brutality of the tory regime.
David Mitchell, whilst not saying anything original at all, is an extremely privileged white male, and as such, clearly has little real understanding or empathy of and with the majority of working people in the UK. That's not to say his views should be dismissed, but he enjoys the privilege to have his voice heard, when millions don't. So perhaps he should step aside and let someone else speak; he has had more than his fair share of his 15 minutes.
But aren’t those people a very small minority, in reality?
Absolutely they are.
Corbyn, for example, was nowhere near the ‘extremist’ position...
I agree.
Perhaps Labour has become to much of a ‘broad church’
Not even close. UK politics, like USA politics, requires a broad coalition within a party (and its supporters and voters) (or in the UK between parties), to get to form a government. The Democrats managed to hold it together long enough to win in the USA, and to their credit have mostly continued to hold it together to start implementing very broadranging reforms and direction shifts over there (which we are already starting to feel the benefit of in the rest of the world). Labour needs to either work cross party, or widen the idea of who and what the party is, if intends to ever hold high office again. Clive Lewis is one of a few Labour MPs pushing this point hard, because he long ago woke up to the fact that it needs to happen right now... there is no point waiting.
And yet according to binners I’m a 6th form utopian idealogue and David Mitchell is a sensible pragmatist? Anyone care to explain the difference?
Binners simply described it as a "great article", I didn't read it but I assume the principal reason it is a great article is that it was published in the Observer.
For binners the Guardian/Observer provides him with the gospel truth ..... a gospel which he can believe in.
Even when it's in an article written by an unqualified unelected comedian who has made a very comfortable living spouting nonsense whilst attempting to convince gullible punters that it's true.
Edit: For the record I am a huge fan of David Mitchell. I particularly liked his story concerning how his shoes were accidentally sold whilst he was trying a pair of cowboy boots in a charity shop. A hilarious story, even if it wasn't true.
I didn’t read it
Did you read Binners' post? He cut the article down to its essence to save you the bother of heading over to the Guardian website. You could address the point he* was trying to raise, rather than attacking the man*.
[ * either Binners or Mitchell, you choose ]
Did you read Binners’ post?
I always read binners posts. They are generally the only ones which are actually interesting.
I would go as far as to say that binners writes "great posts"
Absolutely they are.
So why has that tiny elite group got so much power and influence, within the party and beyond?
I agree.
As I've said before; you'd be an idiot not to.
Not even close. UK politics, like USA politics, requires a broad coalition within a party (and its supporters and voters) (or in the UK between parties), to get to form a government.
Erm, the current Labour party has members from the centre-right neoliberals, all the way to the 'hard' left Marxists, Trots, even some communists. I'd say that's the exact definition of a 'broad church'. The Labour party even has a good number of quite right wing members and voters; many of those 'red wall' voters espouse some pretty right-wing and xenophobic views, hence Starmer's need to appeal to those as well, according to some on here at least. In my view, that's perhaps too broad a church; isn't it better to convince people it's stupid to be racist, rather than pandering to them? Many of those 'racists' are just ignorant and scared, yet I don't see much if any effort from Labour's elite, to actually address those issues. So; Starmer needs to speak to those type of people, yet some here think he needs to cut away from the 'left'. What's it to be?
It's interesting to note that this crises hasn't triggered coordinated Labour Front Bench resignations, or even any threat of Front Bench resignations.
Quite how Starmer has managed to reach this level of unpopularity even without Labour MPs queuing up to stab him in the back I honestly don't know.
Nor do I understand why Labour MPs are so content with a leader who is clearly a loser.
It would appear that for the Blairite cult ideological purity is more important than winning elections. They simply can't admit that they are wrong and that the British people need to be offered a radical alternative to the Tories.
They seem to be determined to make the Labour Party as irrelevant as Nick Clegg made the LibDems when he decided to make them almost indistinguishable from the Tories.
Sir Keir beats Mr Johnson for honesty (by 29 per cent to 22) but the Tory leader is ahead for patriotism (60 versus 38), for having lots of personality (61 to 16). Mr Johnson is seen as more out of touch (by 56 to 41 per cent).
Patriotic personality (doesn’t matter if they are dishonest and out of touch). Depressing and unsurprising. Starmer is too dull. That really matters. No idea who can convince voters that Labour are patriotic when even Starmer’s meek efforts result in so many ‘flag shagging’ jokes.
