| Labour Connected 09:44 - Sep 22 with 7002 views | tractordownsouth |
Quite enjoyed that speech from Starmer at the virtual conference. Of course I'm a bit biased, but it was good to see more emotional appeal in there - attacking Tory incompetence, rather than Tory ideology seems like a good plan for the early days of the parliamentary term - that can become the focus later on. It was quite light on policy, but it's still early for any major announcements, especially on a day where it'll get lost in the lockdown news cycle
Was glad to see Ruth Smeeth doing the intro as well, hopefully she'll be back in parliament in 2024. |  |
| |  |
| Labour Connected on 10:23 - Sep 23 with 878 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 10:21 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Similarly, I think Starmer has gone massively early to distance himself from the policies and the hope that was energising and engaging the people he’ll need to campaign for him. Voters have a short memory - campaigners don’t. He’s also lost people like me who would be largely supportive but now feel largely critical based on me now not trusting him on his principles or his strategy.
And it’s not a question of ideological purity. It’s my sincere belief that politics needs to deal with real-world problems or suffer the consequences, and I certainly don’t think it works along the same top-down party political lines anymore.
Starter and the centrists will be outflanked again and again the more they retreat into chasing the votes for electoral gains. Not realising that even the Tories have co-opted movements themselves to stay relevant. I despise Cummings et al and the way they game the system but they’ve understood fully the need to outflank the rational yet passive majority. Using the clarity and strength (however misguided) of the Leave voters they’ve set the agenda entirely.
I think it’s insane of the Labour Party to not take the lesson and understand that movements like XR, BLM, Corbynism and even the real underlying drivers of Scottish independence and Brexit are critical to their success and can’t be casually cast aside or ignored to please a soft Establishment or a media that the right-wingers will always be able to bring onside around their version of family, country, opportunity, taxation, etc. The Blairite move was a one-time deal because they could count on the loyalty of Labour supporters but that ship has sailed. Plus there’s nothing like the reliance on the mainstream political system nowadays.
All in all, I think Labour need to get out of their traditional party bubble to wake up to the real-world issues AND how to be effective in opposition. |
Did you miss what happened at the last election? |  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:27 - Sep 23 with 868 views | StokieBlue |
| Labour Connected on 10:21 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Similarly, I think Starmer has gone massively early to distance himself from the policies and the hope that was energising and engaging the people he’ll need to campaign for him. Voters have a short memory - campaigners don’t. He’s also lost people like me who would be largely supportive but now feel largely critical based on me now not trusting him on his principles or his strategy.
And it’s not a question of ideological purity. It’s my sincere belief that politics needs to deal with real-world problems or suffer the consequences, and I certainly don’t think it works along the same top-down party political lines anymore.
Starter and the centrists will be outflanked again and again the more they retreat into chasing the votes for electoral gains. Not realising that even the Tories have co-opted movements themselves to stay relevant. I despise Cummings et al and the way they game the system but they’ve understood fully the need to outflank the rational yet passive majority. Using the clarity and strength (however misguided) of the Leave voters they’ve set the agenda entirely.
I think it’s insane of the Labour Party to not take the lesson and understand that movements like XR, BLM, Corbynism and even the real underlying drivers of Scottish independence and Brexit are critical to their success and can’t be casually cast aside or ignored to please a soft Establishment or a media that the right-wingers will always be able to bring onside around their version of family, country, opportunity, taxation, etc. The Blairite move was a one-time deal because they could count on the loyalty of Labour supporters but that ship has sailed. Plus there’s nothing like the reliance on the mainstream political system nowadays.
All in all, I think Labour need to get out of their traditional party bubble to wake up to the real-world issues AND how to be effective in opposition. |
"I think it’s insane of the Labour Party to not take the lesson and understand that movements like XR, BLM, Corbynism"
"Corbynism" resulted in the biggest Tory majority in over 50 years and lead to the enabling of an awful government and PM. What lesson should be taken from it?
SB [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:28]
|  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:32 - Sep 23 with 854 views | Ryorry |
| Labour Connected on 10:03 - Sep 23 by StokieBlue |
What is the point of bringing stuff into the debate if you lose the election to one of the largest majorities in history? All that's been achieved is that a very poor Tory government has been enabled to really show how rubbish they are.
Surely supporting Starmer to a win is far better than having another internal fight within Labour and another Tory victory?
I just think it's naive to push for such change in one large swoop, it is far more likely to be achieved by smaller steps over a period of time once actually in power.
