By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
"In a scathing 5,700-word attack on the prime minister and his would-be successors published on Tuesday night, Blair argued that the party’s agenda should move firmly to the right, calling for the government to crack down on welfare spending, abandon net zero goals and support Donald Trump."
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Principled!?!? He took us into the illegal war to please the US and is advising we do the same now with the illegal Iran war just to please Trump, who is obviously unstable.
He also suggests dropping any progressive policies Labour might have.
Can hardly call himself a Labour member these days surely.
1
A principled man has spoken! on 10:56 - May 27 with 839 views
A principled man has spoken! on 10:22 - May 27 by jayessess
I understand that lots of people are conservatives and that's part of life. What I don't really get is the need that these people seem to have for the main party of the left to also represent their views.
Why not just join one of the right wing parties rather than agitate continuously for right wing policies in a left wing party? Why must your flavour of right-wing authoritarianism come with a red button?
[Post edited 27 May 10:24]
I sometimes wonder why the likes of Blair, Starmer and Mandelson ever joined the Labour Party
Did they ever have a tiny bit of Socialist idealism in them, or was the whole thing just an entryist plan to seize control and build a mildly social democratic party with some unpleasant authoritarian tendancies?
1
A principled man has spoken! on 10:58 - May 27 with 828 views
A principled man has spoken! on 10:53 - May 27 by naa
Principled!?!? He took us into the illegal war to please the US and is advising we do the same now with the illegal Iran war just to please Trump, who is obviously unstable.
He also suggests dropping any progressive policies Labour might have.
Can hardly call himself a Labour member these days surely.
I think you may have missed the sarcasm in the OP.
I was born underwater, I dried out in the sun.
I started humping volcanoes baby, when I was too young.
we had a discussion about most consequential prime ministers which developed into a debate on their post downing street behaviour.
blair is really ony worse than truss and johnson on this metric, apalling comments parrotting his fossil fuel paymasters. complete opposite to the decent, honourable work done by brown since (and even major & may)
A principled man has spoken! on 10:56 - May 27 by EdwardStone
I sometimes wonder why the likes of Blair, Starmer and Mandelson ever joined the Labour Party
Did they ever have a tiny bit of Socialist idealism in them, or was the whole thing just an entryist plan to seize control and build a mildly social democratic party with some unpleasant authoritarian tendancies?
Many within the New Labour movement were former communists, centred around the Marxism Today journal. They appeared to ditch the socialism whilst retaining the bureaucratic centralism and general control freakery.
1
A principled man has spoken! on 11:14 - May 27 with 762 views
Interesting quote from the essay which proves, if proof were needed, that the Blairites regarded Brown and Miliband as beyond the pale.
"Both main parties have gone off the rails by putting internal politics first and good policy second. Labour moving to the left after 2007 culminating in the absurdity of the Corbyn leadership. The Tories with Brexit. Labour moving to the left after 2007 culminating in the absurdity of the Corbyn leadership. The Tories with Brexit."
For what it is worth, I left the party under Blair (and not because of the Iraq war) but rejoined when Brown took over.
His essay also praises his own electoral success but economic conditions generally were much better than has been the case following the great financial crash, so I am not sure he is comparing like with like.
[Post edited 27 May 11:22]
2
A principled man has spoken! on 11:22 - May 27 with 727 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:19 - May 27 by DJR
Interesting quote from the essay which proves, if proof were needed, that the Blairites regarded Brown and Miliband as beyond the pale.
"Both main parties have gone off the rails by putting internal politics first and good policy second. Labour moving to the left after 2007 culminating in the absurdity of the Corbyn leadership. The Tories with Brexit. Labour moving to the left after 2007 culminating in the absurdity of the Corbyn leadership. The Tories with Brexit."
For what it is worth, I left the party under Blair (and not because of the Iraq war) but rejoined when Brown took over.
His essay also praises his own electoral success but economic conditions generally were much better than has been the case following the great financial crash, so I am not sure he is comparing like with like.
[Post edited 27 May 11:22]
He's a dinosaur and his "essay" reflects that. He's stuck in a moribund politics that hasn't been working for the majority of working people for years and years. You don't make things better by doing more of the same, and that's why we're seeing the rise of the populist far-right.
A principled man has spoken! on 11:22 - May 27 by Herbivore
He's a dinosaur and his "essay" reflects that. He's stuck in a moribund politics that hasn't been working for the majority of working people for years and years. You don't make things better by doing more of the same, and that's why we're seeing the rise of the populist far-right.
populism everywhere is a consequence of having had no growth for 2 decades. economic stagnation is at the root of it all. at least blair is focused on the right issue.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
-1
A principled man has spoken! on 11:31 - May 27 with 678 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:26 - May 27 by lowhouseblue
populism everywhere is a consequence of having had no growth for 2 decades. economic stagnation is at the root of it all. at least blair is focused on the right issue.
