Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Jebus_lives]

Hang on, I seem to remember others in that debate suggesting that private schools are breeding grounds for the elite, who have suddenly come to the defence of them now people have inconveniently remembered that Corbyn went to one. So are they a breeding ground for the elite, or are they actually a school, albeit with higher quality of education (mainly) for parents that have the luxury of paying for it?

As @catcherintherye says, that percentage that go are very fortunate. To then go on and spend an entire working life (pretty much) within the political circle is extremely lucky. But to include themselves in the struggles that the less fortunate have with the word 'we' in speeches is grating.

An old video now, but one that for me encapsulates that perfectly.



There's a young bloke that gives his opinion a few times in this. It's absolutely clear that he cannot emphasise with the Labour party, nor can a party activist really emphasis with him. The political classes/elite/privileged using the word 'we' to connect themselves to the issues that those people face is frankly, insulting.

Nobody is saying don't represent those struggles, but don't pretend you're living it when you aren't, especially for those people at the bottom that in all reality can't tell the difference between you and 'the Elite' that you tell them are holding them down.

A story I've shared before, but I will inevitably again. When it all came out that it was a travesty that teachers were being forced to buy supplies out of their own cash, I pretty much shrugged. It was happening in the school I was at in 2000. It wasn't exactly anything new. Stoke being 10 miles down the road, I have no doubt it was happening there too. To most people, it's just another gang of b*stards about to come in. They'll still get shafted no matter what happens in their mind.

Your assertion here seems to be that Jeremy Corbyn is pretending to be a 'man of the people' when I'm not really sure he is. Others may have made the assertion on his behalf, but much of his dialogue seems to be related to an understanding of the struggle rather than suggesting he inhabits the world as them.

And a personal wealth of £3m, as a 70 year old man, who owns a house in Islington and by his own admission is 'frugal', doesn't seem to be the monumental figure you are portraying it to be.

 

[Tubey]

If Labour doesn't win Corbyn should be replaced immediately, by somebody who will continue to champion policies which are overwhelmingly popular with the public rather than by somebody who will resume championing policies which are popular with Rupert Murdoch or the CBI.

I see - so if Labour lose to the Tories after a decade of austerity and unparalleled governmental incompetence, the strategy should be to... do the exact same over and over again.

Makes sense.

 

[zzr45]

Your assertion here seems to be that Jeremy Corbyn is pretending to be a 'man of the people' when I'm not really sure he is. Others may have made the assertion on his behalf, but much of his dialogue seems to be related to an understanding of the struggle rather than suggesting he inhabits the world as them.

From Corbyns speech:

And the big question of this election is: whose side are you on? Are you on the side of the tax dodgers, who are taking us all for a ride?

I’d say that’s pretty clear that it’s ‘us vs them.’ Are people that work cash in hand part of the elite by the way?

And a personal wealth of £3m, as a 70 year old man, who owns a house in Islington and by his own admission is 'frugal', doesn't seem to be the monumental figure you are portraying it to be.

Of course. Everyone has that, don’t they? You’re still talking about wealth that even average earners would be working 94 years for like it’s nothing. Bit of a daft point.

 

[Jebus_lives]

From Corbyns speech:

And the big question of this election is: whose side are you on? Are you on the side of the tax dodgers, who are taking us all for a ride?

I’d say that’s pretty clear that it’s ‘us vs them.’ Are people that work cash in hand part of the elite by the way?


Of course. Everyone has that, don’t they? You’re still talking about wealth that even average earners would be working 94 years for like it’s nothing. Bit of a daft point.

• Us vs them in relation to tax dodgers? And those that don't want a more equal society. I still don't see how he's portraying himself as a man of the people based on that post.
• He isn't an average earner

 

[abelard]

The media will still have their crosshairs aimed at whoever picks up and runs with the same policies ready to knock the new person down.

And they will also have in their crosshairs in exactly the same way any candidate who advocates only 80% of what Corbyn advocates, which you seem to think is the magic solution.

Go back and read how Miliband was covered, then look at what trying to compromise and appease them did for him.

Corbyn and Miliband were smeared in exactly the same way. But the latter performed much worse than the former because begging for mercy both failed to stop the media beatings, and convinced people not to bother turning up at the polls because Miliband couldn't be trusted to stick up for them.

The only way to break through is with leader (which is not to say Corbyn) with the courage to stand for his/her convictions and for policies which are not only overwhelmingly popular but the only economically appropriate response on offer to Britain's many self-induced wounds.

For all the talk of wistful nostalgia on the left, it is actually the centrists whose memory does not extend even as far back as 2015.

I see - so if Labour lose to the Tories after a decade of austerity and unparalleled governmental incompetence, the strategy should be to... do the exact same over and over again.

Makes sense.

You know that I know that you know that this is a spurious argument, and not at all what I wrote in the post you've quoted.

