| No surprise on 11:11 - Feb 19 with 3425 views | DJR |
I am not wholly convinced 8-10% of the population are progressive activists.
Indeed, my experience is that very few people, of whatever persuasion, are activists.
And even Jeremy Corbyn only increased Labour membership by a hundred thousand or so, hardly any of whom got involved in the party where I lived.
As Billy Bragg sang
You can be active with the activists
Or sleep in with the sleepers
While you're waiting for the Great Leap Forwards |  | |  |
| No surprise on 12:25 - Feb 19 with 3263 views | J2BLUE |
I've been saying this for years. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 12:34 - Feb 19 with 3224 views | lowhouseblue |
“In particular this report finds that a tendency to impose purity tests on those they will campaign with, overestimating how many people share their views, and using language that is inaccessible to the wider public is potentially driving a backlash against progressive causes rather than helping them to win people over.
“If the liberal left are going to get back on the front foot it will require a much more deliberate approach to meeting people where they are, and engaging with the old-fashioned work of persuasion, rather than expecting people to be on board with social change from the outset.”
"The authors argue that given this divergence from the rest of the population, it is a particular problem that progressive activists are more likely to misunderstand other voters, criticise them and even refuse to campaign alongside them."
"In focus groups, the authors found that progressive activists were more likely than other voters to believe their opponents had been misled by misinformation and, possibly as a result, hold a negative view about them."
also no surprise because some of us have been pointing it out on here for a long time now. |  |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 12:56 - Feb 19 with 3152 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 12:34 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
“In particular this report finds that a tendency to impose purity tests on those they will campaign with, overestimating how many people share their views, and using language that is inaccessible to the wider public is potentially driving a backlash against progressive causes rather than helping them to win people over.
“If the liberal left are going to get back on the front foot it will require a much more deliberate approach to meeting people where they are, and engaging with the old-fashioned work of persuasion, rather than expecting people to be on board with social change from the outset.”
"The authors argue that given this divergence from the rest of the population, it is a particular problem that progressive activists are more likely to misunderstand other voters, criticise them and even refuse to campaign alongside them."
"In focus groups, the authors found that progressive activists were more likely than other voters to believe their opponents had been misled by misinformation and, possibly as a result, hold a negative view about them."
also no surprise because some of us have been pointing it out on here for a long time now. |
I am probably more left wing than many on here, and have also been an activist, but I wouldn't say this applies to me.
In my view, the most illiberal (and hectoring) of all recent events was the attempt to overturn Brexit, but I always thought that was centrist (or establishment) driven. Indeed, Jeremy Corbyn was prepared to accept the vote and make the best of it. Instead, the second vote campaign pushed it too far and we ended up with the hardest Brexit possible.
I think it is also the case that many on the left of Labour (like me) favour proportional representation. Such a system inevitably ends up with the need for compromise but the centrists in Labour, and the Tory party in general, don't favour PR at all
https://labourlist.org/2024/12/proportional-representation-parliament-vote-labou
"Support for electoral reform amongst the Labour movement has surged in recent years, leading to the overwhelming endorsement of PR by annual conference in 2022, and the adoption in 2023 of party policy recognising that FPTP is both flawed and damaging to trust in politics.
Labour’s candidates at the last election largely share this consensus view – and Labour’s historic parliamentary majority has translated this into the most pro-PR intake of MPs the party has ever seen. Just days ago the All Party Parliamentary Group for Fair Elections announced that it was already one of the biggest such groups in Parliament, with 110 members most of whom are Labour MPs."
EDIT: I've never liked the word progressive. I am not sure I'd ever heard it used until Nick Clegg came along, and he was nothing like the supposed meaning of the word. [Post edited 19 Feb 13:10]
| | | |
| No surprise on 13:13 - Feb 19 with 3057 views | WeWereZombies |
| No surprise on 12:34 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
“In particular this report finds that a tendency to impose purity tests on those they will campaign with, overestimating how many people share their views, and using language that is inaccessible to the wider public is potentially driving a backlash against progressive causes rather than helping them to win people over.
“If the liberal left are going to get back on the front foot it will require a much more deliberate approach to meeting people where they are, and engaging with the old-fashioned work of persuasion, rather than expecting people to be on board with social change from the outset.”
"The authors argue that given this divergence from the rest of the population, it is a particular problem that progressive activists are more likely to misunderstand other voters, criticise them and even refuse to campaign alongside them."