You are right that you've been consistent in your position, however nothing has changed in all that time and probably things are even worse now so perhaps it's worth considering that?
SB |
Some people seem to prefer theorizing about perfect utopias from ivory towers to actually achieving any incremental positive changes on the ground.
Reminds me of when I was renovating a Grade 2 listed farmouse that was derelict & on the point of collapse in the 1990s. The architect I had to engage to draw all of its windows & deal with the local council planning dept. (who were extraordinarily obstructive), said to me "[redacted] Borough Council would rather end up with a pile of stone on the ground, than have the building sympathetically renovated & kept standing - as long as the pile of stone was the original one ..." [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:34]
|  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:33 - Sep 23 with 853 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:03 - Sep 23 by StokieBlue |
What is the point of bringing stuff into the debate if you lose the election to one of the largest majorities in history? All that's been achieved is that a very poor Tory government has been enabled to really show how rubbish they are.
Surely supporting Starmer to a win is far better than having another internal fight within Labour and another Tory victory?
I just think it's naive to push for such change in one large swoop, it is far more likely to be achieved by smaller steps over a period of time once actually in power.
You are right that you've been consistent in your position, however nothing has changed in all that time and probably things are even worse now so perhaps it's worth considering that?
SB |
What is the point in going back to the politics that created the mess of Scottish independence, Brexit, EDL etc. and the growing inequalities that drive them?
What’s the point in going back to the politics that has left us with low productivity and a vulnerable, unbalanced economy?
What’s the point of going back to the politics that has been incapable of addressing the larger global issues?
What’s the point of going back to politics that’s been outflanked at every opportunity?
I know you have faith to spare for the system and traditional politics, Stoke. But tell me how that faith has been repaid over the past couple of decades or more? That system and resulting politics have made us the fragile and rudderless basket case of Western Europe and the US is looking comparable now, even with their own lunacy with Trump. |  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:39 - Sep 23 with 840 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:32 - Sep 23 by Ryorry |
Some people seem to prefer theorizing about perfect utopias from ivory towers to actually achieving any incremental positive changes on the ground.
Reminds me of when I was renovating a Grade 2 listed farmouse that was derelict & on the point of collapse in the 1990s. The architect I had to engage to draw all of its windows & deal with the local council planning dept. (who were extraordinarily obstructive), said to me "[redacted] Borough Council would rather end up with a pile of stone on the ground, than have the building sympathetically renovated & kept standing - as long as the pile of stone was the original one ..." [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:34]
|
Very unfair, I think.
I think it’s more accurate to say that too many people are accepting the current dystopia because they’re too busy gazing at their navels.
I want people and politicians to be realistic and objective and forget about the performative bobbins that ultimately is just playing around.
I have zero ideological or political purity. I just want us to get real. I’ll still keep making the point that there will be over 5 million kids living in poverty by 2022 and I’ll still see the majority ignoring it to talk about a mythical and party political long game. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:41 - Sep 23 with 835 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:23 - Sep 23 by Herbivore |
Did you miss what happened at the last election? |
No. Did you miss what was happening around it? | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:48 - Sep 23 with 818 views | Ryorry |
| Labour Connected on 10:39 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Very unfair, I think.
I think it’s more accurate to say that too many people are accepting the current dystopia because they’re too busy gazing at their navels.
I want people and politicians to be realistic and objective and forget about the performative bobbins that ultimately is just playing around.
I have zero ideological or political purity. I just want us to get real. I’ll still keep making the point that there will be over 5 million kids living in poverty by 2022 and I’ll still see the majority ignoring it to talk about a mythical and party political long game. |
And I think it's fair to say that you're the one gazing at your navel here, whilst those of us supporting Starmer are the ones being "realistic and objective" in at least being willing to give him a chance.
As for your comment "I have zero ideological or political purity" - 😂
seriously, try reading your own posts of the past 2 years+ objectively. Unfortunately I think you've lost all ability to stand back & see the wood for the trees tho.
Kids in poverty is always particularly sad, but as someone else said on previous page, Corbyn & yourself were/are able to do diddly squat about it whilst in opposition. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:50]
| |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:52 - Sep 23 with 813 views | StokieBlue |
| Labour Connected on 10:39 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Very unfair, I think.
I think it’s more accurate to say that too many people are accepting the current dystopia because they’re too busy gazing at their navels.
