Labour U Turns Part 164

[SydneyRover]

But fortunately there are plenty of those on the other side demonstrating exactly why it would be insane to vote for the tories, not forgetting that governments invariably get voted out.

[BillyStubbsTears]

This thread should really be renamed "Reasons not to vote Labour part 164", although that might be underselling the actual number.

What is the point of a party that is actively promising not to change anything. Are they just going to magic growth out of thin air, or something?

MM

Right back at yer.

What is the point of a party actively promising to change everything and having pretty much zero chance of forming a government?

If you had ever criticised the Corbynista takeover of the Labour party, leading it to the worst election result in a century and very nearly posing existential questions over Labour, your hand wringing now would carry more weight.

But it was ever thus with the Left. Being ideologically sound was always more important than actually winning. And when a more centre-left Labour actually does win, the Left will do what it's always done. Sit on the sidelines ignoring the good it does and complaining that it doesn't do everything the Left wants.

You're a clever lad. Stand back and look at the big picture. This is a once in a generation chance to marginalised the Tories for a generation. But Labour starts with a ball and chain, just as it did under Blair. It is still associated by much of the electorate with the unelectable nature of recent leaders from the Left.

The plan is, as with Blair, to not scare the horses. Initially prove yourselves as a safe pair of hands. Rebuilding society in a left-leaning-direction will take 20 years, not 20 months. It's unsexy. It's boring. It doesn't bring idealistic folk from the Left to the barricades.

Do I agree? No, I think it is too cautious. But I understand where it comes from. And if I'd been a Corbynista, I'd be starting from a position of gob shut humility, rather than shouting the odds.

[MachoMadness]

This thread should really be renamed "Reasons not to vote Labour part 164", although that might be underselling the actual number.

What is the point of a party that is actively promising not to change anything. Are they just going to magic growth out of thin air, or something?

MM

Right back at yer.

What is the point of a party actively promising to change everything and having pretty much zero chance of forming a government?

If you had ever criticised the Corbynista takeover of the Labour party, leading it to the worst election result in a century and very nearly posing existential questions over Labour, your hand wringing now would carry more weight.

But it was ever thus with the Left. Being ideologically sound was always more important than actually winning. And when a more centre-left Labour actually does win, the Left will do what it's always done. Sit on the sidelines ignoring the good it does and complaining that it doesn't do everything the Left wants.

You're a clever lad. Stand back and look at the big picture. This is a once in a generation chance to marginalised the Tories for a generation. But Labour starts with a ball and chain, just as it did under Blair. It is still associated by much of the electorate with the unelectable nature of recent leaders from the Left.

The plan is, as with Blair, to not scare the horses. Initially prove yourselves as a safe pair of hands. Rebuilding society in a left-leaning-direction will take 20 years, not 20 months. It's unsexy. It's boring. It doesn't bring idealistic folk from the Left to the barricades.

Do I agree? No, I think it is too cautious. But I understand where it comes from. And if I'd been a Corbynista, I'd be starting from a position of gob shut humility, rather than shouting the odds.

Are you seriously trying to argue the current Labour Party is promising to be centre left? They are further to the right than Theresa May's government on almost every issue you could care to name. And the only issue they appear to be good on - the £28bn green energy pledge - certain figures seem to be set on chipping away at by constantly briefing against it.

I'll ask a question again that I've asked several times, with no answer. Labour have spent years successfully wooing Tory donors. Why do you think those donors have switched allegiance? Do you think they did so in exchange for nothing? Or do you think they'll expect a Labour Govt to look after their interests?

Labour does not need to be this far right to marginalise the Tories for a generation. The Tories are done. Lee Anderson is the best they have to offer. But Labour are choosing to adopt these positions because influential figures in the party - like Epstein's mate Mandelson - see it as a chance to marginalise the Left, more than the Tories. It's factional bullshit - they're more focused on being ideologically sound, you could say! Where was this talk of ideological purity when the right of the Labour Party was explicitly trying to sabotage its own election chances, by the way?

But we've been round this estate before. You believe Labour is being smart and pragmatic, and they're only pretending to be rubbish. I believe they are shunting the Overton window into very dangerous territory and shackling themselves into running a grim election campaign with a grim manifesto. Either way, they've made it clear they don't want or need my vote.

[SydneyRover]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

[SydneyRover]

And there's more, you can see how fickle some/plenty of those that want to believe they are left/far left standing shoulder to shoulder with working people (not) are when a disreputable dangerous oaf dangles a freedom carrot out front they immediately ditch those principles for the spare set they had under the bed.