"In focus groups, the authors found that progressive activists were more likely than other voters to believe their opponents had been misled by misinformation and, possibly as a result, hold a negative view about them."
also no surprise because some of us have been pointing it out on here for a long time now. |
'more likely than other voters to believe their opponents had been misled by misinformation and, possibly as a result, hold a negative view about them...' |  |
| |
| No surprise on 13:15 - Feb 19 with 3028 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 12:56 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I am probably more left wing than many on here, and have also been an activist, but I wouldn't say this applies to me.
In my view, the most illiberal (and hectoring) of all recent events was the attempt to overturn Brexit, but I always thought that was centrist (or establishment) driven. Indeed, Jeremy Corbyn was prepared to accept the vote and make the best of it. Instead, the second vote campaign pushed it too far and we ended up with the hardest Brexit possible.
I think it is also the case that many on the left of Labour (like me) favour proportional representation. Such a system inevitably ends up with the need for compromise but the centrists in Labour, and the Tory party in general, don't favour PR at all
https://labourlist.org/2024/12/proportional-representation-parliament-vote-labou
"Support for electoral reform amongst the Labour movement has surged in recent years, leading to the overwhelming endorsement of PR by annual conference in 2022, and the adoption in 2023 of party policy recognising that FPTP is both flawed and damaging to trust in politics.
Labour’s candidates at the last election largely share this consensus view – and Labour’s historic parliamentary majority has translated this into the most pro-PR intake of MPs the party has ever seen. Just days ago the All Party Parliamentary Group for Fair Elections announced that it was already one of the biggest such groups in Parliament, with 110 members most of whom are Labour MPs."
EDIT: I've never liked the word progressive. I am not sure I'd ever heard it used until Nick Clegg came along, and he was nothing like the supposed meaning of the word. [Post edited 19 Feb 13:10]
|
i agree entirely about the second vote campaign (even though i voted against brexit).
[edit: genuine typing too quickly error]
brexit has been a watershed moment for the group the article refers to (the 8% 'leftwing activists"). it has then been reinforced by a shift to mass immigration. both events have caused many 'leftwing activists' to have genuine contempt for a majority of the electorate. they simply don't understand why their views have been rejected and have therefore developed narratives to excuse themselves - misinformation / lies, manipulation by demagogues, stupidity, racism, too much free speech, culture wars, etc. politically it is such a dead end for the left. [Post edited 19 Feb 13:18]
| |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 13:33 - Feb 19 with 2921 views | Swansea_Blue |
| No surprise on 11:11 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I am not wholly convinced 8-10% of the population are progressive activists.
Indeed, my experience is that very few people, of whatever persuasion, are activists.
And even Jeremy Corbyn only increased Labour membership by a hundred thousand or so, hardly any of whom got involved in the party where I lived.
As Billy Bragg sang
You can be active with the activists
Or sleep in with the sleepers
While you're waiting for the Great Leap Forwards |
Yeah, I’d be amazed if it’s anywhere near that number. I’d also be surprised if activists are accountable for the rise of the far right? They don’t have a particularly large platform for a start. Surely the reason is more simple? The economic system we’ve had for the last 40+ years isn’t working for many people. Understandably, they’ll listen to populists who give them a target to blame (even though it’s incorrect) and promise them the moon on a stick. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 13:41 - Feb 19 with 2870 views | WeWereZombies |
| No surprise on 13:33 - Feb 19 by Swansea_Blue |
Yeah, I’d be amazed if it’s anywhere near that number. I’d also be surprised if activists are accountable for the rise of the far right? They don’t have a particularly large platform for a start. Surely the reason is more simple? The economic system we’ve had for the last 40+ years isn’t working for many people. Understandably, they’ll listen to populists who give them a target to blame (even though it’s incorrect) and promise them the moon on a stick. |
The problem with the far right is that they always shoot themselves in the foot.
Actually that's not the problem, the problem is that they shoot everyone else in the foot first...
Immigration being a case in point:
"Europe’s population crisis: see how your country compares – visualised | Migration | The Guardian" https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/feb/18/europes-population-
'Italy, France and Germany, where anti-immigration politicians have recently made inroads, would face big population declines in a zero-immigration scenario.'
The main consequences will be slower growth because the labour force will shrink, and higher tax burdens, because pension spending and the demand for health and elderly care will rise,” | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| No surprise on 13:51 - Feb 19 with 2814 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 13:41 - Feb 19 by WeWereZombies |
The problem with the far right is that they always shoot themselves in the foot.
Actually that's not the problem, the problem is that they shoot everyone else in the foot first...