I want people and politicians to be realistic and objective and forget about the performative bobbins that ultimately is just playing around.
I have zero ideological or political purity. I just want us to get real. I’ll still keep making the point that there will be over 5 million kids living in poverty by 2022 and I’ll still see the majority ignoring it to talk about a mythical and party political long game. |
How will opposing Starmer affect the number of kids in poverty in 2022?
All it's likely to do is ensure that there are still kids in poverty come 2024 after the next election and the Tories are still in power. If Labour want to get in they need to be united and present a manifesto which starts the path to where you want to be but doesn't try and get there all in one go.
You ask for realism from the politicians but you don't seem to be willing to face the reality of the current parliamentary situation yourself.
SB | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Labour Connected on 10:58 - Sep 23 with 807 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 10:41 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
No. Did you miss what was happening around it? |
No, I think I understand pretty well what went on around it. But I don't see how anyone can spin it as anything other than a crushing rejection of Corbyn. There may well be some remaining enthusiasm for the kind of policies he was pushing and you don't really have any evidence at this point that those policies won't be in Labour's next manifesto. That said, the decimation Labour took at the last election won't be rectified by banging exactly the same drum they've been banging for the past 4-5 years. There has to be some distancing from the past regime to try to rebuild wider support of the party. Unfortunately too many of the hard-line Corbynites don't want to accept that and as a result refuse to accept Starmer. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 10:59 - Sep 23 with 806 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:27 - Sep 23 by StokieBlue |
"I think it’s insane of the Labour Party to not take the lesson and understand that movements like XR, BLM, Corbynism"
"Corbynism" resulted in the biggest Tory majority in over 50 years and lead to the enabling of an awful government and PM. What lesson should be taken from it?
SB [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:28]
|
That movements like this are what gets people to vote for you. Just not as effectively as the Brexit behemoth that was dominating political debate for the same period.
It’s a different age now. And based on the abject performance of traditional party politics rightly so. The Tories and their supporters especially in the media seem to have grasped that. But it would be good to use that insight for good and for real issues like a pandemic, the environmental catastrophe, severe and structural socioeconomic inequality and a future of being able to adapt to a rapidly changing world, both socially, economically and politically.
Actually I can think of few worse instruments for that than a dodgy electoral system and self-interested and entirely corruptible politicians and parties who know on which side their bread is buttered. All propped up by a fairly pathetic media that reinforces and feeds off the same drivers. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:06 - Sep 23 with 793 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:58 - Sep 23 by Herbivore |
No, I think I understand pretty well what went on around it. But I don't see how anyone can spin it as anything other than a crushing rejection of Corbyn. There may well be some remaining enthusiasm for the kind of policies he was pushing and you don't really have any evidence at this point that those policies won't be in Labour's next manifesto. That said, the decimation Labour took at the last election won't be rectified by banging exactly the same drum they've been banging for the past 4-5 years. There has to be some distancing from the past regime to try to rebuild wider support of the party. Unfortunately too many of the hard-line Corbynites don't want to accept that and as a result refuse to accept Starmer. |
I don’t remember it being about Corbynism much at all. I remember it being about Brexit for the vast majority and the narrative surrounding Corbyn for much of the rest.
Certainly the policies were a footnote and rather than addressed on their own terms were tied into the narrative of a Marxist who was out of touch.
But take Corbyn and the anti-campaign out of Corbynism and the policies all poll very well. So much so that they created a movement for the young and those of us who could see past the reactionary mud-slinging. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:21 - Sep 23 with 777 views | hype313 |
| Labour Connected on 11:06 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I don’t remember it being about Corbynism much at all. I remember it being about Brexit for the vast majority and the narrative surrounding Corbyn for much of the rest.
Certainly the policies were a footnote and rather than addressed on their own terms were tied into the narrative of a Marxist who was out of touch.
But take Corbyn and the anti-campaign out of Corbynism and the policies all poll very well. So much so that they created a movement for the young and those of us who could see past the reactionary mud-slinging. |
Brexit was the key driver for the last election as you say, but Corbyn's problem was that he didn't know where to pivot on this issue, he lacked a coherent message on this and once the MSM got hold of his position he was toast, rightly or wrongly.
As you say, lots of his policies were popular amongst the voters, but he let himself down by his historic anti EU rhetoric. |  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:22 - Sep 23 with 777 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 11:06 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I don’t remember it being about Corbynism much at all. I remember it being about Brexit for the vast majority and the narrative surrounding Corbyn for much of the rest.
