Forum menu
Apparently there has been a fire at SKS's home, I imagine he tried to make a bowl of cornflakes and ****ed it up
He's probably 'pro' whatever thinks we win him an election.
Is that not the entire point of democracy?
He hasn't got the skill to change people's minds, and he knows this. Especially when you consider the tactics that the other two parties are going to deploy in response. Politics isn't about standing up and saying what you want and hoping enough people agree with you.
@tjagain shut up about Scotland. Yes, a pro European party has been in government for years but is it because they are pro-European, or because they are pro something else? Don't answer that.
Why, what do you think differentiates them, other than personality.
I think that Tories are grossly incompetent (they didn't actually DO anything in the last decade) and Reform are just chancers with no clue about how to run a country. Labour are more like the first Cameron govt currently, I reckon, which is shit and I would not vote for out of choice, but a vote against Labour is a vote for Farage as PM so...
Well unless the Libdems or Greens properly get their act together, I won't be voting at the next GE.
What's the ****ing point?
Yep, and that also seams to be a SKS labour tactic, they would rather disenfranchise millions of voters to chase a few thousand racists than actually offer hope to the nation with some progressive policies such is their hatred of left leaning politics.
What do.you mean "get their act together"?
What do the LibDems and Greens need to do to enjoy the privilege of your vote?
What I have a problem with is governments using immigrants as scapegoats for their own failures, adding to the anti-immigrant and anti-refugee rhetoric which has gripped Europe and the United States thus creating a climate of fear and hatred, and using the issue in a desperate attempt to scrape the gutter looking for easy votes.
My issue is more a practical one if I'm honest. The uk needs these workers. The very same people who will be complaining now will be complaining even more when they are lying in their own shit as noone will be available to change their bedsheets.
There should be absolutely zero limit on immigration if the folks coming over here are filling jobs that either we don't have the skills to fill, or folks are just too lazy to do.
Is that not the entire point of democracy?
Well that's what I thought. The level of immigration over the past few years has been massively higher than previously. Is that level of immigration necessary? If so why wasn't it previously? Of course the huge increase was due to a deliberate Tory policy to increase the number of study and work visas available. The study visas to increase university income and work visas presumably to supply cheap labour to British companies to the detriment of UK workers.
It seems strange to me that Labour are now being criticised for applying a policy which they laid out before the election and presumably assisted them in becoming elected.
I am not opposed to immigration, but the numbers seem crazy at the moment. As I said earlier is the current level of immigration necessary? If we say yes we need cheap labour and overseas student fees, then OK immigration has to stay at current levels, a case has to be made for it and we need to suck it up.
I am not opposed to immigration, but the numbers seem crazy at the moment. As I said earlier is the current level of immigration necessary? If we say yes we need cheap labour and overseas student fees, then OK immigration has to stay at current levels, a case has to be made for it and we need to suck it up.
The number is the number, nothing crazy about it and nothing wrong with it. Yes the current level of visa issuing is fairly necessary as a lot are in health and care sector and very much needed.
You clearly have a number in your head and it is lower but what are you basing that on?
We are getting more people in need of care and care jobs are not something enough UK people are interested in because it is low paid and not an attractive job. If we paid much better rates to care workers then the councils would be even more screwed unless of course all those anti immigrant people want to pay a lot more council tax to allow it to happen?
Immigration needs to be explained, every week, for the next 4 years to get people to understand it is not an issue unless you are racist and a lost cause. Unfortunately Starmer has joined in with the Farage/Tory side so no chance of that.
work visas presumably to supply cheap labour to British companies to the detriment of UK workers.
When people come here to work do they not then become UK workers?
And universities absolutely do need foreign students, their whole business model is based on it since they don't get enough funding from the UK govt. They are already in dire straits because of Brexit.
Fine, in that case the immigration levels are OK, Labour shouldn't have put a reduction in their manifesto and shouldn't be looking to reduce immigration levels now.
Yeah, what the chuff is Starmer playing at?
I think he's doing a pretty decent job on the world stage, but on domestic issues, this 'neo-tory/reform' rhetoric on immigration... it's not cool, not cool at all.
Any more thoughts on what “an island of strangers” means? I can’t get past the idea it’s just about everyone looking, sounding and thinking the same. The alternative cannot be about us all “knowing” each other… it must be about us thinking that we are all similar. Count me out.
Any more thoughts on what “an island of strangers” means?
It means UK politics has been infantilised to the point where all the top dogs think a slogan is all that is needed. Typically of a man who has no apparent political beliefs of his own, Starmer has still ****ed it up because it is 5 whole words and not 3 as mandated by Dominic Cummings.