It should be a piece of piss for a Labour Party with a sense of community to be seen as patriotic.
isn’t it better to convince people it’s stupid to be racist
Better, yes
Possible, no
Racist people are not rational
Patriotic personality (doesn’t matter if they are dishonest and out of touch).
Yep, I have been saying that for years. That is the audience.
Ignore the audience, get nowhere as proven by Starmer.
No idea who can convince voters that Labour are patriotic when even Starmer’s meek efforts result in so many ‘flag shagging’ jokes.
Because using the flag as an ornament and prop makes you patriotic? Odd really I thought it was just the opposite that its something to be respected not used as camouflage whilst flogging the country off to the lowest bidder who also donated to the tory party.
Perhaps instead of being a shite copy of the tory plastic patriotism he could display an actual vision himself of what it means to be patriotic.
I don't know why this was so hard to fathom when half of the forum were bringing down Corbyn and suggesting Starmer as this amazing speculative leader of a Government of national unity.
What leadership skills did you think he actually possessed? What charisma? What ideology? You thought he would be a good manager?
Joined the Communist and Marxist bashing club? How did that work out when your leader has nothing on the table and he's plummeting without all the shit that was thrown at Corbyn.
Time and time again the approach that would be served up by liberals is caught out with the misunderstanding that this will somehow push against the Tories.
It won't.
Also Stateside - what's brewing in the background if Biden doesn't deliver? (Democrats are rowing back on all sorts of stuff.) - it will be an opening for Trump voters. Let down again.
I See my stupid MP(Brendan Clarke-Smith) is going about the knee being like a salute to Hitler. Thing is, that is all he needs to do to stay elected.
Never mind fixing the community.
They simply can’t admit that they are wrong and that the British people need to be offered a radical alternative to the Tories.
And if the British people don't want a radical alternative to the Tories ?
And if the British people don’t want a radical alternative to the Tories ?
Don't call it radical just better. Who doesn't want better? The means can be radical.
And if the British people don’t want a radical alternative to the Tories ?
Is that some sort of trick question?
The British people need to feel that they are being offered something which is significantly different to the Tories otherwise they will simply vote for the real thing.
Have the lessons really not been learnt from Nick Clegg's political suicide strategy?
The British people need to feel that they want something which is significantly different to the Tories
There's ya problem. The British people (or enough of them), think the Tories are what they need. You can offer something radically different all you like, but if enough people want what the Tories are offering, they'll win, simple as.
The British people need to feel that they are being offered something which is significantly different to the Tories otherwise they will simply vote for the real thing.
And if the British people want to vote for the "real thing"?
At least IHN gets it....
And if the British people want to vote for the “real thing”?
Are you really asking that question?
I would have thought the answer was obvious....... they vote Tory.
It is not the Labour Party's role to offer fundamentally the same policies but delivered by different people.
Politics is not a team game where the only goal is to win.
The Tories are now offering at least the appearance of giving a large proportion of the electorate what they want (the older part that actually goes out and votes anyway), which seems to be fiscally liberal and socially conservative, and genuinely patriotic(/nationalist).
Labour's constant attempts to criticise the Tories without offering significantly different policies or vision just comes across as hollow and unconvincing and rather petty.
Politics is not a team game where the only goal is to win.
This. I don't know how many times I've said the exact same thing and I'm genuinely baffled why people can't understand this simple point. If the voters want the tories, which I would despute given only 28% of the electorate voted for them in 2019, then they are within their rights to vote for them. Or they could vote for something different, and if that is preferable then labour and/or some other parties would be elected. The singular purpose of the labour party is to give voters that choice. By imitating the tories they massively undermine democracy, and as we've seen over the past few years, that results in all sorts of unintended consequences. If people feel like they have no voice, then they will turn to populists and snake oil merchants, and that's the underlying driver of everything that's going on today.