Immigration being a case in point:
"Europe’s population crisis: see how your country compares – visualised | Migration | The Guardian" https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/feb/18/europes-population-
'Italy, France and Germany, where anti-immigration politicians have recently made inroads, would face big population declines in a zero-immigration scenario.'
The main consequences will be slower growth because the labour force will shrink, and higher tax burdens, because pension spending and the demand for health and elderly care will rise,” |
welcoming people because they can contribute to the labour market is a great plan. but that doesn't characterise current immigration to the uk. a minority of current migrants have come to work, most of those are unskilled, and projections are that current migrants will be a net fiscal draw, rather than being net contributors, during their life time. ironically, migration pre-brexit was exactly what you would want for economic purposes (economically active, skilled, etc) - post-brexit, overall, the same economic benefit isn't there. | |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 14:44 - Feb 19 with 2725 views | homer_123 |
| No surprise on 11:11 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I am not wholly convinced 8-10% of the population are progressive activists.
Indeed, my experience is that very few people, of whatever persuasion, are activists.
And even Jeremy Corbyn only increased Labour membership by a hundred thousand or so, hardly any of whom got involved in the party where I lived.
As Billy Bragg sang
You can be active with the activists
Or sleep in with the sleepers
While you're waiting for the Great Leap Forwards |
Keyboard activists? |  |
| |
| No surprise on 15:13 - Feb 19 with 2621 views | WeWereZombies |
| No surprise on 13:51 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
welcoming people because they can contribute to the labour market is a great plan. but that doesn't characterise current immigration to the uk. a minority of current migrants have come to work, most of those are unskilled, and projections are that current migrants will be a net fiscal draw, rather than being net contributors, during their life time. ironically, migration pre-brexit was exactly what you would want for economic purposes (economically active, skilled, etc) - post-brexit, overall, the same economic benefit isn't there. |
Any worthwhile evidence for these assertions ? | |
| |
| No surprise on 15:29 - Feb 19 with 2563 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 15:13 - Feb 19 by WeWereZombies |
Any worthwhile evidence for these assertions ? |
yes - the ons data which is published quarterly. | |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 15:29 - Feb 19 with 2558 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 12:25 - Feb 19 by J2BLUE |
I've been saying this for years. |
it's worth reading the exec summary of the report - i suspect you'd enjoy it. | |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 15:52 - Feb 19 with 2515 views | leitrimblue |
| No surprise on 15:29 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
it's worth reading the exec summary of the report - i suspect you'd enjoy it. |
OMG Think I may be a disengaged battler.. |  | | |
| No surprise on 15:59 - Feb 19 with 2476 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 15:52 - Feb 19 by leitrimblue |
OMG Think I may be a disengaged battler.. |
i feel that i combine the best of a civic pragmatist and an established liberal. | |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 16:22 - Feb 19 with 2434 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 15:52 - Feb 19 by leitrimblue |
OMG Think I may be a disengaged battler.. |
I can't make up my mind if I'm a progressive activist, a civic pragmatist, a disengaged battler, a loyal national, an established liberal, a disengaged traditionalist or a backbone conservative!
More seriously, I can't stand this sort of stuff, which indicates to me all that is wrong with modern day politics, where focus groups and Mondeo man or Worcester Women dominate.
I often think that polling companies and the like come up with this sort of nonsense in order to make money (Deborah Mattison and the Observer springs to mind), and at the same time fool their clients (in this case More in Common) into thinking this sort of stuff makes any difference in the scheme of things.
The problem is that if you try to rely on focus groups, or seek to appeal to everyone, you end up pleasing no one because no one knows what you stand for, as Starmer is finding out
For me (and paraphrasing Groucho Marx)
I don’t want to belong to any [imaginary group] that would have me as a member. [Post edited 19 Feb 16:28]
| | | |
| No surprise on 16:43 - Feb 19 with 2359 views | leitrimblue |
| No surprise on 15:59 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
i feel that i combine the best of a civic pragmatist and an established liberal. |
The disengaged battler appears to be the cheese in your civic pragmatist and established Liberal sandwich  | | | |
| No surprise on 16:47 - Feb 19 with 2337 views | leitrimblue |
| No surprise on 16:22 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I can't make up my mind if I'm a progressive activist, a civic pragmatist, a disengaged battler, a loyal national, an established liberal, a disengaged traditionalist or a backbone conservative!
More seriously, I can't stand this sort of stuff, which indicates to me all that is wrong with modern day politics, where focus groups and Mondeo man or Worcester Women dominate.
