Current Affairs The Labour Party

[bring the ghost on]

Not really. Their role now is to cause havoc in Labour's ranks by eating into Labour votes by appealing mostly to those left behind by globalism - those on short hours, the casualised workforce and the unwaged who blame competition from incomers for work opportunities and scarce local resources for their lot in life.

Yes, I don't disagree that UKIP will seek to attract those types of Labour voters, but you don't win seats by trying to appeal to a small percentage of disillusioned voters from other parties - you win seats by having a clear identity and genuine appeal.

UKIP has totally lost it's identity due to (1) the number of years they spent campaigning for an exit from the EU and that having now being achieved, and (2) the number of years they spent building the party around one man, who has stepped down and left behind a rather talentless bunch fighting over his role.

My point is, the party is in even bigger trouble than Labour at the moment, the only party making any gains is the Tory party. I don't think it's an accurate analysis to present UKIP's loss in Stoke as a great victory for Labour.

 

[edge]

Mirror and a few others getting stuck right into the labour party today

 

[tonyhorne]

Blair gained power in '97 on a left wing platform.

The '97 manifesto was a left wing document which Blair later betrayed.

I seem to remember a lot of people discussing that they may vote Labour at that time precisely because Blair was not left wing. The Lib Dems had the real left wing agenda at that election?

 

[dannyboy]

Mirror and a few others getting stuck right into the labour party today

Practically every single major media outlet has been getting stuck into Labour for a good few years now.

Tbh it's not good enough that they haven't came up with a strategy to address it. They've had long enough.

 

[Mrk]

I seem to remember a lot of people discussing that they may vote Labour at that time precisely because Blair was not left wing. The Lib Dems had the real left wing agenda at that election?

Indeed. The idea that Blair won the '97 election on a left-wing platform is almost too ludicrous for words. They went into the election promising to broadly follow the economic strategy set out by Ken Clarke, which they abandoned in the early 2000's, engaging in a huge program of public spending - so you could argue that Blair actually moved a bit to the left on the economy...

 

[bring the ghost on]

I seem to remember a lot of people discussing that they may vote Labour at that time precisely because Blair was not left wing.

The idea that Blair won the '97 election on a left-wing platform is almost too ludicrous for words.

Agreed, Blair was left-of-centre on certain issues and very much centrist/right-of-centre on others.

Let's not forget he scrapped Clause IV well in advance of the election, so he was nailing his colours his colours to the mast from the outset - to accuse him of betraying his principles isn't correct as he never campaigned on socialist principles.

 

[1966efc]

I seem to remember a lot of people discussing that they may vote Labour at that time precisely because Blair was not left wing. The Lib Dems had the real left wing agenda at that election?

You're absolutely right - as the record shows. You'll see from the rest of my post that I go on to quote the summary from the '97 manifesto which couldn't be further from a left wing prospectus. All through that manifesto there are clear as daylight statements that 'New' Labour was separating itself from the ideology of the past.

This doesn't suit the far left argument however, which is that Blair lied about his intentions and thus the Party lost support from the working class over the next 13 years.

 

[edge]

You're absolutely right - as the record shows. You'll see from the rest of my post that I go on to quote the summary from the '97 manifesto which couldn't be further from a left wing prospectus. All through that manifesto there are clear as daylight statements that 'New' Labour was separating itself from the ideology of the past.

This doesn't suit the far left argument however, which is that Blair lied about his intentions and thus the Party lost support from the working class over the next 13 years.

It lost support because it no longer looks, talks, or thinks likes its support , more university; metropolitan ,dominated than actul factory / office floor, from top to bottom , if it didnt have people that just voted labour because thats the way they have always voted it would be in an even worse state than it is now, the scotish turned away first now it looks like England is going the same way.
Worse thing about it they just dont get it.