He really isn't. Blindly pursuing a late capitalist model that is no longer fit for purpose and is increasingly only benefiting the best off is no kind of strategy. Economic growth at all costs is partly what's got us into the mess we're in now and to keep positing the problem as the solution is really not the right way forward.
A principled man has spoken! on 11:31 - May 27 by Herbivore
He really isn't. Blindly pursuing a late capitalist model that is no longer fit for purpose and is increasingly only benefiting the best off is no kind of strategy. Economic growth at all costs is partly what's got us into the mess we're in now and to keep positing the problem as the solution is really not the right way forward.
without it none of our problems are solvable. without it people's frustration will only get worse, and we'll have a sclerotic state absorbing evermore for less and less effect. focusing only on short-term redistribution makes everyone poorer in the end. if you really want to benefit the many not the few you need to be just as clear eyed about state failure as you do about market failure. i don't think the blair article offers a convincing route forward, but his analysis of where we are is pretty useful.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
A principled man has spoken! on 11:47 - May 27 with 622 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:42 - May 27 by lowhouseblue
without it none of our problems are solvable. without it people's frustration will only get worse, and we'll have a sclerotic state absorbing evermore for less and less effect. focusing only on short-term redistribution makes everyone poorer in the end. if you really want to benefit the many not the few you need to be just as clear eyed about state failure as you do about market failure. i don't think the blair article offers a convincing route forward, but his analysis of where we are is pretty useful.
If we want to have a habitable planet in a hundred years' time then a model that prioritises more and more consumption isn't how we get there. We need to be consuming less, not more. The notion that capitalism will suddenly grow a conscience and fix problems like climate change, an ageing population, and growing inequality if only we let big businesses have less regulation and more cheap energy is for the birds. Those peddling it don't really give two shits about "the many".
It is really difficult to know what Blair's motives are because his intervention certainly isn't helpful to Labour especially when fighting a by-election that is not a dead cert. It also plays in certain narratives of both Reform and the Tories more generally.
He must surely realise that the Labour party is such that it could accept very little of what he says. And if he feels that strongly about the direction of the Labour party, the time to have made such an intervention was before the last general election but I am not aware that he did.
Maybe it is just a roundabout way of trying to tip things in Wes Streeting's favour. Streeting has always struck me as an uber-Blairite, even though his recent pronouncements on GGT seem a bit out of character.
[Post edited 27 May 13:16]
0
A principled man has spoken! on 11:58 - May 27 with 554 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:47 - May 27 by Herbivore
If we want to have a habitable planet in a hundred years' time then a model that prioritises more and more consumption isn't how we get there. We need to be consuming less, not more. The notion that capitalism will suddenly grow a conscience and fix problems like climate change, an ageing population, and growing inequality if only we let big businesses have less regulation and more cheap energy is for the birds. Those peddling it don't really give two shits about "the many".
growth doesn't mean that we need to consume more resources. productivity led growth implies the opposite. building infrastructure and green energy means we'll consume less. but people do want their material lives to improve over time - to be better off than their parents. without that over decades you get populism. if you think dividing the current gdp differently solves these problems your sums just don't add up.
redistributing the status quo means that more and more is absorbed by the state. ever ballooning welfare budgets and waste on the scale of hs2. every other european country can build railways - here it takes 3 times as long and costs 5 times as much per mile. it isn't just that it was a tory project, the civil service, the planning system, the inability to negotiate between interest groups and different objectives is endemic in the uk. scandal after scandal is exposed in public institutions - enquiry after enquiry into failures in social services - and yet the left isn't honest about state failures.
if the aim is to empower and benefit the many not the few, all this is just as relevant as the market failures we all know about.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
A principled man has spoken! on 11:59 - May 27 with 561 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:58 - May 27 by lowhouseblue
growth doesn't mean that we need to consume more resources. productivity led growth implies the opposite. building infrastructure and green energy means we'll consume less. but people do want their material lives to improve over time - to be better off than their parents. without that over decades you get populism. if you think dividing the current gdp differently solves these problems your sums just don't add up.
redistributing the status quo means that more and more is absorbed by the state. ever ballooning welfare budgets and waste on the scale of hs2. every other european country can build railways - here it takes 3 times as long and costs 5 times as much per mile. it isn't just that it was a tory project, the civil service, the planning system, the inability to negotiate between interest groups and different objectives is endemic in the uk. scandal after scandal is exposed in public institutions - enquiry after enquiry into failures in social services - and yet the left isn't honest about state failures.
if the aim is to empower and benefit the many not the few, all this is just as relevant as the market failures we all know about.