[normal rules]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

Uk unemployment is currently the lowest it’s been since 1974. (ONS) that to me says we have a thriving business industry and plenty of people in jobs . What needs to change ?

[SydneyRover]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

Uk unemployment is currently the lowest it’s been since 1974. (ONS) that to me says we have a thriving business industry and plenty of people in jobs . What needs to change ?

Nothing at all nr in your world

[normal rules]

Following the post pandemic challenges 2024 will be the year the uk turns a page. Inflation returning closer to normal levels, progress on regional growth and real incomes improving provides optimism for the year ahead, despite the legacy of higher consumer prices and rising housing costs.

Not my words. But those of PWC for the UK economic outlook for 2024.

[SydneyRover]

Following the post pandemic challenges 2024 will be the year the uk turns a page. Inflation returning closer to normal levels, progress on regional growth and real incomes improving provides optimism for the year ahead, despite the legacy of higher consumer prices and rising housing costs.

Not my words. But those of PWC for the UK economic outlook for 2024.

And?

[SydneyRover]

I think you are trying to make the case for another tory government by posting up scraps you find via google, If you want some political cred on this topic nr then make the case why and how they will won the next election. If you're not I'm not sure what your ramblings are all about.

[MachoMadness]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

Here's the crux of it. I don't give a shit about Labour overcoming an 80 seat majority. That in itself means nothing. What is important to me is what Labour is saying they will do when in power.

How are Labour proposing to create jobs and build the economy? You should be asking them, not me. At the minute they seem to mostly talk about growing the economy without spending any money or redistributing wealth. Nice one.

[SydneyRover]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

Here's the crux of it. I don't give a shit about Labour overcoming an 80 seat majority. That in itself means nothing. What is important to me is what Labour is saying they will do when in power.

How are Labour proposing to create jobs and build the economy? You should be asking them, not me. At the minute they seem to mostly talk about growing the economy without spending any money or redistributing wealth. Nice one.

No, MM it's you with the problem of where you want to hang your vote and whether you want another tory government. I can't make that argument that for you, it's for you to decide.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Seriously MM? you need to get real, how the hell is labour going to overcome an 80 seat majority without signalling to business that they are not anti-business and without taking the centre ground.

The UK needs business to thrive to create jobs and build the economy, would you like to expand on a plan to take office without those things.

In your own time

Uk unemployment is currently the lowest it’s been since 1974. (ONS) that to me says we have a thriving business industry and plenty of people in jobs . What needs to change ?

I'd start by looking at the people sponsoring Labour and ask how can they become richer, more secure personally. It's not about redistribution of wealth - the check on the runaway train of capitalism. It's not about the redistribution of power, eg through knowledge, security for the people, education, and again wealth.

[Bristol Red Rover]

BST, and others are in denial about the sabotage of Corbyn by those in control of the Labour Party who have certain agendas that are not to do with Socialism. Without them and their actions we'd have a real socialist government right now.

[Bristol Red Rover]

I think you are trying to make the case for another tory government by posting up scraps you find via google, If you want some political cred on this topic nr then make the case why and how they will won the next election. If you're not I'm not sure what your ramblings are all about.

As has been said, it's not about which party wins,  it's about what they'll do. That's all very clear.

[MachoMadness]

Schrodinger's leftist. The left doesn't matter, but then when the left withholds their votes it risks another Tory government.

[albie]

The assumption behind much of this discussion is that people want to vote AGAINST something, in this case the incompetent Tories, rather than FOR something, such as a new policy agenda.

Labour are not making a case for change, they are pitching to those who want to see different managers for a failing system.

This misses the point by a country mile, because the weaknesses in the UK economy cannot be managed without structural reform.
You cannot address key challenges, like climate change, by protecting the financial interests of those who created many of the problems we face.

Getting the endorsement of the City of London means supporting their business model, even where it runs counter to the need to reform in important sectors of the economy.
I understand the need to gain power, but that is meaningless if you do not have a policy agenda for how to use that power to deliver social change.

The pitch seems to be vote for us and blindly hope that the measures we introduce will be what you would wish to see.
This is despite Labour saying that they will not reverse many Tory legacies, even blatantly unpopular ones.

It runs up against common sense to support an unknown prospect with your future prosperity.
Why vote for austerity again because Reeves has renamed it "fiscal rules", and some other rebrand?

[BillyStubbsTears]

MM

I don't know if you are old enough to have been politically aware in the mid 90s.

