Current Affairs The Labour Party

[The binman chronicles]

According to your definition of "Left", the LP of the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s you'd have described them as Marxist-Leninist mate.

I've never been one to go that far Dave, even if we say far left it isn't THAT far in comparison. But it shifted with Miliband and it shifted again with Corbyn, so it is two steps further left than required.

I'm going on past principle that for the majority of those years there were Conservative governments at a time that type of socialist party was much more relevant. If the country wanted that type of party then we would be now talking about a Labour landslide due to the ineptitude of the incumbents. The fact we are not is down to the basis that the people outside of the heartlands are resistant to the party the way it is. You can moan about New Labour but least it had a chance to do something and if you don't change and keep up with the times then one day it will be the Liberals sitting opposite the government. Then what's the plan? Another shift further left because obviously the problem is Labour is still to close to the centre?

 

[Tubey]

I said this the other week, but if you look for when the last time an actual left wing government was in place, you're arguably going back to 1951 or, at the very least, 1979.

It's been 40 years since a left wing government of any description had power.

There's a reason for that!

 

[neil999]

I said this the other week, but if you look for when the last time an actual left wing government was in place, you're arguably going back to 1951 or, at the very least, 1979.

It's been 40 years since a left wing government of any description had power.

There's a reason for that!

This is what people never seem to get, even if you agree with labours current policies, it does not mean you will win an election

Its like playing nice football and getting relegated every year till you are in non league

 

[peteblue]

This is what people never seem to get, even if you agree with labours current policies, it does not mean you will win an election

Its like playing nice football and getting relegated every year till you are in non league

it’s like playing football but only on the left wing.......

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

I said this the other week, but if you look for when the last time an actual left wing government was in place, you're arguably going back to 1951 or, at the very least, 1979.

It's been 40 years since a left wing government of any description had power.

There's a reason for that!

To have a dividend nation and the United Kingdom on fast track to being dismantled, hip hip hooray for New Labour and One nation Tories. We thankyou all for your legacies ( a note of sarcasm).

 

[neil999]

it’s like playing football but only on the left wing.......

*thread banned

 

[Joey66]

it’s like playing football but only on the left wing.......

@Walken can only play on the left wing if he was put on the right he may fall over
Do you know I try to keep off the political threads -I tried posting on the old pictures thread this am wait for it the person who told me to not go on them for the sake of my health @Bruce Wayne kept notifying me on the scummy stories thread .......I have never voted Tory.......
As for my health I will now have to go on insulin as my pancreas is knackered with the pills for diabetes as my blood sugar has been to high fo ages just been in a queue.... getting the insulin soon after induction - I am now prepared for an onslaught of none being available because of Brexit....

 

[Tubey]

To have a dividend nation and the United Kingdom on fast track to being dismantled, hip hip hooray for New Labour and One nation Tories. We thankyou all for your legacies ( a note of sarcasm).

It's divided by catering to the extremes, namely the extreme right Tories/UKIP for Brexit. The narrative ever since has been the Tories going extreme right overall and Labour marching to the extreme left in response.

There isn't a shred of evidence the country wants the extreme left in power. Bizarrely there's more evidence they even want the extreme right instead.

 

[davek]

The Blair years were indeed an aberration, he won 3 general elections, the last Labour leader to win an election was Harold Wilson in 1974. That should tell you something.......

It tels me that in 1979 the Tories got on the wave of neo-liberalism and rode it for all it was worth, recasting British politics from a social democracy to one intent on upholding the interests of "entrepreneurialism" ("entrepreneurs" who built up their wealth from state cash handouts and contracts, btw) and who deregulated the economy to do so. Blair carried that work on. But now the global conditions are very different and that neo-liberal wave became a tsunami that wiped out their political economy...and now we look for new answers: some go for the Populist route that you do - *strong* centralised leadership that appeals to base emotions around nationalism; others like the LP leadership and membership see a chance to use the state to undo the tangled mess and give order and security to people's lives again. THAT is the struggle here in Britain.

 

[tsubaki]

This is what people never seem to get, even if you agree with labours current policies, it does not mean you will win an election

Its like playing nice football and getting relegated every year till you are in non league

That analysis makes the mistake of assuming that enough people make their choices based on the policies espoused by the parties though.

Most will either reflexively vote for a party or will listen to what a particular paper tells them. As for the rest, they don’t vote because they assume (and this was correct 2002-2015) that none of the main parties were interested in appealing to them.