Certainly the policies were a footnote and rather than addressed on their own terms were tied into the narrative of a Marxist who was out of touch.
But take Corbyn and the anti-campaign out of Corbynism and the policies all poll very well. So much so that they created a movement for the young and those of us who could see past the reactionary mud-slinging. |
It was a combination of Brexit and Corbyn. Labour didn't get their message over around Brexit and really spend 4 years not being clear about what their stance was. Corbyn was barely visible during the referendum and was luke warm in backing remain despite the majority of Labour supporters being pro-remain.
Corbyn was toxic in the end and that helped the Tories to get a majority on the scale they did despite having overseen a decade of austerity. Even if people liked aspects of Corbyn's message it was clear they didn't trust the messenger and I think a manifesto that was essentially a 20-30 year programme of reform was too much. Most people don't vote on manifestos but when you put that much in it there's always going to be plenty for the press to pick apart, and a manifesto like that just looked undeliverable even to someone like me that was prepared to support it.
You really can't just expect Labour to bounce back by carrying on like nothing happened. They got trounced. They lost in constituencies where losing always looked unthinkable. You can't pretend that didn't happen and bang the same drum but with a different drummer. There is a need to distance from Corbyn because of the toxicity associated with him. You don't seem to want to give Starmer to chance to create that difference and try to win trust back before focusing on policy. I think that's rather short sighted. He may end up disappointing, he may not, but to not even give him a chance is why the left is fooked and we keep getting lumbered with increasingly horrendous Tory governments. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:34 - Sep 23 with 766 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 11:21 - Sep 23 by hype313 |
Brexit was the key driver for the last election as you say, but Corbyn's problem was that he didn't know where to pivot on this issue, he lacked a coherent message on this and once the MSM got hold of his position he was toast, rightly or wrongly.
As you say, lots of his policies were popular amongst the voters, but he let himself down by his historic anti EU rhetoric. |
Not sure he let himself down at all. 7 out of 10 was a reasonable view and I think he softened to the EU over the years. I’m much more pro-European than he is but I respect he had other reservations.
I could pick holes in any of the major leaders’ historic and current view of Brexit and the EU if I wanted to. You’d have an absolutely field day with Johnson and Swinson was particularly arrogant in how she handled the Leave voters. But that’s the point, it was a narrative about Corbyn that was being pushed at every opportunity, not about them. They had a sympathetic press and TV media despite being at opposite extremes.
Yet it was the conciliatory, compromise position to step back from the cliff edge that was the problem. But that was Starmer’s position and doing (which I give him credit for). However thrown into the Corbyn smear nonsense it wasn’t given the respect it deserved.
Now we’re paying the ultimate price. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:42 - Sep 23 with 755 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 10:48 - Sep 23 by Ryorry |
And I think it's fair to say that you're the one gazing at your navel here, whilst those of us supporting Starmer are the ones being "realistic and objective" in at least being willing to give him a chance.
As for your comment "I have zero ideological or political purity" - 😂
seriously, try reading your own posts of the past 2 years+ objectively. Unfortunately I think you've lost all ability to stand back & see the wood for the trees tho.
Kids in poverty is always particularly sad, but as someone else said on previous page, Corbyn & yourself were/are able to do diddly squat about it whilst in opposition. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:50]
|
Well, I guess we’ll see who is addressing the real world and who is living in a narrative.
No, Corbyn didn’t achieve anything on child poverty because he wasn’t voted in. But at least it became part of the debate, even if politicians, the media and far too many of the public still seem remarkably and shamelessly blasé about the issue.
Maybe if you do go down the traditional party political route you could at least consider what you and others need to do differently based on the past 30 or 40 years while this and other inequalities have been increasing? Let me know if you need any help. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:43 - Sep 23 with 753 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 11:34 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Not sure he let himself down at all. 7 out of 10 was a reasonable view and I think he softened to the EU over the years. I’m much more pro-European than he is but I respect he had other reservations.
I could pick holes in any of the major leaders’ historic and current view of Brexit and the EU if I wanted to. You’d have an absolutely field day with Johnson and Swinson was particularly arrogant in how she handled the Leave voters. But that’s the point, it was a narrative about Corbyn that was being pushed at every opportunity, not about them. They had a sympathetic press and TV media despite being at opposite extremes.