Hey we will soon be a year in!
That's gone quick.
(James O'Brien still picking through the bones of Starmer's smartest moves is starting to look increasingly embarrassing.)
Any more thoughts on what “an island of strangers” means? I can’t get past the idea it’s just about everyone looking, sounding and thinking the same. The alternative cannot be about us all “knowing” each other… it must be about us thinking that we are all similar. Count me out.
As someone above alluded to, sorry I can't be bothered to scroll back up to check... it's very reminiscent of May's 'citizens of nowhere' sound byte... deeply worrying and offensive language.
I think it's clear Starmer is trying to play 'both sides of the fence' to us, his domestic audience but that's a splinter too far for me... and you have to get off the fence sooner or later.
All this tory-esque language will just make the labour party 3rd place after the tories and reform in the race to be as right wing as possible.
He might gain some votes back from racist labour defectors in the electorate who voted reform in the recent locals, but it's not enough to win as a strategy, and it's morally bankrupt.
it will be interesting to see if they do anything about ISAs in the autumn budget... it wouldn't supprise me if they scupper them and force normal savers into savings accounts that you have to pay tax on....or as has been suggested, keep the 20k tax allowanve as long as it's invested in UK equities.
The huge problem with that is no one person in thier right mind is going to invest £20k in the UK unless it's part of a much broader and larger global investment portfolio.
He might gain some votes back from racist labour defectors in the electorate who voted reform in the recent locals
Unlikely since Reform have also adopted various traditionally left wing policies. So if someone wants a racist left wing party reform will happily pretend to be so (the left wing bit that is).
Oddly Starmer hasnt copied Reforms use of those policies since thats a step too far for him.
Any more thoughts on what “an island of strangers” means? I can’t get past the idea it’s just about everyone looking, sounding and thinking the same. The alternative cannot be about us all “knowing” each other… it must be about us thinking that we are all similar. Count me out.
island of strangers reeks of a Mosley/Powell speech, starmer deserves a slap for such crap
I think this also fits with the cutting back benefits rhetoric. There will be plenty of (minimum wage unpleasent) jobs available giving them an excuse to reduce working age benefits, will it work, probably not but it will play well with traditional Labour supporters who have gone to Reform who think anyone in receipt of working age benefits is a lazy scrounger whilst conviently forgetting they are also net beneficiaries from the state.
traditional Labour supporters who have gone to Reform
This is all Starmer and McSweeney, no excuses, this blaming everyone else for their bigotry has to stop, they are now driving the racist narrative not responding to it.
island of strangers reeks of a Mosley/Powell speech, starmer deserves a slap for such crap
That was my first thought. Trying to outflank Reform on the right is an electoral dead end, it's a battle they can't win.
traditional Labour supporters who have gone to Reform
Why this apparent belief that the typical Reform voter is a former Labour voter? A far more typical Reform voter is a former Tory voter.
This YouGov poll is admittedly about three months old but I very much doubt that the Reform voter demographics has changed substantially since then, although admittedly there are probably even more pissed off Labour voters :
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51474-what-is-attracting-24-of-britons-to-reform-uk
You will note the following :
By party voted for in 2024
Reform UK 90
Conservative 33
Labour 9
Lib Dem 8
So three months ago 91% of Labour 2024 voters were not claiming to be Reform supporters, which is almost identical to the 92% of LibDem 2024 voters who were also not claiming to be Reform supporters.
In contrast a third of Tory 2024 voters were claiming to have switched to Reform.
The sort of person who is now being attracted to Reform is typically a Tory voter.
Starmer has his work cut out trying to attract former Tory voters who have now defected to Reform. I rate his chances of success as very low.
Any more thoughts on what “an island of strangers” means? I can’t get past the idea it’s just about everyone looking, sounding and thinking the same. The alternative cannot be about us all “knowing” each other… it must be about us thinking that we are all similar. Count me out.
island of strangers reeks of a Mosley/Powell speech, starmer deserves a slap for such crap
Yeah Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood speech. Here's a passage from that speech.
"they found themselves made strangers in their own country. They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places"
I remember Blair's government getting battered with negative headlines about immigration and asylum seekers, and Brown's infamous "bigoted woman" comment might have been triggered by said woman's comment about eastern european immigrants.
It may not be what any of us here want from them but I suspect the Labour leadership by now has a very deeply embedded fear of being hammered in the press and in public opinion about seeming soft on immigration. I think that at least initially Blair was very positive about the benefits of free movement within Europe and hence immigration but it didn't seem to work very well back then, so memories of that might be why they're reluctant to really push back on the right's immigration narrative now.