“ growth doesn't mean that we need to consume more resources. productivity led growth implies the opposite.”
Absolutely, we need better productivity for better prosperity, unfortunately successive governments have either failed to recognise that, or kicked it in to touch because GDP ‘growth’ is a good headline.
The population of the West is a small one on a global scale. Most of the growth is coming from the BRICS and other rapidly developing countries with huge populations. Growth is going to happen with or without the UK, and at a huge scale - those people are going to want the ‘niceties’ the west has enjoyed (e.g. see projections for air passenger numbers), and fossil fuel use hasn’t even peaked. The UK will form an ever smaller piece of the global economy, and whatever we do will be largely irrelevant on a global scale.
IRO the article, Blair is an egotistical berk, and should have no airtime after his disgraceful special military operations.
[Post edited 27 May 12:46]
1
A principled man has spoken! on 12:51 - May 27 with 482 views
A principled man has spoken! on 11:58 - May 27 by lowhouseblue
growth doesn't mean that we need to consume more resources. productivity led growth implies the opposite. building infrastructure and green energy means we'll consume less. but people do want their material lives to improve over time - to be better off than their parents. without that over decades you get populism. if you think dividing the current gdp differently solves these problems your sums just don't add up.
redistributing the status quo means that more and more is absorbed by the state. ever ballooning welfare budgets and waste on the scale of hs2. every other european country can build railways - here it takes 3 times as long and costs 5 times as much per mile. it isn't just that it was a tory project, the civil service, the planning system, the inability to negotiate between interest groups and different objectives is endemic in the uk. scandal after scandal is exposed in public institutions - enquiry after enquiry into failures in social services - and yet the left isn't honest about state failures.
if the aim is to empower and benefit the many not the few, all this is just as relevant as the market failures we all know about.
The US has the most "successful" example of a capitalist state and I'm not sure I'd consider that a great exemplar for how things should be.
The traditional ways need to be rethought and Blair's essay is just parroting the US way of thinking.
1
A principled man has spoken! on 12:54 - May 27 with 472 views
A principled man has spoken! on 09:54 - May 27 by Dubtractor
Yet more lobbying from a paid up shill.
Rishi Sunak tells Radio 4 that "AI is changing every aspect of our economy and our lives, and if I was back in office and looked at my diary and where I was going to spend my time, I would spend it on that"
At no point does he or the BBC mention the £373,000 given to him every year by an AI company
A principled man has spoken! on 12:51 - May 27 by naa
The US has the most "successful" example of a capitalist state and I'm not sure I'd consider that a great exemplar for how things should be.
The traditional ways need to be rethought and Blair's essay is just parroting the US way of thinking.
the us wasn't my comparison.
why does high speed rail track cost $25m per km in france but $260m in the uk?
why is the neet rate in germany half that in the uk? why in germany, for claimants under the age of 25, if they reject one job offer do they lose their basic benefit completely (only receiving an allowance for housing and heating) and if they reject a second offer they lose all benefits? are the two linked?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
A principled man has spoken! on 13:43 - May 27 with 351 views
A principled man has spoken! on 13:22 - May 27 by J2BLUE
He is 100% right though.
It's coming fast and improving every day. I use chat gpt daily now. It has almost made google obsolete for me.
Governments need to be making a plan right now for what they are going to do. So do ordinary people if they can find the time/resources to do so.
AI is good for some things, really not good for others. It's not a solution to absolutely everything as is being pushed by those with vested interests. There's also the issue that rarely gets spoken about, which is the eye watering amounts of electricity and water needed to support AI. At the minute I don't think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, other than for particular applications of it. It's a shame the genie is out of the bottle before people have really stopped to think about the impact.
Interesting article which could be said to explain Blair's evangelism for AI. It is co-authored with the New Statesmen, so presumably has some credibility.
A principled man has spoken! on 14:19 - May 27 by DJR
Interesting article which could be said to explain Blair's evangelism for AI. It is co-authored with the New Statesmen, so presumably has some credibility.
A principled man has spoken! on 14:21 - May 27 by Dubtractor
As i said earlier, he's a shill.
Indeed. And this is the issue with politics from the Blair era onwards, to a large extent the Tories and Labour have coalesced around a version of neoliberal capitalism that they are both fundamentally wedded to and from which they and (most of) their backers largely benefit. In many respects, both are small c conservative when it comes to the economy. They differ in some areas of course and on social issues there's sometimes more divergence but neither really want to disrupt the status quo. It's part of the reason lots of people feel disenchanted, the main parties don't offer any real change.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
