Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Tree13]

I do - it's because he's a racist.

Agreed.

Lammy is a perfect example of a single-issue politician. He needs racism to exist because it's the only thing he feels he can speak about with any confidence. Therefore he misidentifies racism where none exists, and is so desperate for racism to remain a "hot topic" that he is prepared to stoke the fires directly. I find it astonishing that his constituents elected him.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Agreed.

Lammy is a perfect example of a single-issue politician. He needs racism to exist because it's the only thing he feels he can speak about with any confidence. Therefore he misidentifies racism where none exists, and is so desperate for racism to remain a "hot topic" that he is prepared to stoke the fires directly. I find it astonishing that his constituents elected him.

He's spoken very well on Brexit as well to be fair.

 

[dholliday]

I think I would be classed an anti-Semite if I lived in Gaza as Palestinian. And generally I would not take to kindly to those who defended the Israel Government actions either. Maybe the UN are also anti Semites now?

It is notable that Labour MP's who have claimed the Israelis are guilty of war crimes have been accused of anti-semitism.

I think you would be surprised at actually how many people would be unperturbed by it. Of course it isn't a great news story by any means but strip away anti-war brigade, the conspiracy theorists and generally people who wanted to harm the government to see them out (Tories etc. But even they voted for it so they couldn't say it was all Blair's fault) then I think most people would be meh about the whole fiasco.

It is nowhere close to meh. A great many people still feel disgusted & ashamed by Blair's Iraq crusade. Millions marched back then, and millions still feel horrified. They can't do too much about it other than not vote in a Blairite party.

Still nothing to say why Blairism, or to give it the proper title, the third way, has been massively rejected by the public.

Why do you think so, mate?

no.

i am referring to your use of language, not your politics.

You're gonna have to be more specific. Circling around a point so broadly that no one can see which point you're circling is a little...pointless.

Prompted by an early essay, but nothing that can't be found in his P&EL mate.

His Essays & Letters collections? Also gonna have to be more specific, mate.

 

[abelard]

You're gonna have to be more specific. Circling around a point so broadly that no one can see which point you're circling is a little...pointless.

Still?

Okay, read Politics and the English Language (to which @orchard is referring) very carefully, and then tell us how you think Orwell would feel about how the term 'centrist' is used, and why.

 

[dholliday]

Still?

Okay, read Politics and the English Language (to which @orchard is referring) very carefully, and then tell us how you think Orwell would feel about how the term 'centrist' is used, and why.

Why don't you just say what your point is?

 

[The binman chronicles]

It is nowhere close to meh. A great many people still feel disgusted & ashamed by Blair's Iraq crusade. Millions marched back then, and millions still feel horrified. They can't do too much about it other than not vote in a Blairite party.

Millions did march you are right, but in a country whose population is 66 million it is a drop in the ocean. I'm not saying anyone will say it was great, it is all negative. But I think it was behind a shift in Labour trying to distance itself from it, that they didn't need to do. The anti-war protesters that are mainly left leaning would still vote Labour and even if they didn't they would have still secured the seats in those areas due to the population isn't going to vote Conservative and the Lib dems killed themselves by getting into bed with the Tories.

For most of the country it is not an issue that is going to change their voting preferences.

Why do you think so, mate?

They won 3 elections off the back of it, could have won a fourth had Brown called for an election when he was in the ascendancy. They were not thrashed after 13 years of power unlike what happened to the Tories in 1997. Most of that was down to Brown having the charisma of a boiled egg and the fact that the Conservatives had found a leader who was fresh enough to look like it was a new start.

Speaking of which and the reason why the argument rings true, is that Cameron won two elections using similar Third Way tactics to cover the centre ground and even an appeasement of sorts to the left with his one nation polices. Although his was sprinkled with added austerity on top.

Now the parties are moving ever further in opposite directions the centre is plum for taking if a major party can bridge that divide. As above regarding the Iraq issue, Labour looked to reshape opinions by dismissing and condemning the Blair/Brown governments instead of embracing what they did well and outwardly projecting what they had learnt from any mistakes.

 

[dholliday]

Millions did march you are right, but in a country whose population is 66 million it is a drop in the ocean. I'm not saying anyone will say it was great, it is all negative. But I think it was behind a shift in Labour trying to distance itself from it, that they didn't need to do. The anti-war protesters that are mainly left leaning would still vote Labour and even if they didn't they would have still secured the seats in those areas due to the population isn't going to vote Conservative and the Lib dems killed themselves by getting into bed with the Tories.

For most of the country it is not an issue that is going to change their voting preferences.



They won 3 elections off the back of it, could have won a fourth had Brown called for an election when he was in the ascendancy. They were not thrashed after 13 years of power unlike what happened to the Tories in 1997. Most of that was down to Brown having the charisma of a boiled egg and the fact that the Conservatives had found a leader who was fresh enough to look like it was a new start.

Speaking of which and the reason why the argument rings true, is that Cameron won two elections using similar Third Way tactics to cover the centre ground and even an appeasement of sorts to the left with his one nation polices. Although his was sprinkled with added austerity on top.

Now the parties are moving ever further in opposite directions the centre is plum for taking if a major party can bridge that divide. As above regarding the Iraq issue, Labour looked to reshape opinions by dismissing and condemning the Blair/Brown governments instead of embracing what they did well and outwardly projecting what they had learnt from any mistakes.