Yet it was the conciliatory, compromise position to step back from the cliff edge that was the problem. But that was Starmer’s position and doing (which I give him credit for). However thrown into the Corbyn smear nonsense it wasn’t given the respect it deserved.
Now we’re paying the ultimate price. |
I think you're wrong in pinning this on the second referendum position. I don't see what other position Labour could adopt; had they gone fully behind delivering Brexit I think they'd have lost even more voters as the perception was they weren't as pro-leave as the Tories so the red wall still would have crumbled and the urban educated lefties would have abandoned them too. I wouldn't have voted for them. Part of the problem was that having backed a second referendum, far too late in the day, Corbyn then had the fudge position of saying he'd negotiate a deal that he then may or may not back. How is that kind of indecision going to win votes? Had Labour gone with backing a second referendum earlier and had they taken a clearer position on where they'd stand in that scenario they may have limited some of the damage.
And had Corbyn's hubris not meant that he threw himself enthusiastically into a GE he was only ever going to get trounced in we may have ended up getting to a point where a second referendun could actually happen. The Tories were painted into a corner and he gave them a way out.
Seriously, the desperation to absolve Corbyn of any responsibility at all for what happened in the GE is the kind of cultist thinking I'd expect from Johnson supporters. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 11:44]
| |
| |
| Labour Connected on 11:56 - Sep 23 with 744 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 11:43 - Sep 23 by Herbivore |
I think you're wrong in pinning this on the second referendum position. I don't see what other position Labour could adopt; had they gone fully behind delivering Brexit I think they'd have lost even more voters as the perception was they weren't as pro-leave as the Tories so the red wall still would have crumbled and the urban educated lefties would have abandoned them too. I wouldn't have voted for them. Part of the problem was that having backed a second referendum, far too late in the day, Corbyn then had the fudge position of saying he'd negotiate a deal that he then may or may not back. How is that kind of indecision going to win votes? Had Labour gone with backing a second referendum earlier and had they taken a clearer position on where they'd stand in that scenario they may have limited some of the damage.
And had Corbyn's hubris not meant that he threw himself enthusiastically into a GE he was only ever going to get trounced in we may have ended up getting to a point where a second referendun could actually happen. The Tories were painted into a corner and he gave them a way out.
Seriously, the desperation to absolve Corbyn of any responsibility at all for what happened in the GE is the kind of cultist thinking I'd expect from Johnson supporters. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 11:44]
|
I’m not pinning it on the second referendum position. But it’s in the context of what was going on around the election that it failed and became a weight and a problem in the Red Wall.
The Tory party backed by the media and online supporters were insistent on making the election about Brexit.
Where was the counterbalance to address Brexit but really as part of a more serious analysis of the government’s record and their multiple failings. Hell, even the fabulously unhelpful People’s Vote lot and the LibDems also only wanted to make it about Brexit and they reserved most of their ire for Labour’s position.
All very silly and counterproductive. But if that’s the way our politics and media work (with centrists often fighting the hardest against sensible and popular socialist/social democratic policies), then you take a leaf out of UKIP’s book and outflank them.
If Starmer can align himself at a later stage all well and good. But let’s not call this leadership. It’s a pretty clear attempt at not taking up the fight - and I reckon the closer they feel they are to power the less likely he can wheel a right-leaning Shadow Cabinet back even if he wanted to. We’re back to the same soft Establishment nonsense of Blair that started us off on this road. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:06 - Sep 23 with 728 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 11:56 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I’m not pinning it on the second referendum position. But it’s in the context of what was going on around the election that it failed and became a weight and a problem in the Red Wall.
The Tory party backed by the media and online supporters were insistent on making the election about Brexit.
Where was the counterbalance to address Brexit but really as part of a more serious analysis of the government’s record and their multiple failings. Hell, even the fabulously unhelpful People’s Vote lot and the LibDems also only wanted to make it about Brexit and they reserved most of their ire for Labour’s position.
All very silly and counterproductive. But if that’s the way our politics and media work (with centrists often fighting the hardest against sensible and popular socialist/social democratic policies), then you take a leaf out of UKIP’s book and outflank them.
