I am specifically addressing El-Bent and their claim that “the illusion that most people who voted labour were on the left?”.
So do you agree with that claim of theirs.
I would say nearly all Labour voters are on the left... but most of those people would be describes as centrists and liberals by those that don't want a broad church Labour. But then I mean, to me, there is no way Starmer is a "centrist"... he absolutely is on the left. As are all the current Labour MPs.
There is no way on this good earth Starmer is on the left.
He supports a neoliberal model. But occasionally mentions the health service
If you think that Starmer is not on the left, then that is also true of many many voters who supported Labour in 2019, 2017… well all years…
This is why I hate terms like centrist, it’s sometimes a label for “not left enough”, as I “think” you are using it, and at other times in means something akin to a one nation Tory. It’s an utterly junk term and should be dumped.
It’s an utterly junk term and should be dumped.
So what do you want to use?
There did seem to be a liking for "moderate" but that is a rather leading term and pretty inaccurate in many cases.
Are you equally opposed to the use of hard left etc?
Are you equally opposed to the use of hard left etc?
Well, I’m not sure it’s helpful. Happy to use communist for people who say they are. I often used Straight Left to describe those that were part of that movement, especially when so many suddenly appeared at the heart of Labour in recent years.
The problem is, that all these ideas and identities blur. If you are happy to see someone as a liberal, and a centrist, and on the left, then a reasonable discussion can be had. If there’s to be an imaginary line between them all, then it’s just name calling, and pointless.
If one person says Starmer is a not on the left, that he is a centrist “instead”, and another is claiming that most Labour voters are on the left, then it all falls apart. Because Starmer is indeed to the left of many Labour voters.
Which left wing polices must you vocally support to not be labelled a centrist? What if there is no consensus on those policies? What marks me out as being on the left or not? What is the purity test?
Just against Labour saying they are pro-business.
To paraphrase Michael Foot, labour don't need to be pro-business, because business is perfectly capable of looking after itself. Labour need to be pro-people. That's their USP. Who votes based on whether a party will be good for their employer, especially when the vast majority are unhappy in their jobs? People will vote for labour when they have the confidence to stand up for what they believe in. At the moment they're a long way from doing that.
I would say nearly all Labour voters are on the left…
If you define leftwing as supporting collective action, collaboration and mutual aid over survival of the fittest competition, then most people in this country, bar a small number of rich people are on the left, they just don't identify themselves as such. The only reason people don't identify as being on the left is because it's seen as a political thing rather than behavioural, and it's because politiicians of all colours have proven themselves to be the opposite of what they claim to be, people don't want to be associated with politics. Instead of left vs right, it makes more sense to describe people as being pro or anti politics.
because business is perfectly capable of looking after itself
I guess you missed the whole of the last 12 months then, didn’t you.
Instead of left vs right, it makes more sense to describe people as being pro or anti politics.
Or anti left vs right. But then they’d be called a centrist, or lacking conviction.
I guess you missed the whole of the last 12 months then, didn’t you.
Sigh, more pendantry. I'm talking in general terms, in times of non-crisis. Clearly the normal rules are suspended in times like these. Or do we now have to caveat everything we say within the context of pandemic or non-pandemic?
Okay, in “normal times”, the “normal rules” set out by government, what and how it takes funds, trading arrangements with other countries, recruitment restrictions… just about everything every business does is touched, controlled, limited, supported, financed, subsidised, taxed, regulated, promoted, banned… everything business does is touched by government. And all are lives are touched, every single second of every day by those businesses. They are not just employers… they are at the heart of everything we do, from having a beer, to life saving drugs, to making bikes, to selling us toilet rolls. Everything is business, and everything in business is touched by government policy and governance.
But then they’d be called a centrist, or lacking conviction.
Nope, I know loads of people who define themselves as being anti-politics. They just get on with their lives and try to ignore it all. In fact most people I know fall into this category. They're not lacking conviction or 'centrist', and instead are almost perfect examples of what I described above as being on the 'left'. These are the people who labour could be targeting, who would stand to gain the most and support a labour party committed to the things they believe in. But labour ignores them in favour of chasing the votes of people who are diametrically opposed to them. It's bizarre.
Because Starmer is indeed to the left of many Labour voters.
Maybe although outside of his please vote for me campaign I am struggling to see when he has really given sufficient insight into his own beliefs and motivation for that judgement to be made.
Which left wing polices must you vocally support to not be labelled a centrist?
What policies do you need to support to be called hard left?
Centrist is a term used by many to describe themselves although there does seem to be an effort to replace it with "moderate" or "progressive". Both of which are heavily loaded terms hence I avoid them.
They are not just employers… they are at the heart of everything we do, from having a beer, to life saving drugs, to making bikes, to selling us toilet rolls.