I often think that polling companies and the like come up with this sort of nonsense in order to make money (Deborah Mattison and the Observer springs to mind), and at the same time fool their clients (in this case More in Common) into thinking this sort of stuff makes any difference in the scheme of things.
The problem is that if you try to rely on focus groups, or seek to appeal to everyone, you end up pleasing no one because no one knows what you stand for, as Starmer is finding out
For me (and paraphrasing Groucho Marx)
I don’t want to belong to any [imaginary group] that would have me as a member. [Post edited 19 Feb 16:28]
|
I haven't had time to properly check out what us disengaged battlers are supposed to stand for yet. But obviously once I do I will be defending these views as if my life depended on it. And judging badly all those who don't stand for exactly the same things as us | | | |
| No surprise on 18:27 - Feb 19 with 2149 views | DJR |
| No surprise on 15:59 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
i feel that i combine the best of a civic pragmatist and an established liberal. |
This would appear to suggest such rigid groups are a bit of a nonsense, as I indicated above. | | | |
| No surprise on 18:32 - Feb 19 with 2105 views | lowhouseblue |
| No surprise on 18:27 - Feb 19 by DJR |
This would appear to suggest such rigid groups are a bit of a nonsense, as I indicated above. |
categories often have slightly fuzzy edges. these things are only ever illustrative. | |
| 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 |
| |
| No surprise on 18:42 - Feb 19 with 2068 views | Dubtractor |
| No surprise on 13:51 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
welcoming people because they can contribute to the labour market is a great plan. but that doesn't characterise current immigration to the uk. a minority of current migrants have come to work, most of those are unskilled, and projections are that current migrants will be a net fiscal draw, rather than being net contributors, during their life time. ironically, migration pre-brexit was exactly what you would want for economic purposes (economically active, skilled, etc) - post-brexit, overall, the same economic benefit isn't there. |
I tend to avoid immigration threads, as they are largely a mess of arguments, but I'm going to break cover here.
I've never been a fan of the 'immigration has a net benefit to the UK' argument. Not because I disagree with the point, but more because its the sort of argument that is easy to make if you're not living in the areas most affected by immigration. Telling people who are unhappy about immigration, who possibly do live in those areas, that immigration has a 'net benefit' just feels a bit tone deaf to me.
Edit: just to add, I say this as a Guardian reading lefty who mostly thinks that immigration is a good thing. [Post edited 19 Feb 18:45]
|  |
| |
| No surprise on 19:05 - Feb 19 with 2004 views | Plums |
| No surprise on 16:22 - Feb 19 by DJR |
I can't make up my mind if I'm a progressive activist, a civic pragmatist, a disengaged battler, a loyal national, an established liberal, a disengaged traditionalist or a backbone conservative!
More seriously, I can't stand this sort of stuff, which indicates to me all that is wrong with modern day politics, where focus groups and Mondeo man or Worcester Women dominate.
I often think that polling companies and the like come up with this sort of nonsense in order to make money (Deborah Mattison and the Observer springs to mind), and at the same time fool their clients (in this case More in Common) into thinking this sort of stuff makes any difference in the scheme of things.
The problem is that if you try to rely on focus groups, or seek to appeal to everyone, you end up pleasing no one because no one knows what you stand for, as Starmer is finding out
For me (and paraphrasing Groucho Marx)
I don’t want to belong to any [imaginary group] that would have me as a member. [Post edited 19 Feb 16:28]
|
I agree totally. I don't tend to watch the news because a 20 second vox pop with uninformed Betty in Barnsley market now appears to be the primary content. Public political discourse has been dumbed down and become so binary that it's simply pointless in engaging with it. |  |
| |
| No surprise on 20:11 - Feb 19 with 1870 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
As an aside who they feck came up with 'progressive' as a thing and when? |  |
| |
| No surprise on 20:21 - Feb 19 with 1831 views | Oldsmoker |
| No surprise on 19:05 - Feb 19 by Plums |
I agree totally. I don't tend to watch the news because a 20 second vox pop with uninformed Betty in Barnsley market now appears to be the primary content. Public political discourse has been dumbed down and become so binary that it's simply pointless in engaging with it. |
Have you watched any podcasts from 'respected' journos with opinions.
e.g. The Rest is Politics, News agents etc.
They have one thing to say and they take 20 minutes to say it and repeat the same 'thing' many times in different ways. Boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need Betty from Barnsley types to scream a Seig Mail like Headline in 20 seconds 'cos that will wake up the masses.
It can be absolute lies - 'cos that doesn't matter anymore apparently. [Post edited 19 Feb 20:21]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