If Starmer can align himself at a later stage all well and good. But let’s not call this leadership. It’s a pretty clear attempt at not taking up the fight - and I reckon the closer they feel they are to power the less likely he can wheel a right-leaning Shadow Cabinet back even if he wanted to. We’re back to the same soft Establishment nonsense of Blair that started us off on this road. |
But everyone knew the GE would be all about Brexit, that was hardly a surprise. With a bit of lateral thinking and a whole lot more humility and less hubris Labour could have avoided a Brexit GE in December last year. The Tories were properly in a corner and rather than keep them there and use Parliament to outflank the government, Corbyn went all Billy Big Boll0cks and charged into an election that nobody other than Corbyn thought he could win. He was entirely complicit in fighting and losing a Brexit GE and if he ever thought it was possible to fight it on any other lines then he's too thick to lead the country quite frankly. He totally ballsed it up.
You can't keep extolling the need to engage with reality whilst seemingly ignoring it. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 12:07]
| |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:07 - Sep 23 with 726 views | giant_stow |
| Labour Connected on 11:56 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I’m not pinning it on the second referendum position. But it’s in the context of what was going on around the election that it failed and became a weight and a problem in the Red Wall.
The Tory party backed by the media and online supporters were insistent on making the election about Brexit.
Where was the counterbalance to address Brexit but really as part of a more serious analysis of the government’s record and their multiple failings. Hell, even the fabulously unhelpful People’s Vote lot and the LibDems also only wanted to make it about Brexit and they reserved most of their ire for Labour’s position.
All very silly and counterproductive. But if that’s the way our politics and media work (with centrists often fighting the hardest against sensible and popular socialist/social democratic policies), then you take a leaf out of UKIP’s book and outflank them.
If Starmer can align himself at a later stage all well and good. But let’s not call this leadership. It’s a pretty clear attempt at not taking up the fight - and I reckon the closer they feel they are to power the less likely he can wheel a right-leaning Shadow Cabinet back even if he wanted to. We’re back to the same soft Establishment nonsense of Blair that started us off on this road. |
" But let’s not call this leadership. It’s a pretty clear attempt at not taking up the fight"
Corbyn's brexit manoeuvrings summed up neatly. |  |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:22 - Sep 23 with 713 views | Ryorry |
| Labour Connected on 11:42 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
Well, I guess we’ll see who is addressing the real world and who is living in a narrative.
No, Corbyn didn’t achieve anything on child poverty because he wasn’t voted in. But at least it became part of the debate, even if politicians, the media and far too many of the public still seem remarkably and shamelessly blasé about the issue.
Maybe if you do go down the traditional party political route you could at least consider what you and others need to do differently based on the past 30 or 40 years while this and other inequalities have been increasing? Let me know if you need any help. |
" ... it became part of the debate" - yet nothing happened to alleviate it - because Labour wasn't in power (some might challenge they'd have been able to achieve it even if they were, but that's a separate debate). Took Marcus Rashford to achieve something on that issue.
What I, Stokie, Herbivore and a few others are doing differently is giving Starmer a chance by backing him. What are you doing apart from sticking your head in the sand & only lifting it out to ask for the political moon on a utopian stick?
Anyway you're clearly never going to accept a word I say on the subject, and Stokie + Herbivore are able to put it to you with a great deal more detail, depth and length than I can, so I'll leave you to it. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:31 - Sep 23 with 707 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 12:07 - Sep 23 by giant_stow |
" But let’s not call this leadership. It’s a pretty clear attempt at not taking up the fight"
Corbyn's brexit manoeuvrings summed up neatly. |
Starmer’s position remember, and a compromise with the fabulously supportive Labour right whose reality isn’t the same as yours or mine.
I think the compromise could have brought both sides together and was a way out. But the number of people (in the media and on here) who said they just didn’t get it just shows what the UK is up against with the state of our politics and where it takes people.
Either that or the UK is unbelievably thick.
Of course, 2017 and the non-Brexit election was the big chance even for the most rabid Remainers. But they screwed that up too because they still thought Corbyn was the real enemy. The stupid idiots. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:37 - Sep 23 with 695 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 12:22 - Sep 23 by Ryorry |
" ... it became part of the debate" - yet nothing happened to alleviate it - because Labour wasn't in power (some might challenge they'd have been able to achieve it even if they were, but that's a separate debate). Took Marcus Rashford to achieve something on that issue.
What I, Stokie, Herbivore and a few others are doing differently is giving Starmer a chance by backing him. What are you doing apart from sticking your head in the sand & only lifting it out to ask for the political moon on a utopian stick?