Thanks for the economics lesson. I never realised economic activity outside of the government was delivered via businesses 😉 Sarcasm aside though, that's my point, business doesn't exist because of government, it exists because people naturally collaborate and trade with each other in a multitude of specialised activiities. Business will always exist irrespective of what government does because it's integral to human behaviour. Politicians don't have to 'support' business any more than it has to support breathing. In fact they don't support business, they support specific business people to gain an advantage over others, often because they stand to gain personally from it.
Business will always exist irrespective of what government does because it’s integral to human behaviour.
And everything every business does is touched by government. Everything. Most voters know this. Many, sadly, see Labour as being anti-Business… hence the attempts to explicitly claim and show otherwise by Labour now. Many fear an over-correction, understandably, but the evidence for that seems slim, so far. There will be an actual policy correction come an election though, much of the 2019 manifesto will be dumped in this area… that’s what some are against I suppose.
Politicians don’t have to ‘support’ business any more than it has to support breathing.
It’s like a right wing fantasy, where government just needs to “stay out of the way”. It’s just nonsense.
Many, sadly, see Labour as being anti-Business
and given the opinions being expressed on this thread by our more left-leaning comrades, it’s not hard to see why.
Saying that business operates irrespective of and independently of government is just brainless nonsense.
Tell that to the business owners about to go bust due to Brexit, or any of their (soon to be former) employees
I don’t think those presently in charge of the Tory party have any more understanding of, or sympathy for how businesses functions or any more idea of what it needs, so that presents an opportunity for Labour.
But apparently that’s verboten. Do anything in the interests of ‘business’ , or even engage with the subject and you’re apparently lobbying to give Jeff Bezzos a tax cut. 🙄
It’d obviously be beneficial for the Labour parties attitude to private enterprise to develop beyond the sub-6th form level nonsense of the last regime
Not all businesses should be seen in the same light. A restauranteur might have fantasies of a Jamie Oliver empire and think voting tory is part of that package but objectively they are employees of the landlord whose weight of dead wealth they have to continually supplement before anyone gets a bean.
And that’s your carefully considered, thoughtful interpretation of how business operates, is it?
Brilliant!
Binners are you pro-rentier capitalism now? I do wonder whether you’re in the wrong party. You know that thing you keep saying about dealing with the world as it is instead of how you want it to be? Well I’m not sure the Labour Party is the party you want it to be.
But apparently that’s verboten.
Once again what do you actually mean by "business". Its odd considering your rants about six formers that I have had far more challenging conversations with some six form politics or business studies students. Maybe I should try art students instead?
So what do you mean by pro-business?
How does that reflect in the obvious conflicts between a large multinational and a small supplier to said multinational?
What about how we structure income support so we arent allowing a business to externalise some of the costs onto the public purse.
Seems topical...
Starmer repeating all his points about the NHS pay and budget at PMQs... importantly linking it to trust and promises... the gap between Johnson's rhetoric and policy as regards the NHS needs hammering home.
And still, no-one cares... PMQs has become utterly irrelevant.
As I said... repeating all his points... he's made them in the more "relevant" ways as well... traditional and social media etc... this is just one more opportunity to push this point... he and the Labour front bench have used every chance they can to do so over the past few days... they have not kept it just for PMQs, have they... it's just reinforcement, and the only public opportunity to link those points directly to the PM in person, face to face.
he and the Labour front bench have used every chance they can to do so over the past few days…
It doesn't matter that he keeps repeating it, what matters is that he finds a way for it to cut through, and on that he's sadly failing. Boris just batted it away as normal.
PS. Why do you keep writing like that with ... between statements? What's wrong with normal sentences?
the gap between Johnson’s rhetoric and policy as regards the NHS needs hammering home.
And yet he is failing to do so. Johnson seems to have caught onto how he can just ignore the questions and just say what he likes whereas Starmer doesnt seem to have been able to adjust to this and still seems to think it is a debate.
I guess to be fair to Starmer no one else has managed either. Looking at the guardian live list of question answers really is bizarre with him rarely answering even the tory lapdog questions directly.
Well, Nurses pay is now being discussed on all the lunchtime news broadcasts... and I hope will be in the evening ones as well. Not sure what you mean by "cutting through"... but the public are being given every chance to hear about the "pay cut for Nurses" after all they've been through and all they've done during the pandemic... and hanging that around Johnson's neck is an ongoing effort... how people respond to that, and for how long it sticks, remains to be seen.
As for your PS dazh... I'm breaking it down... making it simple... why do you care?
All true dissonance. There have been very few "Prime Ministers Answers" for over a year now. But the questions still need to be asked. Johnson's arrogant and aloof approach to avoiding scrutiny is still working for him exceptionally well. Will that ever stop working for him with voters? I don't know.
Starmer doesnt seem to have been able to adjust to this and still seems to think it is a debate.
It's funny because binners always slags off Corbyn for using PMQs as a platform for a bit of a rant, but at least every now and again he'd get on the news after causing a bit of a barney. With Starmer it's so boring it doesn't even get reported. 'Starmer asks question which Boris doesn't answer. Again!' isn't really a headline anyone's interested in.