You don't have to become "tory-lite" to offer... patriotic personality. It is not an inherently Conservative Party idea. I can see why people can think that way though, because Tony Blair was the last Labour leader to successfully offer the public a strong vision of Britain "on the up", paired with the charisma needed to carry people with him. I never voted Labour under Blair, and I don't want the Labour party offering the public what he offered way back then in terms of policies, but can see that without addressing the public's vision of Labour as not being patriotic, and without finding a leader who can charm the voters, the Conservatives are literally the party of power for the foreseeable. And if you're thinking "that's alright then", than quite frankly, shame on you, because they will ruin the lives of millions while they are there, and feel safe in their position there.
but can see that without addressing the public’s vision of Labour as not being patriotic
The problem with Starmer is he is allowing the tories to define patriotism in a very narrow and, in my opinion, profoundly unpatriotic way. Just dressing yourself up in a flag isnt patriotism its a cynical disregard for it. Neither is waffling on about greatness without doing anything useful to create it.
Politics is not a team game where the only goal is to win.
Yes it is, the party that wins is the party in power. With Labour as permanent opposition what are they actually achieving in comparison to what they could achieve if they won/were in power?
It is not the Labour Party’s role to offer fundamentally the same policies but delivered by different people.
It is their role to offer policies that people actually want. People want Tory policies so they need to appeal to those people rather than offering "radical" policies that the likes of you or me would want.
One day you will come to the realisation that you live in a Tory country. The only blip in the last 40+ years has been when Blair did exactly what you are suggesting shouldn't be done.
One day you will come to the realisation that you live in a Tory country.
Let me repeat, 28% of the electorate voted tory in 2019. The tories and their billionaire paymasters want everyone to think that we live in a tory country, but it's a lie, and you appear to have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
Let me repeat, 28% of the electorate voted tory in 2019. The tories and their billionaire paymasters want everyone to think that we live in a tory country, but it’s a lie, and you appear to have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.
Of the people interested enough to vote, enough voted Tory (for most of the last 40 years) to have a Tory majority. That makes it a Tory country whether you like it or not.
The people that don't bother to vote are happy enough with whoever is in (and that is mostly Tory so Tory by default)
You blame the billionaire paymasters if that make you feel better.
it's a country with a tory government. 'Winning the argument' is an irrelevance if we can't win an election.
Surely, Labour need to rebrand 'patriotism' (call it something like 'nationhood' instead, for a start), and concentrate on all those aspects of what makes modern Britain 'great', such as our arts, music, sports, top class engineering, architecture, science, medicine etc. And quietly just have loads of examples of PoC/'immigrants' etc there, without mentioning them in regard to their race and culture. Normalise difference, don't highlight it. Don't keep pandering to the lowest common denominator. Understand what people's fears are really about, and address those, rather than using the Margaret Hodge approach of prioritising housing for 'indigenous' people. Actually, just get rid of Margaret Hodge, would be a good start. But really, what Labour needs to do is cut out the rancid core of neoliberals at the top of the pile, because they're just tory lites, and you won't achieve anything different with them. Because they don't actually believe in change, nor do they really want it. Because the status quo suits them. Change has to happen from the membership uniting and dismantling the current power structures, before any positive progress can be made at all. So; a programme of mass unionisation (cos if there's one thing the elite are really scared of, it's workers unions), use the current laws regarding unions to their full extent, before the tories take even those away. The only way the UK will be able to reverse the slide towards total elite rule, will be if workers gain solidarity. Bring back the 70s!
The people that don’t bother to vote are happy enough with whoever is in
No the people who don't vote don't see any point in it because no one listens to them or is interested in them. That's another thing the tories and their backers encourage. Apathy and hopelessness are as important to the tories 'success' as hatred and selfishness. Labour can't do much about the latter, but they have a massive opportunity to take advantage of the former. Remember that old labour theme tune of 'Things can only get better'? Well Starmer's version is 'Lets hope things get better', and that's why he's plummeting in the polls.
rancid core of neoliberals at the top of the pile,
1. A thing's core is in its middle. Not at the top.
2. What's a neoliberal? Are there telltale signs? (Surely I'm not one?)
Surely, Labour need to rebrand ‘patriotism’ (call it something like ‘nationhood’ instead, for a start), and concentrate on all those aspects of what makes modern Britain ‘great’, such as our arts, music, sports, top class engineering, architecture, science, medicine etc.
That was Blair's approach.
What’s a neoliberal?
Pick a definition and run with it...
It is their role to offer policies that people actually want. People want Tory policies so they need to appeal to those people rather than offering “radical” policies that the likes of you or me would want.