Anyway you're clearly never going to accept a word I say on the subject, and Stokie + Herbivore are able to put it to you with a great deal more detail, depth and length than I can, so I'll leave you to it. |
Rather than blaming Corbyn for not doing anything about it while fighting an uphill battle against the established order tell me how traditional politics even in government has addressed it over the years?
That’s the system that has created it or at least exacerbated it. I’m all ears how this time it’s going to be completely different.
For me, it’s a lack of realism, objectivity and imagination that keeps us returning to the same approach but always expecting a different, better result. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 12:48 - Sep 23 with 684 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 12:06 - Sep 23 by Herbivore |
But everyone knew the GE would be all about Brexit, that was hardly a surprise. With a bit of lateral thinking and a whole lot more humility and less hubris Labour could have avoided a Brexit GE in December last year. The Tories were properly in a corner and rather than keep them there and use Parliament to outflank the government, Corbyn went all Billy Big Boll0cks and charged into an election that nobody other than Corbyn thought he could win. He was entirely complicit in fighting and losing a Brexit GE and if he ever thought it was possible to fight it on any other lines then he's too thick to lead the country quite frankly. He totally ballsed it up.
You can't keep extolling the need to engage with reality whilst seemingly ignoring it. [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 12:07]
|
I accept there’s a fairly narrow party political and electoral reality, sure. But I see the wider, more genuine reality too.
I don’t think slavish reliance on that traditional system is fit for purpose to deal with that wider reality nowadays and it’s being increasingly marginalised and outflanked.
This is also a particular UK and non-PR problem that’s paralysed us more than most other countries. Made exponentially worse by the recognised least trustworthy media in the OECD and a frightening lack of transparency about how power is used and by whom.
Fill your boots - I’ll try other routes and representative organisations or movements. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 13:04 - Sep 23 with 671 views | Herbivore |
| Labour Connected on 12:48 - Sep 23 by Darth_Koont |
I accept there’s a fairly narrow party political and electoral reality, sure. But I see the wider, more genuine reality too.
I don’t think slavish reliance on that traditional system is fit for purpose to deal with that wider reality nowadays and it’s being increasingly marginalised and outflanked.
This is also a particular UK and non-PR problem that’s paralysed us more than most other countries. Made exponentially worse by the recognised least trustworthy media in the OECD and a frightening lack of transparency about how power is used and by whom.
Fill your boots - I’ll try other routes and representative organisations or movements. |
Let me know how that works out for you.
I don't disagree about the problems with our political system but it's not like Corbyn was seeking to change that, he had no interest in PR as ultimately FTPT guarantees Labour will always be a major player in a de facto two party system. Corbyn, for all the activism of some of his supporters, is a career politician who has made a living being part of the system you rail against. For all of his own campaigns through his career, how much genuine change in Westminster has he pushed for?
And he ultimately threw the dice trying to play the game you despise and ended up enabling a huge Tory majority. This time last year there were potential avenues for the kind of different politics you so crave. The Tories had effectively lost their majority and were paralysed. There could have been moves towards a government of national unity to resolve the Brexit issue and even to potentially put PR on the table at a GE/referendum further down the line. Instead he wanted to grab power via a GE that he had no chance of winning. I honestly don't see Corbyn himself as being the kind of anti-establishment figure he's painted as. Policy wise he offered something different but he himself is a well-used cog in the Westminster machine and too often acted exactly like it. | |
| |
| Labour Connected on 13:05 - Sep 23 with 669 views | Darth_Koont |
| Labour Connected on 13:04 - Sep 23 by Herbivore |
Let me know how that works out for you.
I don't disagree about the problems with our political system but it's not like Corbyn was seeking to change that, he had no interest in PR as ultimately FTPT guarantees Labour will always be a major player in a de facto two party system. Corbyn, for all the activism of some of his supporters, is a career politician who has made a living being part of the system you rail against. For all of his own campaigns through his career, how much genuine change in Westminster has he pushed for?
And he ultimately threw the dice trying to play the game you despise and ended up enabling a huge Tory majority. This time last year there were potential avenues for the kind of different politics you so crave. The Tories had effectively lost their majority and were paralysed. There could have been moves towards a government of national unity to resolve the Brexit issue and even to potentially put PR on the table at a GE/referendum further down the line. Instead he wanted to grab power via a GE that he had no chance of winning. I honestly don't see Corbyn himself as being the kind of anti-establishment figure he's painted as. Policy wise he offered something different but he himself is a well-used cog in the Westminster machine and too often acted exactly like it. |
Cheers. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