Meanwhile, your reasoning seems to be to acknowledge that - enabled entirely by Corbyn's victory - what Labour is now proposing is overwhelmingly popular, but that they should only offer some of what is overwhelmingly popular because....??? Then maybe the media will be nice? Or that voters maybe only actually want 60% of what they say they want, just for prudence's sake?

As @tsubaki has pointed out several times, you are confusing the fact that people identify with the term 'centrist' because it is inherently flattering and makes them feel like they're reasonable blokes, with active support for policies that the media characterises as 'centrist'. But in fact, as is routinely documented, 'centrist' policies are actually extremely unpopular and cozying up to them will further do for Labour what it did to the centre left in France, Germany, Italy, Greece, the United States and just about everywhere else these days.

What you see as the solution was running out of steam by 2005, in tatters by 2010, and then humiliated once again in 2015, not to mention economically incompetent.

Again, it is not the Labour left that keeps demanding the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

 

[Tubey]

You know that I know that you know that this is a spurious argument, and not at all what I wrote in the post you've quoted.

Meanwhile, your reasoning seems to be to acknowledge that - enabled entirely by Corbyn's victory - what Labour is now proposing is overwhelmingly popular, but that they should only offer some of what is overwhelmingly popular because....??? Then maybe the media will be nice? Or that voters maybe only actually want 60% of what they say they want, just for prudence's sake?

As @tsubaki has pointed out several times, you are confusing the fact that people identify with the term 'centrist' because it is inherently flattering and makes them feel like they're reasonable blokes, with active support for policies that the media characterises as 'centrist'. But in fact, as is routinely documented, 'centrist' policies are actually extremely unpopular and cozying up to them will further do for Labour what it did to the centre left in France, Germany, Italy, Greece, the United States and just about everywhere else these days.

What you see as the solution was running out of steam by 2005, in tatters by 2010, and then humiliated once again in 2015, not to mention economically incompetent.

Again, it is not the Labour left that keeps demanding the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

And yet you argued that union membership shouldn't be tarnished by the past, yet you tarnish 'centrism' - an incorrect definition of it mind you - by the past.

Which means you can only be objective about the things that you believe in, and dismiss any value in those you don't.

 

[abelard]

And yet you argued that union membership shouldn't be tarnished by the past, yet you tarnish 'centrism' - an incorrect definition of it mind you - by the past.

Which means you can only be objective about the things that you believe in, and dismiss any value in those you don't.

Blair did many good things, not least of which was Sure Start. Where I come from, the difference was night and day.

Labour centrism is tarnished much more by its recent present than by the past, most notably by the fact that it has no answer for its own economic misadvantures, and above all by the fact that it no longer wins elections. When I refer to other countries where liberal centrism is also failing, I am talking about the past five years, not the 1970s.

I'm not sure there's a single Labour/Tory swing constituency that would be more likely to vote for a Labour helmed by Owen Smith.

The election will hinge on whether Labour leavers value Labour more than they value Leave. It is only because of the policy turn and grassroots surge under Corbyn that in places like Middlesborough and Mansfield and Stoke Labour still even has a chance. Tell me you honestly think Owen Smith would be doing better there.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Blair did many good things, not least of which was Sure Start. Where I come from, the difference was night and day.

Labour centrism is tarnished much more by its recent present than by the past, most notably by the fact that it has no answer for its own economic misadvantures, and above all by the fact that it no longer wins elections. When I refer to other countries where liberal centralism is also failing, I am talking about the past five years, not the 1970s.

I'm not sure there's a single Labour/Tory swing constituency that would be more likely to vote for a Labour helmed by Owen Smith.

The election will hinge on whether Labour Leavers value Labour more than they value Leave. It is only because of the policy turn under Corbyn that in places like Middlesborough and Mansfield and Stoke Labour still even has a chance. Tell me you honestly think Owen Smith would be doing better there.

Blair wrote in his autobiography that Brown was already pulled back to old labour after he left by people like Balls, Miliband and Watson. So it depends what your view of when new labour starts and ends.

The economic misadventures by Labour were caused by the global financial crisis and that wasn't their fault. You can say fighting wars was a big drain which fingers crossed wouldn't happen again. But I understand the reasons we went to war. In hindsight everything is easy to say why it was a mistake, unfortunately you don't get that at the time.

I'll agree with you about Owen Smith though.

 

[Aberblue]

Blair wrote in his autobiography that Brown was already pulled back to old labour after he left by people like Balls, Miliband and Watson. So it depends what your view of when new labour starts and ends.

The economic misadventures by Labour were caused by the global financial crisis and that wasn't their fault. You can say fighting wars was a big drain which fingers crossed wouldn't happen again. But I understand the reasons we went to war. In hindsight everything is easy to say why it was a mistake, unfortunately you don't get that at the time.

I'll agree with you about Owen Smith though.

Owen Smith isn't standing for re-election.

I just thought I'd mention that.

 

[catcherintherye]

I see - so if Labour lose to the Tories after a decade of austerity and unparalleled governmental incompetence, the strategy should be to... do the exact same over and over again.

Makes sense.

What policy would you advocate? The one that saw them get hammered in 2010/15 by any chance?