Labours current strategy appears to be to keep its core vote, neutralise the really negative press attacks and to try to do what they partially did in 2017 and get non-voting people to vote. It might well work, especially if the Tories go down this “we are not the establishment” / spending on things route.

 

[davek]

You are clueless. Stand on your soapbox and rant a bit. Its completely pointless hence the whole comparison with Momentum and rabid student politics.

You dont live in the real world. Blair was a massive upgrade on Major and miles better than Cameron and what followed.

You seek to ignore and try and row back about 35 years of Labour modernisation. Its laughable and actually just serves to hammer the UK with a hard Tory party.

Corbyn/Momentum only really appeal to a die-hard 10%. Mass nationalisation? Banning private schools and all out attacks on pretty much the whole business community? No thanks. Not going to work in reality however much it gets the juices running for the hairy and unwashed left.

I have been a labour party member since 1994. I believe in higher taxes to support key public services. I support a true living wage and much tighter environmental protection paid for by relevant businesses. But all that needs to be done in a smart and sensible way. Hence where people like Mandelson and Campbell were critical to Blair's success.

Did you learn anything at all from the last election? Take a look what happened to Brown and then Miliband when they offered the muck you applaud New Labour for serving up to the electorate. They were obliterated. It's yesterday's game plan...a game plan from the opposition play book at that.

Corbyn's 2017 manifesto won more votes for Labour since Blair's heyday precisely because they identified market failure and a contempt amongst growing sections of the electorate for the purveyors of the market. They argued that the state needed to step in and intervene in people's lives and almost overhauled a huge Tory lead to get into government to enact it...and you want to go back to Blairism.!!!

FFS, give your head a shake.

 

[neil999]

That analysis makes the mistake of assuming that enough people make their choices based on the policies espoused by the parties though.

Most will either reflexively vote for a party or will listen to what a particular paper tells them. As for the rest, they don’t vote because they assume (and this was correct 2002-2015) that none of the main parties were interested in appealing to them.

Labours current strategy appears to be to keep its core vote, neutralise the really negative press attacks and to try to do what they partially did in 2017 and get non-voting people to vote. It might well work, especially if the Tories go down this “we are not the establishment” / spending on things route.

Very interesting to see what will happen as print media becomes obsolete, i guess its already happening with facebook campaigns...but not sure of they will have the same hold on people as newspapers

 

[davek]

I've never been one to go that far Dave, even if we say far left it isn't THAT far in comparison. But it shifted with Miliband and it shifted again with Corbyn, so it is two steps further left than required.

I'm going on past principle that for the majority of those years there were Conservative governments at a time that type of socialist party was much more relevant. If the country wanted that type of party then we would be now talking about a Labour landslide due to the ineptitude of the incumbents. The fact we are not is down to the basis that the people outside of the heartlands are resistant to the party the way it is. You can moan about New Labour but least it had a chance to do something and if you don't change and keep up with the times then one day it will be the Liberals sitting opposite the government. Then what's the plan? Another shift further left because obviously the problem is Labour is still to close to the centre?

Oh, New Labour did have a chance to do something..and they failed to do it. Instead they delivered a continuation of the Thatcher/Major years.

They weren't socialists, and they weren't even what could broadly be described as social democrats. They were creatures of the market with a contempt for their own party...remember the "sofa cabinets" of Blair? Disgraceful. And it all led inexorably to the Iraq War and the industrial scale carnage of shock and awe.

 

[tsubaki]

Oh, New Labour did have a chance to do something..and they failed to do it. Instead they delivered a continuation of the Thatcher/Major years.

They weren't socialists, and they weren't even what could broadly be described as social democrats. They were creatures of the market with a contempt for their own party...remember the "sofa cabinets" of Blair? Disgraceful. And it all led inexorably to the Iraq War and the industrial scale carnage of shock and awe.

This is only tangentially related to the debate but there were s a fantastic review of Cameron’s biography at the Middle East Eye site which looks at his foreign policy. It is remarkable how he (and Blair) had an almost child-like conception of the world and ignored expert advice consistently.

 

[davek]

This is only tangentially related to the debate but there were s a fantastic review of Cameron’s biography at the Middle East Eye site which looks at his foreign policy. It is remarkable how he (and Blair) had an almost child-like conception of the world and ignored expert advice consistently.

Cameron wanted to be Blair. He was Cameron's idol. He was devestated when he was defeated on intervention in Syria. He wanted his own 'ethical foreign policy' escapade.