People who want Tory policies will vote Tory. There is no point whatsoever in developing a facsimile when people can have the real thing.
Last time I checked, Starmer was elected as "leader" rather than "follower" so perhaps he could try it some time. Otherwise, as the proverb goes, if no-one is following him then he's just going for a walk.
No the people who don’t vote don’t see any point in it because no one listens to them or is interested in them.
You don't know that anymore than I know they don't vote because they are happy with how it is. Let's split it down the middle and add half of them to the tory voters. Gives us that tory country that you seem blinkered about...
100% daz. It's only 28%! With some balls Labour could win an election. Corbyn came close.
Nationalising railways, water etc is patriotic. Investing in infrastructure is patriotic. Creaming off money from PPE deals and sticking it in tax havens is not patriotic.
I think Labour has to tread v carefully when it takes on patriotism. Corbyn suffered with this, Here's his take on it;
"Patriotism is about supporting each other, not attacking somebody else. It’s about loving your country enough to make it a place where nobody is homeless or hungry, held back or left behind."
Which is a perfectly decent view on Patriotism,...which did **** all to help the fact that press had him down as a Terrorist Sympathiser, and it was was one of problems that voters after the 2019 election said about him. "that he's not patriotic enough". Look at the Tories, they have flags all over the bloody place, every press release, in every room they Zoom from, it's home turf for them and they wear it with ease . For Labour it always looks as if they're embarrassed by the whole thing, and do it because they think they have to and if they're not careful, it comes across as nationalistic, (because they aren't as practiced at it as the Tories.)
Currently, patriotism is being defined as "Flag shagging" and full on Jingoism, and Labour shouldn't go anywhere near it They can't compete in this game with the Tories or whatever grift that Nigel is standing in front of, and they really shouldn't try.
Why waste words congratulating johnson on marrying - again?
Cut out the niceties; start putting the boot in.
Currently, patriotism is being defined as.....
Right there is the problem. The Tories are allowed to set the agenda, define values, call all the shots.
Labour simply reacts and takes defensive positions.
And then people wonder why Labour is so uninspiring to voters.
I don't need right-wingers to define patriotism for me. If it's "currently" defined as sticking a flag in front of your house whilst not giving a flying **** about your fellow countrymen then it is time to have it redefined to its correct meaning.
But of course, as is often the case, the Labour Party is too scared and too timid to make the distinction between patriotism and chauvinism.
They need to start playing the Tories at their own game - become the party of the underdog.
These Tories got elected on the back a Brexit - a result that was partly caused due to people's anger with the system. Labour need to harness that anger with the system & define a new agenda away from the Tories get them on the backfoot for once.
However, until the press are back onside with Labour that will never happen.
This page gives an idea of what they are up against.
Right there is the problem. The Tories are allowed to set the agenda, define values, call all the shots.
the Tories can't "set the agenda", any more than Labour can. People do it, In the Blair years, Patriotism was "Cool Britannia" Blair wore it easily and could get away with rolling his sleeves up, be seen having a pint with Noel Gallagher or Chris Evans, the then Tory leadership couldn't have got away with that, as their leaders were Michael Howard and Ian Duncan Smith, it would've looked totally phoney. Now It's Flag waving - Going alone in the big bad world - We got the vaccine first Flag shagging, and it's the turn of Johnson to be able to ride that wave better than Starmer can.
It's naive to think that Starmer (or for that matter Johnson) are in any way in control of it, all they can do is just react to it.
the Tories can’t “set the agenda”, any more than Labour can. People do it
At the risk of Binners posting a picture of someone wearing a foil helmet, I don’t think this is true. The media, and more to the point the people who own the media set the agenda. The Corbyn era proved that. We had 4 years of hysterical nonsense which no one asked for or was interested in, and et all we got was lies, smears, gossip and rumour.
Boris is a much more interesting and newsworthy target than Corbyn, with a much more colourful past but he’s let off the hook every time, and we all know why.
tbf the nedia did go after Johnson on his flat donation scandal
and plenty of people still love him because he tells them what they want to hear
Johnson gets away with all sorts of shit because of his ‘Boris’ cartoon persona of a honey monster on acid he’s carefully cultivated over decades, that the reality TV watching idiots lap up
“What’s he done now? He’s been shagging another one half his age, got her up the duff and taken a hundred thousand quid bung off a Russian oligarch? Oh he’s a card isn’t he, that Boris?”