 

[abelard]

The economic misadventures by Labour were caused by the global financial crisis and that wasn't their fault.

The financial crisis was global, and obviously not Labour's fault, but mindless privatisation and deregulation made it much worse than it would have been. An instructive comparison is in Canada, which resisted the trend to cease governing its banks, and which as a result had no financial crisis whatsoever, save the impact of the American meltdown.

And on the other hand, the inefficient and extremely expensive financialisation of the public sector, the entire model of awarding monopoly contracts, and all the harm this has caused and continues to cause, is New Labour's responsibility as much as anyone else's.

Privatisation, a very British disease

Britain is an extreme oddity regarding privatisation: nowhere else in the advanced world is there such a willingness to sell everything that isn’t nailed down. Time and again the British public is ripped off and sold out by its leaders.

www.opendemocracy.net

I mean... I'm not the one struggling to be balanced about Blair here... ; )

But I understand the reasons we went to war. In hindsight everything is easy to say why it was a mistake, unfortunately you don't get that at the time.

Well, except that millions of people in Britain were protesting against it before it had even started...

 

[Tubey]

Blair did many good things, not least of which was Sure Start. Where I come from, the difference was night and day.

Labour centrism is tarnished much more by its recent present than by the past, most notably by the fact that it has no answer for its own economic misadvantures, and above all by the fact that it no longer wins elections. When I refer to other countries where liberal centrism is also failing, I am talking about the past five years, not the 1970s.

I'm not sure there's a single Labour/Tory swing constituency that would be more likely to vote for a Labour helmed by Owen Smith.

The election will hinge on whether Labour leavers value Labour more than they value Leave. It is only because of the policy turn and grassroots surge under Corbyn that in places like Middlesborough and Mansfield and Stoke Labour still even has a chance. Tell me you honestly think Owen Smith would be doing better there.

Of course not, but that's like saying if you plopped 2019/20 Blackburn in the Champions League now would they compete like they would have in 1995 - of course they wouldn't. Owen Smith isn't the same as Blair - the same as the unions now wouldn't necessary destroy in the same way they did in the past. It's lazy to say they are the same thing.

Also, when you look at the last five years, what you'll notice with the rise of extremism is international chaos. All highlighting that does is reinforce my point - that this populism is a bubble that will pop. They are the few voices that were rightfully marginalised in favour of common sense in the past, especially in the UK where the average voter looks on at the likes of Farage and Momentum with horror at both sides. They are amplified beyond their actual power because of fear.

What always surprises me is that the extremes are never able to recognise their own extremes. A Corbyn supporter will easily see the lurch right of the Tories due to the fear of UKIP and their own backbenchers, but they can't see themselves as the exact opposite extreme.

 

[Tubey]

The financial crisis was global, and obviously not Labour's fault, but mindless privatisation and deregulation made it much worse than it would have been.

Yet simultaneously we're told by Labour now that austerity was a choice from the Tories, not a necessity...

The reality of course is that you are right to an extent, but it's not the real story - the financial crisis would have destroyed any government of the time, regardless of action or inaction - only the scale of destruction is up for debate.

 

[abelard]

Also, when you look at the last five years, what you'll notice with the rise of extremism is international chaos. All highlighting that does is reinforce my point - that this populism is a bubble that will pop. They are the few voices that were rightfully marginalised in favour of common sense in the past, especially in the UK where the average voter looks on at the likes of Farage and Momentum with horror at both sides. They are amplified beyond their actual power because of fear.

Wait until the next financial crisis. The Party is only just getting started.

Likewise, it is always amazing how people cling to the idea that New Labour was 'centrist', mostly just because they say so.

In economic and foreign policy terms, their objectives were every bit as radical and ideologue-driven as anything Corbyn is attempting.

Anyone who sets up Momentum and UKIP on opposite poles and Blair in the middle sees the world in terms of received narrative, and not policy.

 

[Tubey]

What policy would you advocate? The one that saw them get hammered in 2010/15 by any chance?

Honestly, 2015 wasn't far off. The problem there was Ed Milliband couldn't counter the gloss of Cameron at an election - you know, eating bacon sandwiches, the Millstone, "Red Ed" and so on...

But yeah, politically it was left of centre of Blairism but had decent appeal. If Labour were ran on roughly the same platform now they'd eviscerate the Tories in 2019, but you'd have had to have had four years of sensible opposition under a leader with wider appeal to make that a reality.

All that said, I think that's Corbyn's best hope - a 'tame' left of centre manifesto that counters the ridiculous "Stalin" extremism argument from the Tories would be very much the best thing to do. Just a bit of moderation - bin off the "ban private schools" type of crap and just have a common sense, reasonably costed manifesto that would persuade voters to hold their nose and take a chance on Corbyn.

It's so easy to forget that we've had literally a decade of austerity and Tory incompetence that should make the Labour win an absolute certainty by default. It is an open goal in theory, yet it isn't, because Labour have done everything in their power to look as bad as the Tories at every step.