Current Affairs The Labour Party

[tsubaki]

I like this quote:

The source went on to say that Mr McCluskey was likely to redirect the money to left-wing grassroots organisations to support a socialist programme, "which he sees as vital to produce a Labour victory in 2024".

Here is another quote, this time by Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results."

er - McCluskey is the one calling for some kind of change here; doing the same thing over and over again is precisely what this country has been doing since 1979 and all we have to show for it is a colossal mound of debt, a failing state (in terms of the UK) and a government of incompetents.

Oh, and upwards of 50000 dead thanks to a preventable pandemic.

 

[roydo]

er - McCluskey is the one calling for some kind of change here; doing the same thing over and over again is precisely what this country has been doing since 1979 and all we have to show for it is a colossal mound of debt, a failing state (in terms of the UK) and a government of incompetents.

Oh, and upwards of 50000 dead thanks to a preventable pandemic.

How would he have prevented it?

 

[The binman chronicles]

They are not pulling all their funding only 10% that is still 90% common ground, for a broad church its pretty good going... At moment sounds like some tactical PR for the easy minded, of course if it continues to near 50% and below, Starmer really does have a problem...

Any funding drop will mean less cash for campaigning. You can bet them lot will have more money to throw at it even if Labour had all the funding. So it is damaging and ultimately self-harming.

 

[Black Belt Jones]

Did they have a democratic vote before he decided how to spend his members money?

Not sure the members are that invested in Unite's national level politics. Or they were just frustrated / disengaged by the Corbyn fiasco. Big Len was elected on 12% voter turnout last time out.

 

[tsubaki]

How would he have prevented it?

I think you are misunderstanding completely the role of a head of a union, roydo

 

[The binman chronicles]

er - McCluskey is the one calling for some kind of change here; doing the same thing over and over again is precisely what this country has been doing since 1979 and all we have to show for it is a colossal mound of debt, a failing state (in terms of the UK) and a government of incompetents.

Oh, and upwards of 50000 dead thanks to a preventable pandemic.

Maybe the country needs a revolution but the problem is the majority who vote keep picking the same way. One more election and that's near as dammit 20 years and if you include Blair's as Tory-lite it will be 50 years.

This mess of a party has already matched the (modern) record of 4 in a row that Thatcher and Major won. It shows the appetite for socialism in this country and I have always said I would rather have a centre leaning Labour government than a Tory one. Like you mentioned maybe this whole covid situation would have been handled a lot better under Labour and that makes me sad to think of the missed opportunities as this Tory government was there for the taking.

 

[roydo]

I think you are misunderstanding completely the role of a head of a union, roydo

How?

Unless I am mistaken, a union is first and foremost a collective body to protect workers rights, provide support and guidance with grievances between workers and employers, with a smattering of woolly stuff around all that.

Or maybe I do misunderstand. But thats what I was told my union would do when I was in one.

 

[tsubaki]

Maybe the country needs a revolution but the problem is the majority who vote keep picking the same way. One more election and that's near as dammit 20 years and if you include Blair's as Tory-lite it will be 50 years.

This mess of a party has already matched the (modern) record of 4 in a row that Thatcher and Major won. It shows the appetite for socialism in this country and I have always said I would rather have a centre leaning Labour government than a Tory one. Like you mentioned maybe this whole covid situation would have been handled a lot better under Labour and that makes me sad to think of the missed opportunities as this Tory government was there for the taking.

It doesn’t need a revolution - the problem is that a whole industry has popped up to slate whatever the left says, despite the fact that quite often exactly the same ideas get proposed by the Tories and somehow acceptable then (as Johnson did yesterday with calls for massive new house building, renewables and national gigabit broadband). The need and appetite for proper reform is there, it’s just been misdirected into Brexit, anti-immigrant crap and all the rest of the blaming culture.

Starmer has my support, but honestly unless all sides of Labour understand that the deck is stacked against them in a big way then there is no reason to suspect that Starmerism is going to “appeal to the British people” any more than anything else has.

 

[davek]

Yes they can obviously put their money where they want. But it doesn't help change the fact that it likely leads to 5 more years of Tory rule if they don't find common ground and pull together.

They had common ground during Starmer's leadership campaign, where he based his pitch on a promise to continue to put human rights and the restructuring of the economy to the forefront of the LP. He also committed to a non-sectarian attitude and tolerance of all wings of the party. He reneged on that. He's been as draconian on human rights as when he was DPP, and he refuses to commit to any policies on the economy and indeed courts the financial houses of the City of London. And he's gone after the left, expelling RLB on a pretext (while retaining Green, her successor, in education after a far worse, near criminal, gaffe) and he surrounds himself with people who worked for Blair.

The Unite announcement is the consequence of Starmer's attack on those commitments he made just 7/8 months ago.

 

[The binman chronicles]

They had common ground during Starmer's leadership campaign, where he based his pitch on a promise to continue to put human rights and the restructuring of the economy to the forefront of the LP. He also committed to a non-sectarian attitude and tolerance of all wings of the party. He reneged on that. He's been as draconian on human rights as when he was DPP, and he refuses to commit to any policies on the economy and indeed courts the financial houses of the City of London. And he's gone after the left, expelling RLB on a pretext (while retaining Green, her successor, in education after a far worse, near criminal, gaffe) and he surrounds himself with people who worked for Blair.

The Unite announcement is the consequence of Starmer's attack on those commitments he made just 7/8 months ago.

But the choice is there, would you prefer Boris or Keir? If we want anything less than the former then get behind him whether you have problems or not. One is far, far worse than the other.

 

[davek]

But the choice is there, would you prefer Boris or Keir? If we want anything less than the former then get behind him whether you have problems or not. One is far, far worse than the other.

Not to me they're not. Why is it do you think that Stamer gives so much support to the Tories?

1/ Starmer in office would change nothing about the fundamentally unequal relations between people in this country...just as Blairism never did.
2/ His election would put back the cause of left wing politics decades, because people would associate that neo-liberal fake with a party associated with it (in however a diluted form).

We need a complete break with Labour. It's gone. Infested forever with the parasites that colonised it in the 80s.

 

[roydo]

But the choice is there, would you prefer Boris or Keir? If we want anything less than the former then get behind him whether you have problems or not. One is far, far worse than the other.

Some are more interested in fighting a fight 99% of people dont give a flying one about though.

To a casual observer, (me), its an unappetising sight.

edit. See above.

 

[catcherintherye]

I guess its folk in politics/academia who dont really work, preaching about being the party for the working class when they dont actually know what they are on about.

Ah ok. What's wrong with being in academia then?

All I can say is I work, have done since I was 15 doing a variety of different jobs (never politics or academia) doing jobs most would associate with being "working class" and I've never been frustrated by an academic, politician or anyone else acknowledging this. It's not an insult is it?

 

[catcherintherye]

Did they have a democratic vote before he decided how to spend his members money?

His members are entitled to bring a vote about affiliation if they wanted. Or they can just vote him out if they dont agree with his position.

 

[catcherintherye]

I like this quote:

The source went on to say that Mr McCluskey was likely to redirect the money to left-wing grassroots organisations to support a socialist programme, "which he sees as vital to produce a Labour victory in 2024".

Here is another quote, this time by Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results."

So by that token, unions blindly pouring money into Labour needs to be considered?