If you are, you'll remember that exactly the same criticisms were fired at Blair/Brown.

Their Governments produced.

A decade of unprecedentedly low inflation and unemployment.

A huge increase in funding for the regions, for state education and the NHS.

The Good Friday Agreement.

Same sex marriages.

A huge reduction in child poverty.

The almost elimination of street sleeping and dozens of other, mostly incremental but collectively significant moves leftwards.

And when the crunch came, Brown gave world leadership in preventing a second Great Depression.

The Left called them Red Tories.

Blair didn't come from nowhere. He was a reaction to the calamity of the Bennites taking over the party and making them unelectable.

The Left sat on the sidelines sniping and complaining that he wasn't what they wanted. People in here who claim to be left wing voted against Brown in 2010 because, apparently, he was no better than having the Tories in power.

Did I uncritically support those Governments? Nope. I railed against Blair because he wasn't as radical as I wanted. But I'll tell you this. I'd have taken 1 Blair over a hundred Benns and Foots.

And today, I have all sorts of criticisms of Starmer. But I'd take one of him over 100 Corbyns.

This is a once in a generation chance to isolate the Tories, leave them to rip themselves apart and let Labour get on with the 2 decade job of repairing the damage of the last 14 years. You don't do that by being as radical as you want. You do it by making Labour the natural home to swing voters, who are going to have a choice between a limited Labour party and a batshit far right Tory one.

You may prefer ideological purity and Opposition. You may want someone to tip the system on its head. You had that from 15-19. Fat lot of f**king good it did. Your call.

[i_ateallthepies]

I do wonder if this Labour election strategy runs the same risk that the Cameron Referendum strategy did, giving an unpopular message in the expectation that it couldn't lose.  Having said that, given the Lib-Dems have never been so totally anonymous since they came into being are the Labour Left prepared to see another Tory government for the next God knows how long?

[albie]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

[selby]

  If  the Reform Party get the exposure in the media, I think the numbers that will leave the labour vote, especially in the red wall areas will impact on the Labour vote as much as the Tories.
  Probably not this election but they could well become a credible danger to both major parties.
  The Liberal party is just a prisoner of the educated idiots and could well also lose votes to them after their glorious leaders bad publicity that will get louder cometh the day.
  If he didn't know what was going on in a company like the Post Office, he would be good looking after a country the prat.   

[BillyStubbsTears]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

If only we'd ever tried a genuine left wing approach eh? That might have worked.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Looks like the green money they proposed is gone too.  What's next?

[tyke1962]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

If only we'd ever tried a genuine left wing approach eh? That might have worked.

Don't come sqeeling Billy about the far right gathering pace when a Labour government just accepts the status quo .

The far right will eat you for breakfast , dinner and tea .

[Bristol Red Rover]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

If only we'd ever tried a genuine left wing approach eh? That might have worked.

Tell that to the managers of Labour,  ones who benefit from being more right wing, as well as the Israeli influence.  Without them we'd have had a socialist government. But very weirdly, you are consistently completely blind to that. Ostrich stylee.

[drfchound]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

For quite a few years I have read posts on here battering the Tory’s because of their cronyism but nothing about it is happening with the Labour Party I guess it must be ok because no one has mentioned it.
I am beginning to wonder whether I should vote Labour or not in the coming election.
Are they any different?

[SydneyRover]

Schrodinger's leftist. The left doesn't matter, but then when the left withholds their votes it risks another Tory government.

To be able to add up also help MM, Labour and the far left no centre = no government

[SydneyRover]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

If only we'd ever tried a genuine left wing approach eh? That might have worked.

Don't come sqeeling Billy about the far right gathering pace when a Labour government just accepts the status quo .

The far right will eat you for breakfast , dinner and tea .

A bit hypocritical tyke when you promote and vote with the far right aye?

You've been playing with a busted flush for too long tyke, the only person that appears not to know is yourself.

[tyke1962]

Follow the corporate money:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2023/12/labour-for-sale/

Who pays the piper, eh!

If only we'd ever tried a genuine left wing approach eh? That might have worked.

Don't come sqeeling Billy about the far right gathering pace when a Labour government just accepts the status quo .

The far right will eat you for breakfast , dinner and tea .

A bit hypocritical tyke when you promote and vote with the far right aye?

You've been playing with a busted flush for too long tyke, the only person that appears not to know is yourself.

Not as much as emigrating to a right wing country with some of the toughest immigration laws on the planet that voted not to give it's First People a voice in parliament .

[SydneyRover]

Where's the row of emojis to hide behind tyke?