Whereas Corbyns persona of a particularly petty local council health and safety inspector, who’s just been licking piss off a thistle is unlikely to elicit the reaction
“What’s he done now? Had his photo taken with a suicide bomber then proposed making steak illegal? He’s a lad isn’t he, that Jezza?”
Whereas Corbyns persona of a particularly petty local council health and safety inspector, who’s just been licking piss off a thistle is unlikely to elicit the reaction
Is that really the choice binners, Johnson or Corbyn?
Or are you just determined to talk about anyone but Starmer on a thread about Starmer.
Starmer has a similar public image problem, though obviously not anywhere near as bad as Steptoe of the Allotment.
He comes across as a provincial photocopier sales rep telling you about the latest development in printer toner cartridges at a regional office supplies conference.
Both massively fail the ‘could you see yourself having a pint with them?’ Test that for some totally inexplicable and unfathomable reason voters seem to want
plenty of people still love him because he tells them what they want to hear
I haven't seen much evidence to suggest that plenty of people love Johnson.
What I have seen is that for a significant minority his is, by a large margin, the preferred choice.
I prefer diarrhea to vomiting by a large margin. However it doesn't mean that I love diarrhea.
He comes across as a provincial photocopier sales rep telling you about the latest development in printer toner cartridges at a regional office supplies conference.
To you maybe. To me he looks and sounds like a lawyer, albeit one who's been told to say certain things by focus groups. Perhaps they think they need focus groups because of people spewing hyperbole about him on the internet.
I dunno why you keep trashing the people who would be able to get rid of Tories if only people didn't keep trashing them.
Starmer has a similar public image problem, though obviously not anywhere near as bad as Steptoe of the Allotment.
And yet if you are to believe opinion polls binners, which you have very keenly quoted in the pass, Starmer is now as unpopular as Corbyn was. What is his secret if it isn't a "public image problem"?
What makes him as unpopular as a local council health inspector who in his spare time works as provincial photocopier sales rep when he's not the Steptoe of the Allotment?
Both massively fail the ‘could you see yourself having a pint with them?’
What professional people do like to have a pint with binners?
Obviously not health and safety inspectors or photocopier sales reps, especially if they have an allotment.
EDIT : Or anyone who drinks down the Rose and Crown.
It doesn’t really matter, does it?
The Hallucinogenic honey monster is busy using the festival of Engerland flag-waving and BLM booing that is the Euros to pick a fight with the EU, tear up the very agreement he negotiated, signed and championed and unilaterally override the NI protocols.
The Daily Mail will probably spaff itself into a coma when he does, Farages Twitter will go into meltdown and the white van driving populace will raise their pint glasses around the Weatherspoons of the nation (if they’ve got enough staff to serve them) as he starts a trade war with the EU and the riots erupt in Belfast with Union jacks literally all over the place
Yay for Engerlish nationalism, which is apparently what the majority of voters in this septic isle now want, no matter who the leader of the Labour Party is
How utterly depressing
U OK?
Maybe sit yourself down and have a nice pint?
And peruse the comment pages of the Guardian?
That'll make you feel a whole lot better.
I’ve done both Ernie. It’s not working.
I’m hoping Springwatch might help
Desperate times, my friend. Desperate times
I haven’t seen much evidence to suggest that plenty of people love Johnson.
You really need to widen your social circles.
Starmer has a similar public image problem, though obviously not anywhere near as bad as Steptoe of the Allotment.
And look what an easy ride Starmer has been given.
Just think no Hodge or Jess stabbing you in the front or Mandelson publically swiping you at every opportunity. Austin and his Tory letters support act. Tom Watson spouting contradictory rubbish every few days.
My god.
You really need to widen your social circles.
LOL! I really really don't!
If your social circles include plenty of people who love Johnson then I would suggest you perhaps try moving in different social circles?
@rone see also newspapers constantly calling him a racist, communist, terrorist sympathiser.
Even now with these woeful poll numbers and election results I don't see much of a push for a new leader.
You really need to widen your social circles.
I'm also ok with not knowing loads of people who love a lying, immoral, corrupt, narcissistic serial philanderer ta.
Both massively fail the ‘could you see yourself having a pint with them?’