Still, the above is all just the speculation about why Starmer/Labour are behaving like this, not agreement that their approach is a good one.
There's a lot of things I didn't like about Gordon Brown... But calling a bigot, a bigot, isn't one of them!
I suspect the Labour leadership by now has a very deeply embedded fear of being hammered in the press and in public opinion
Being tough on immigration does not require the use of dangerous language which will indisputably fan the flames of fear and hatred. Fear and hatred which is presenting itself as a growing crisis not only in the UK but across much of Europe and the United States.
Starmer could easily have avoided the "island of strangers" hyperbole but, like Enoch Powell before him, he obviously wants to exploit the fears and prejudices that some voters have.
As he desperately tries to shore up his failing political career..... just like Enoch Powell.
'Island of strangers' is designed to frighten people it is not designed to sound comforting and reassuring. And as a barrister Keir Starmer fully understands the power of words when presenting a case.
Indeed, I expect more from someone of his intelligence, and as former "Head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)"
Seems domestically he just wants to roll around in the gutter with trump, farrage and 'bad-Enoch' with the recent language
Yeah Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood speech. Here's a passage from that speech.
"they found themselves made strangers in their own country. They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places"
christ…that could just as easily been spoken by starmer earlier
“Do we have any foreigners in the audience tonight?” “If so, please put up your hands. So where are you? Well, wherever you are, I think you should all just leave. Not just leave the hall, leave our country. I don’t want you here, in the room or in my country.” “Listen to me, man! I think we should send them all back.” “Stop Britain from becoming a black colony. Get the foreigners out,” “Get the w*gs out. Get the c**ns out. Keep Britain white,”
The backlash to the above was Rock Against Racism.
Even if half the population is racist (polls on racist statements suggest in the range 20-40%) Starmer is going to piss off the other half. That other half is important to him, the hard-line racists will vote Farage whatever, Labopur has nothing to gain from this shit, and there will be a backlash.
But a pro Europe pro immigration party has been in government in Scotland for 15 years and now looks nailed on to continue
Yet Scotland has one of the lowest levels of immigration. The only part of England that has less is the North East
Something doesn't add up
Quite.
What's the ****ing point?
Even if you think Labour aren't doing what you want, any vote for any other party or a no-vote is a vote for Reform.
Even if you think Labour aren't doing what you want, any vote for any other party or a no-vote is a vote for Reform.
And if Labour just become Reform step by step?
FWIW, Ben Jennings's cartoon in today's Graun is spot on. Obvs I can post the image, but look for yourself.
That's what people said when I voted for Macron first time around. No party that's only existed for a year can win they said.
'Island of strangers' is designed to frighten people it is not designed to sound comforting and reassuring. And as a barrister Keir Starmer fully understands the power of words when presenting a case.
Absolutely awful use of language, and the fact that it was used by a Labour PM is disgusting. It just has so many echoes of "rivers of blood".
And completely wrong, based on my experience of working in a very diverse team of first and second generation immigrants.
It truly has become a wrestling match in the gutter as someone brilliantly described it further up
And if Labour just become Reform step by step?
Do you think Reform actually know the first thing about running a country? It'll be like Liz Truss for 4 years.
For those who see a similarity between Starmer's rhetoric on immigration yesterday and Enoch Powell's Rivers of Blood speech it is worth remembering that despite much higher levels of tolerance of racism 60 years ago when Enoch Powell made his speech, a Labour government had only made racial discrimination illegal 3 years earlier, the Tory leader to his credit did not hesitate to immediately sack Enoch Powell from the Shadow Cabinet the next day.
Who is going to sack the Labour leader?
Personally I reckon that Starmer and McSweeney are undoubtly relishing the backlash that the inflammatory rhetoric has caused. It is precisely that sort of reaction which Starmer's biggest current political rival Nigel Farage thrives on, and it makes Starmer look tough and uncompromising.
It'll be like Liz Truss for 4 years.
Starmer got there first, idiotic failed domestic policy, photoshoot opportunity politics on the international stage. Hopefully he won't last 4 years, but he has hollowed out the heart from the labour party so I am worried about the direction it takes even after he is given the boot.
I first posted this article by David Renton over 5 years ago when Starmer first became Labour leader, it predicts his behaviour with surprising accuracy.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/16/keir-starmer-past-scrutiny
The last paragraph sums it up :
Starmer’s enthusiasm while DPP for using mundane news events to feed the press with rightwing talking points is a possible concern for Labour members. If such a leader was faced with news of an injustice in the future – the consequence of a change to immigration rules, say, or of a strike in public services – Starmer’s approach to the press as DPP might raise worries that he would not give a principled defence of the victims but would tell the press whatever it wanted to hear.
