Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Spadge Vernacular]

Starmer should be setting his stall out now for what sort of country we want to be. The problem will be if, in two or three years, just before an early election, he starts pushing the Labour agenda. It needs to be now, and it needs to be radical. Otherwise Labour are out of power and the Tories, the centrists, and their supporters can keep laughing as the poorest keep getting hit

I understand why you want this and that many might not feel their views are being represented at present but the danger is that if he/Labour start pushing radical policies now, at a time the Tories have just embarked on such enormous financial support schemes, that they would probably have all of their arguments and ideas shot down and with some justification. There will be a time for such arguments but now might not be the time for them, no matter how frustrating this may be.

 

[dead_soft]

I understand why you want this and that many might not feel their views are being represented at present but the danger is that if he/Labour start pushing radical policies now, at a time the Tories have just embarked on such enormous financial support schemes, that they would probably have all of their arguments and ideas shot down and with some justification. There will be a time for such arguments but now might not be the time for them, no matter how frustrating this may be.

The only similar precedent we’ve had for this suggests otherwise - as has been repeated a lot recently, the Second World War lead to a radical government.
The country sees that money is there to be spent, it is starting to reject austerity and the idea of household debt mirroring national debt.
Radical policies don’t seem as radical if they’ve been part of the conversation for years leading up to the election. The public are able to follow new ideas if they are given the basis for it but we need long term planning and conversation.

 

[tsubaki]

The only similar precedent we’ve had for this suggests otherwise - as has been repeated a lot recently, the Second World War lead to a radical government.
The country sees that money is there to be spent, it is starting to reject austerity and the idea of household debt mirroring national debt.
Radical policies don’t seem as radical if they’ve been part of the conversation for years leading up to the election. The public are able to follow new ideas if they are given the basis for it but we need long term planning and conversation.

TBF I think there is a bit of a danger there in assuming that it was radical policies that was the deciding factor in the 1945 election; I think it was at least as important that Labour in 1945 were seen as competent (Attlee especially) at delivering those policies, that the country had just largely experienced the policies anyway and that they were seen as fair to the country as a whole.

The country is currently living through one of those things (increased government spending), so that is one box ticked - but Starmer isn't going to be able to answer the competency question in the same way Attlee did (unless this government collapses and a national unity one replaces it), and the fairness question is one that requires attacks on the government for its corruption and the promotion of an alternative by Labour.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

The only similar precedent we’ve had for this suggests otherwise - as has been repeated a lot recently, the Second World War lead to a radical government.
The country sees that money is there to be spent, it is starting to reject austerity and the idea of household debt mirroring national debt.
Radical policies don’t seem as radical if they’ve been part of the conversation for years leading up to the election. The public are able to follow new ideas if they are given the basis for it but we need long term planning and conversation.

I understand the sentiment behind the comparison but WWII was infinitely more destructive. During WWII countries sought to maximise their workforces, pushing them to the limit, during Covid governments have had to minimise economies and support them through periods of closure with a strategic view to kick-starting the economy once safe. From an infrastructure perspective, the virus is not physically destroying essential infrastructure. WWII lasted 5 years and cost 60 million lives. Outside of a doomsday scenario, it would appear that we are out of the worst of this, if not out of the woods. Assuming that this is so, our and global economies will most likely be back up to speed within a couple of years. There is going to be an emotional/mental fallout and some economic price to pay but even with this, there is talk of the Covid debt being written off. Considering these points, I am not confident that WWII is an ideal comparator.

Politically in many respects, it's new terrain and so I am not sure that there is a clear strategic pathway at this point. It could be that shouting about investment and an end to austerity would get the majority to listen, but then again a large percentage/most of them have just had the best part of a year at home being supported by the Tory’s. I’m not suggesting that I think that the political climate is great now, far from it, it’s flat and secondary because there is a virus keeping me at home, but my mortgage is being paid, there is food on the table as well as the little luxuries that I enjoy. The fact that the big debate at the moment is about when can we start spending our money at pubs, restaurants and on summer holidays is indicative of the challenge that Labour is facing, in my humble opinion.

 

[peteblue]

I understand why you want this and that many might not feel their views are being represented at present but the danger is that if he/Labour start pushing radical policies now, at a time the Tories have just embarked on such enormous financial support schemes, that they would probably have all of their arguments and ideas shot down and with some justification. There will be a time for such arguments but now might not be the time for them, no matter how frustrating this may be.

I think you are spot on. Starmer could come out with a shed load of policies, Boris would rubbish some and steal the good ones himself...and get away with it, while Starmer looked on, forensically, like a rabbit caught in headlights........

 

[davek]

There are no words....

 

[LEONARD]

Neo Fascist scumbag jailed for threats against Jess Phillips.

I like Jess, she was principled in opposing bigot parents in Birmingham, who opposed positive LGBTQ topics in schools.

White supremacist who targeted Jess Phillips sentenced to two years in prison

Tony Eckersley sent a picture of Jo Cox along with the threat to ‘have you dealt with’

www.theguardian.com

 

[dead_soft]

View attachment 123606

There are no words....

'Look, the centrists have said the common working class Brit hates the EU, immigrants, and benefits cheats and loves the Royal Family so let's do this right this time'

 

[Connor]

King

 

[JimmyJeffers]

King

Unfortunately, decent ideas like that got drowned by brexit and it’s even more relevant now with the growth in home working.

 

[Tin-Tin]

 

[peteblue]

Keir Starmer: ‘I’m not like Boris Johnson. There’s almost nothing we have in common’​

apart from both being tories......

 

[BigMick]

 

[peteblue]

That’s Corbyn skewered.....and Miliband ....surprised at the Brown results....with Blair doing well it looks like the sample vote prefer ‘Tory Lite’.....

 

[BigMick]

That’s Corbyn skewered.....and Miliband ....surprised at the Brown results....with Blair doing well it looks like the sample vote prefer ‘Tory Lite’.....

Yes I was surprised too. Think it says more about the ineptitude of the two previous leaders than anything positive about Starmer.