 

[1966efc]

It lost support because it no longer looks, talks, or thinks likes its support , more university; metropolitan ,dominated than actul factory / office floor, from top to bottom , if it didnt have people that just voted labour because thats the way they have always voted it would be in an even worse state than it is now, the scotish turned away first now it looks like England is going the same way.
Worse thing about it they just dont get it.

I've never really worked them (the far left) out.

 

[tsubaki]

It lost support because it no longer looks, talks, or thinks likes its support , more university; metropolitan ,dominated than actul factory / office floor, from top to bottom , if it didnt have people that just voted labour because thats the way they have always voted it would be in an even worse state than it is now, the scotish turned away first now it looks like England is going the same way.
Worse thing about it they just dont get it.

The thing is though that they - or at least Corbyn - does get it. That is why his most prominent and consistent opponents are all those university educated, metropolitan "we know best" mindset types of exactly the sort that lost Scotland and who would almost certainly do - at best - sod all to reconnect Labour to its natural supporters.

I've never really worked them (the far left) out.

In the main, they suffer from an excess of zeal and time with an absence of reason and experience.

 

[edge]

The thing is though that they - or at least Corbyn - does get it. That is why his most prominent and consistent opponents are all those university educated, metropolitan "we know best" mindset types of exactly the sort that lost Scotland and who would almost certainly do - at best - sod all to reconnect Labour to its natural supporters.



In the main, they suffer from an excess of zeal and time with an absence of reason and experience.

Corbyn gets it, and surrounds himself with Abbott, thornberry, the baroness Shami ?

 

[tsubaki]

You're absolutely right - as the record shows. You'll see from the rest of my post that I go on to quote the summary from the '97 manifesto which couldn't be further from a left wing prospectus. All through that manifesto there are clear as daylight statements that 'New' Labour was separating itself from the ideology of the past.

This doesn't suit the far left argument however, which is that Blair lied about his intentions and thus the Party lost support from the working class over the next 13 years.

The 1997 manifesto was by far the most left-wing manifesto that Blair ever ran on. It promised, among other things:

- a windfall tax on the privatized utilities
- freedom of information
- an end to the NHS internal market
- building new council homes
- a national volunteer citizens programme
- more money for education

 

[tsubaki]

Corbyn gets it, and surrounds himself with Abbott, thornberry, the baroness Shami ?

Yes, because those three are not the metropolitan sort who ran the party and caused the problems - they didn't lose Scotland, they didn't plant their acolytes in safe seats across the Labour heartland, they didn't allow the centre to dominate the local CLPs and they haven't flounced off to make fortunes out of their contacts / as a reward for their sterling service whilst in Government.

 

[edge]

Yes, because those three are not the metropolitan sort who ran the party and caused the problems - they didn't lose Scotland, they didn't plant their acolytes in safe seats across the Labour heartland, they didn't allow the centre to dominate the local CLPs and they haven't flounced off to make fortunes out of their contacts / as a reward for their sterling service whilst in Government.

But they are as far away from most ordinary peoples views as the man on the moon, not the sort of people in jobs of a man that gets it.
Its clear as the nose on your face the parlimentary labour party are just sitting back and letting them get on with it , till they get wiped out in a GE .

 

[tsubaki]

But they are as far away from most ordinary peoples views as the man on the moon, not the sort of people in jobs of a man that gets it.
Its clear as the nose on your face the parlimentary labour party are just sitting back and letting them get on with it , till they get wiped out in a GE .

"Ordinary people views" are usually what the S*n or the Mail insist that they are. Even something as cast-iron and as oft-cited as Trident renewal apparently is tends to wilt a bit when people are reminded that in essence all we are doing is cutting the effective bits of our military in favour of something that we would only ever actually use when the Yanks let us and when the world is between one and three minutes from ending.

I'll admit though that what you say is what is often said out there - that Corbyn et al are extremists and espouse crazy ideas; the problem is that increasingly it seems that other crazy ideas - like selling off everything that previous generations handed on to us, wrecking the terms and conditions of employment for people, making houses and education unaffordable, entering into bad deals with dodgy governments etc - have become mainstream.