Nah, I hear he's fine to have a pint with, or was anyway. From friends who are lawyers admittedly but it seems likely to be the case. Be hard to have had his career without being able to rub along with folks. What that's got to do with becoming PM I'm not sure, thinking of May, Brown, Major, Thatcher I dunno, Sturgeon etc.
What that’s got to do with becoming PM I’m not sure
I think the original "can you see yourself having a pint with *insert name*?" was used as a template in an attempt to gauge whether *insert name* could be seen as a man of the people.
I don't think participating in a nice drink with fellow lawyers counts.
Even now with these woeful poll numbers and election results I don’t see much of a push for a new leader.
You need to look to the people who really know about such things...
The bookies.
They were advertising odds this morning, so they’re gearing up. The present favourite (3/1) isn’t currently a Labour Westminster MP. Though god only knows why he’d want it at the moment.
I’m sure it’ll all really go off when the Tory’s win the Batley and Spen by-election in a couple of weeks
On a different thread a few months ago, someone had a pop at me for saying that I was embarrassed by the fact that I now had to drive a van due to having no work as a musician. Binners post above about white van man would be the main reason. To clarify, not all of us are racist football hooligans....some of us even have a university education and vote Labour/Green Party.
As for Kier Starmer.....I genuinely have no idea how he's expected to play it against the right wing papers (the majority of all of them!) and the current flag shagging populist Boris juggernaut....it's so depressing to think it.....but I reckon I'm as likely as him to be the next PM ffs. His best hope is that Boris gets bored and ****s off, although he'd almost certainly lose to Gove too.
We're in for another decade of this current style of government imo, it makes me look back enviously at the 'Call me Dave' era 😒
You need to look to the people who really know about such things…
The bookies.
Yeah but it's not the role of bookies to push for a new Labour Party leader.
Grum's point remains....even now with these woeful poll numbers and election results I don’t see much of a push for a new leader.
Why is that?
Why are people who were so keen to organise coordinated resignations when Corbyn was leader so reluctant to replace Starmer?
Tom ... apologies.
It’s probably a bit outdated now with so many much more diverse people driving vans for a living. So I’m sorry. No offence intended.
I’m referring in general to the sun-reading, EU hating, St. George’s flag waving fraternity who seem to presently be the custodians of the direction of this country.
As for the rest of your post I think you’re bang on. Boris is about to start a trade war with the EU which will likely ignite a return to violence in Ireland and further stoke the BLM-booing culture war, and the flag-wavers will cheer him on.
It’s depressing beyond words. God only knows where this experiment in nationalist populism is taking us but I suspect it’s going to get an awful lot worse before it’s run it’s course
I would suggest you perhaps try moving in different social circles?
Or move down there?
it makes me look back enviously at the ‘Call me Dave’ era
When people (yeah, including me) were complaining about the coalition government, we really weren’t property considering how much worse things could get. Progress you see… we think it’s ongoing, that it just has periods of slowing down and speeding up… but history tells us otherwise… decades of progress can be washed away when the nationalism becomes mainstream.
I was going to say "because nobody wants the job and nobody knows who to replace him with". But then that turned out to be true with Corbyn as well.
Johnson gets away with all sorts of shit because of his ‘Boris’ cartoon persona of a honey monster on acid
And who created and promoted that persona?
Well, the Telegraph helped, but mostly he did it himself on every platform he appeared on, with every speech, every TV appearance, every article… he’s a performance artist. But there’s a whole thread about him… can we do it there? Safe to say that Starmer isn’t in the same league when it comes to the performance stuff… but who is, and wants to use that to become a Labour PM? No one.
I think everyone here knows the reason why the Parliamentary Labour Party was so keen to replace Corbyn but are currently extremely reluctant to replace Starmer.
We all go along with this nonsense that the issue is and was about the popularity of the Labour Leader. It was never about that, and it still isn't about that now.
It always was, and still is now, about policy.
Even before Corbyn was elected Labour Leader Tony Blair, the arch-blairite Labour politician, was making it crystal clear that he didn't want to see a left-wing Labour government.
In fact he could not have made it clearer :
For Tony Blair his wish came true and we now have a Tory government.
No apology needed binners.....you seem like one of lifes good guys mate, and tbf the first time I've ever properly encountered a 'Sun reading, St George's flag waving EU hater' is in my current employment....sometimes a feel bad at not confronting it, but for little over minimum wage and a desire to make it as pain free as possible, I just cba!