As for your PS dazh… I’m breaking it down… making it simple… why do you care?
Do you realise that comes across as qutie 'mansplainy'? I don't really care, just curious as I've never seen anyone else do it.
And yet he is failing to do so. Johnson seems to have caught onto how he can just ignore the questions and just say what he likes whereas Starmer doesnt seem to have been able to adjust to this and still seems to think it is a debate.
It's not just Starmer. That shameless shyster has used the cover of the effect lockdown has had on media to completely bypass any accountability whatsoever. Its not that he doesn't answer Starmers questions at PMQ and just rambles instead, he doesn't answer anyones questions EVER. The only contact the media has with the PM or any government minister is via a stage-managed press conference. Watch Boris there. He just completely ignores any question and delivers pre-prepared soundbites instead. And because the journalist is on the other end of a zoom line, they're cut off and have no comeback
This government has effectively devised a method of bypassing even the slightest hint of direct scrutiny and accountability
This isn't just a problem for the leader of the labour party, this is a major problem for our whole system of democracy. Can you see them just reverting back to how it was before now that they've given themselves such an easy ride? No... me neither.
It’s funny because binners always slags off Corbyn for using PMQs as a platform for a bit of a rant, but at least every now and again he’d get on the news after causing a bit of a barney
I slagged him for using PMQ's to deliver a shouty ten-second soundbite to be tweeted out to the cult-members that afternoon. It became so formulaic... mumble, mumble, mumble... SHOUTY TEN SECOND SOUNDBITE!!!!... mumble, mumble, mumble.... that all the Tory benches would cheer him doing it. It became a running joke in the press
Is the speaker implicit in allowing Johnson to get away with not answering, would a Bercow drive with a heavier hand?
This government has effectively devised a method of bypassing even the slightest hint of direct scrutiny and accountability
What they need is some 'effective', and 'credible' opposition. 😂
See also his use of personal photographers employed at the public expense but directly accountable to him/his PR team rather than the civil service, to take staged propaganda pictures of him supposedly working, or out playing with his cute dogs etc, while denying access to press reporters, because COVID.
Is the speaker implicit in allowing Johnson to get away with not answering, would a Bercow drive with a heavier hand?
He's pulled him up repeatedly for just ignoring the question. Johnson just ignores him too
It's true that SKS needs to fire at the tories from the TV, just relying on PMQs isn't doing the job. He should decide which news programme (C4 news I suspect) will give him a fair run, he needs to prep for the awkward questions and use Track'n'Trace as the biggest stick.
Is the speaker implicit in allowing Johnson to get away with not answering, would a Bercow drive with a heavier hand?
He’s pulled him up repeatedly for just ignoring the question. Johnson just ignores him too
Thereby proving what an ineffectual waste of space he is. Really don't see the point of the current "speaker" other than a point of reference when making a statement.
Really don’t see the point of the current “speaker” other than a point of reference when making a statement.
He was picked to be the opposite of his predecessor. He's a laptop lapdog ... and his occasional reprimands are made in a way that the PM can make a joke about and laugh off.
needs to fire at the tories from the TV
He does. But his style is so dull it floats past most of the audience. He's not exactly the kind of person you want on Have I Got News For You, or The Apprentice. He's really not TV material, is he.
One year in, leader of the opposition.
Successful first year?
Anyone want to tell me about his successes so far?
His strengths as labour leader?
Any positives?
He’s really not TV material, is he.
Not sure he's politician material either. Given his disastrous brexit policy which handed the tories a majority, and his unswerving ability to piss off his own members and supporters whilst boring everyone else to death I'm seriously beginning to wonder what he's good at.
So, we're doing "it's Starmer that lost the 2019 election" now are we? Right you are...
I suppose that was the inevitable destination really...
I'm going to have to quote Dazh's prediction about Binners at the start of this thread, as in hindsight, it's pretty funny...
One thing I know you won’t be doing is giving Starmer any credit for whatever he does or says because the only thing you do on here is have a go at the labour party whoever it’s led by.
LOLZ
Still nothing?
I’m going to have to quote Dazh’s prediction about Binners at the start of this thread
Funny old world isn't it. It just shows how much Starmer is the opposite of what he claimed to be in the leadership campaign, and why so many are extemely pissed off about it. Betraying the people who elected you, especially when it was entirely unnecessary, is an interesting way to start your leadership term, and the results are there for all to see.
So, we’re doing “it’s Starmer that lost the 2019 election” now are we? Right you are…
You have this arse about face: the narrative to date has been that everything was Corbyn's fault.
I actually admired Starmer's willingness to serve under Corbyn (in contrast to the toy throwers) but there's little doubt that the Brexit policy he was responsible for was a complete mess.
Betraying the people who elected you
I elected him. I don't feel betrayed.