2 million out of say 66 million is about 3%. Many more heartily disagreed with Blair's actions yet didn't/couldn't march. Granted Labour still won the next election but it was against Michael Howard's disorganised Tories yet Labour still experienced a downward swing of almost 6%. Blair finally had to go two years later.

I'm just saying it's a lot more than a drop in the ocean. Even today if Blair writes an article for any online site which enables comments the majority of those comments will be demanding his arrest.

I agree Cameron was Third Way (the Tory version). I also agree aside from Iraq new-Labour did a lot of good work domestically.

 

[zzr45]

Why don't you just say what your point is?

Banging your head against a brick wall there pal. Doesn’t actually have any.

 

[The binman chronicles]

2 million out of say 66 million is about 3%. Many more heartily disagreed with Blair's actions yet didn't/couldn't march. Granted Labour still won the next election but it was against Michael Howard's disorganised Tories yet Labour still experienced a downward swing of almost 6%. Blair finally had to go two years later.

I'm just saying it's a lot more than a drop in the ocean. Even today if Blair writes an article for any online site which enables comments the majority of those comments will be demanding his arrest.

I agree Cameron was Third Way (the Tory version). I also agree aside from Iraq new-Labour did a lot of good work domestically.

Don't disagree with what you say about Iraq and Blair, but that is who Joe Public is angry with. If Labour stopped spouting Blairites/Blairism and just took the Third Way policies then it would be fine. By bashing it constantly they are taking away what actually worked for Labour.

Parties always take a hit if they get reelected there is nothing new than that, you don't start off with small wins and then achieve landslides. Knowing teflon Tony he could have stayed on and won that election that Brown lost. Blair was just unlucky that Bin laden decided to do 9/11 during his term. He would be seen in a completely different light if it wasn't for that and the deal that he made with Brown to handover power at some point during the second term.

 

[dholliday]

Don't disagree with what you say about Iraq and Blair, but that is who Joe Public is angry with. If Labour stopped spouting Blairites/Blairism and just took the Third Way policies then it would be fine. By bashing it constantly they are taking away what actually worked for Labour.

Parties always take a hit if they get reelected there is nothing new than that, you don't start off with small wins and then achieve landslides. Knowing teflon Tony he could have stayed on and won that election that Brown lost. Blair was just unlucky that Bin laden decided to do 9/11 during his term. He would be seen in a completely different light if it wasn't for that and the deal that he made with Brown to handover power at some point during the second term.

Agree with all except that Blair always had something of the night about him. That perma-smile. He's the polar-opposite of the genuine bloke vibes we got from John Smith.

 

[tsubaki]

Don't disagree with what you say about Iraq and Blair, but that is who Joe Public is angry with. If Labour stopped spouting Blairites/Blairism and just took the Third Way policies then it would be fine. By bashing it constantly they are taking away what actually worked for Labour.

Parties always take a hit if they get reelected there is nothing new than that, you don't start off with small wins and then achieve landslides. Knowing teflon Tony he could have stayed on and won that election that Brown lost. Blair was just unlucky that Bin laden decided to do 9/11 during his term. He would be seen in a completely different light if it wasn't for that and the deal that he made with Brown to handover power at some point during the second term.

Blair wouldn't have - he would have been wiped out by the 2008 crash.

It is a bit of a mystery why Blair's abilities are rated so high - yes, he won those elections but then that is what usually happens to the party who signs away their soul to Murdoch. In the process he almost wrecked his party, did wreck the next generation of its political leadership and put us in a financial position of such horror that it will take until about 2030 for the majority of society to notice.

 

[Tree13]

He's spoken very well on Brexit as well to be fair.

No-one in Parliament has spoken well on Brexit pal, and yet there are plenty who speak better than Lammy does on that subject.

Fact remains, he is a racist.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

No-one in Parliament has spoken well on Brexit pal, and yet there are plenty who speak better than Lammy does on that subject.

Fact remains, he is a racist.

Of course, the bar isn't especially high.

 

[strummer]

...there has always been a Momentum type group in Politics, I know that from the ‘unity Left’ in my own Trade Union. I have no issue with that, but the governance of the Labour Party means it has now become the home for that group. What it’s supporters fail to acknowledge is the bullying and harassment of those who don’t tow the line. They point to media bias, rather than accept the Party no longer wants to be a broad church. It’s always somebody else’s fault.

I’m old but i’m a traditional Labour voter. It’s not the policies of this group I dislike, its the lack of decency and value. I don’t think i’m alone.

You're not alone. I totally agree. Some labour voters come across as massively intolerant. Especially in this thread

 

[Black Belt Jones]

Blair wouldn't have - he would have been wiped out by the 2008 crash.

It is a bit of a mystery why Blair's abilities are rated so high - yes, he won those elections but then that is what usually happens to the party who signs away their soul to Murdoch. In the process he almost wrecked his party, did wreck the next generation of its political leadership and put us in a financial position of such horror that it will take until about 2030 for the majority of society to notice.

Hit the nail on the head there mate. Alex Ferguson is another one - 13 titles and 2 European cups yes, but you'd expect that from the best resourced team in the world. Just look at the legacy he left, ruined Utd for years - mystery why he's rated really.