It does however illustrate a potential problem with current Labour. I'm as guilty as you and countless other of being a long standing Labour voter and making the 'White van man racist flag shagger' comments.....Boris and the Tories in general have won them over. Lots of the folk that I work with have literally zero education/zero belief in themselves/zero aspirations for what we might consider a better life.....they're convinced that Boris and Nigel are just like them....it's terrifying really!
And who created and promoted that persona?
It’s his life’s work. He’s been tweaking the act over decades. He’s the political equivalent of Alan Partridge
If only he put 10% of the effort into being PM as he did preening his persona
Unfortunately it appears there are plenty of takers for the whole concocted charade.
As one of his aides when he was London Mayor said:
“Everyone loves Boris....
apart from those who know him”
Sun reading, St George’s flag waving EU hater’
I know most punters on stw fondly hang on to this stereotype as it's obviously warmly reassuring to dismiss Brexiteers as stupid and uneducated.
And whilst I don't want to rob anyone of the sense of superiority which it undoubtedly provides them with I reckon it distorts the truth so much as to render it meaningless.
The London borough next to mine is Sutton. Leafy Sutton is one of the wealthiest boroughs in London, it forms part of that affluent doughnut ring which encompasses Inner London.
Sutton has some of the highest house prices and levels of academic achievement in London.
It is a Liberal Democrat stronghold, it is middle-class and liberal. For over 30 uninterrupted years the LibDems have controlled the council. And until the great LibDem meltdown of 2010 they held the parliamentary seat.
In the 2016 EU referendum Sutton, this affluent middle-class well-educated liberal borough, voted to leave the EU by a greater margin than the national average.
I know simple is easy but it is not always correct.
On the other hand I'm a C2 who left school with only CSEs and hates the EU. So I guess I fit the stereotype nicely. Although I don't drive a white van, currently it's a BMW estate with a roof rack.
Pfft! Typical! Bloody BMW drivers!
I know most punters on stw fondly hang on to this stereotype as it’s obviously warmly reassuring to dismiss Brexiteers as stupid and uneducated.
I think there was data to back this up though wasn't there? Also being educated doesn't exempt you from political naivety and racism.
I live in a wealthy village in the New Forest. Retired doctors, senior people in companies etc,. stupid they are not. Being in or out of the EU would make very little difference to their lives, they can't even have an issue with immigration and any impact whatsoever to them.
This is a ~65% Brexit and ~65% Tory voting area.
When I talked to them about Brexit, most were in favour but not a single one of them can actually give any sort of reason other than the typical bullshit the likes of Farage puts out.
Same goes for why they vote Tory, nothing to really back it up.
Does that make them stupid? (I know a few of them are a bit racist!)
On the other hand I’m a C2 who left school with only CSEs and hates the EU. So I guess I fit the stereotype nicely.
Yep, stupid racist.
Obviously not in all cases - but it's not so much as these people are stupid and dumb (hell, my local barista who makes incredible coffee and food - always on the wrong side of history, anti-vax, Brexit, anti-Corbyn, pro distorted free market, foreigners taking all the money etc.) - it's that they are really pissed and frustrated and their anger lands in the wrong place, cunningly guided by the newspapers.
Remind them the institutions of the last 40 years have robbed them and future generations. The ones they voted for.
The one problem now is you have the likes of Julia Spewer dividing these people up now into a fight for their freedoms against the elite and the msm. When in reality they are do the job of the actual elite by blaming foreigners and scroungers.
The more you carve society up the harder it is to heal.
If division delivers the 25% of the voting age public that you need into the booths to put a tick against your candidates… then why try and do away with it? Of course there are politicians who genuinely want to heal divisions… but are they winners? I consider Starmer one of those who want to being people back together… but no, not a winner.
Yep, it's no good dismissing people who have not developed class consciousness with white van man ad hominems. The flag waving and imagined communities may well express a misplaced desire for solidarity and mutual support. The task is to swivel that anger against migrants and the EU towards bosses, rent-seekers and a Tory government who are really the ones who are screwing them over. If your arguments and evidence are any good you don't need to storm off in impotent outrage. Stay for the extra pint, cajole and persuade.