When push comes to shove Starmer has always failed the test.
Who is going to sack the Labour leader?
Personally I reckon that Starmer and McSweeney are undoubtly relishing the backlash that the inflammatory rhetoric has caused. It is precisely that sort of reaction which Starmer's biggest current political rival Nigel Farage thrives on, and it makes Starmer look tough and uncompromising.
The voters.
Voters like me who see him as racist, divisive, white supremacist, stigmatising immigrants and their descendants, modern slavery advocate (because that's what the visas for carers tied to employment contracts amounts to).
Those wishing to vote for a party that represents right and good will look elsewhere, and to hell with tactical voting.
His 10 pledges are in tatters(economic conditions have changed was his excuse - bollocks), his 5+1 pledges are in stagnation with one exception, the +1. You can't win an election on one pledge your opposition does better.
Even if you think Labour aren't doing what you want, any vote for any other party or a no-vote is a vote for Reform.
It's increasingly difficult to tell the difference.
Even if you think Labour aren't doing what you want, any vote for any other party or a no-vote is a vote for Reform.
Quite the opposite, a vote for labour has now proven to be a vote for reform and their policies. This is evidenced by a, labours lurch to reform policies, b, labours policy failures massively increasing reforms voter share, and c, labours purge of the labour party for ideological purity silencing progressive voices within the party and pushing the party into competing on the populist bandwagon.
It is a centrist fear mongering that not voting centrist is the path to a right wing take over, "centrist" governments in the UK, USA, Germany and France have lead to either a wannabe fascist dictator in the US, and a massive upsurge of support for right wing populists in the other countries, 4 of the biggest economies in the world.
So look at the evidence instead of stating centrist propoganda that is demonstratable a false narrative.
If Reform-Tory win the next general election the responsibility for that will rest squarely with Sir Keir Starmer.
No Prime Minister who has won a landslide has ever handed victory to the opposition at the subsequent general election.
Starmer has been given a fairly unique opportunity and he is squandering it for a variety of reasons including his ineptitude and lack of political convictions.
Quite the opposite, a vote for labour has now proven to be a vote for reform and their policies
I think Reform would be way worse.
It is a centrist fear mongering that not voting centrist is the path to a right wing take over
No, it's the frustrating reality of FPTP. You can't vote how you want, you have to vote tactically. This ****s everything up, but it's the system we have.
No, it's the frustrating reality of FPTP. You can't vote how you want, you have to vote tactically. This ****s everything up, but it's the system we have.
And yet countries in Europe with other voting systems are having the same problems. The core problem isn't the voting system, it is the political environment failing to address societies problem, always travelling ever rightward, framing right wing politics as "centrist" and then coming out with the bullshit that "we are your only choice so suck it up and bend over". You might have bought that lie, but it is not supported by the evidence.
Oh, and taking the oligarchy money out of politics and lobying would have a far far more transformative impact on voting than changing the system. Even though I support a more representative voting system, changing political funding is the biggest hit, PR would be the icing on the cake.
And that is something that any leader that believes in democracy could do, Starmer could have a huge impact on the future of the nation, if he did that one thing, despite all his other failures, if he stopped the oligarchs from controlling politics for their own benefit against the general population it would create a real platform for change.
But he won't even see the issue, never mind look at solutions, he will instead go ahead with the HOL reforms, which is so minor and inconsequential will have **** all impact on the lives, health and wealth of 99% of the nation.
And completely wrong, based on my experience of working in a very diverse team of first and second generation immigrants.
Your "diverse team" is what the UK has become. But the mainstream politicians seem intent on dividing it. It's no longer a question of parties representing socio-economic groups, the main parties seem intent on alienating whole sections of the population. It's becoming very American (I tried to insert a US census link but it bust the forum) where the correlation between the biggest ethnic groups and voting habits is striking. In California the biggest ethinic group is latinos and they vote democrate, and Trumps hates the place. Redneck land is Republican.
In the UK Labour tends to do well in areas with high levels of first and second generation immigration, perhaps not such a good correlation as the US but it's there. So if Starmer had any sense he'd have inclusive rather than divisive policies and play to that diverse team. But, no he wants to be on the racist bandwagon, he's worried that Labour has lost votes in the redneck red wall. But he won't get them back. What he should be worried about is biting the hands that feed him and a lot of those are first and second generation immigrants, and people like those on this thread who don't want to see a Britain divided politically, socially and geographically on ethnic lines.
Starmer is pandering to the redneck white trash, they won't vote for him.