OutByEaster? Posted August 14, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 14, 2021 If you look at Keir Starmers twitter, it's like he reads the news every day and then says "That's not very nice" - that isn't policies, or values or ideas or principles - it's gogglebox. No one is doing more for Boris Johnson than Sir Keir right now. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted August 15, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 15, 2021 I take it the aim is to appeal to the masses and not to these loony left marxists who call themselves members - like that Ken Loach fella. I think it should be clarified that this is actually the plan. Any Labour fanboys out there who want to confirm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted August 15, 2021 Share Posted August 15, 2021 On 14/08/2021 at 13:24, bickster said: The Labour Party under the previous leader was not the Labour Party of at least the last 50 years, in that sense Starmer is actually returning the party to its traditional position. Loach's comments on the matter are pure cliche. The only word that's missing from what he said was Stalinism We do however have the words purge, clique, expulsion, witch hunt, solidarity, victim, comrades.... What he hasn't said was that it was the obvious consequence of a decision he was forced to make I'm presuming this is about Loach being a member / supporter of one or more of the 4 orgs that Labour recently decided were not compatible with the Party. He was therefore presumably asked to disassociate himself from those orgs and refused. He knew when he made that decision what the consequences of that choice were. That is obviously his choice and the correct decision for him, if those orgs are more important to him than the party itself, he's made the right decision. Given that though, it is rather that he expelled himself and his comments are wholly disengenuous. Bloke walks into a shop with 50p, he can only afford either a Mars Bar or a Marathon, he chose Mars Bar then moaned to everyone the shop keeper wouldn't give him the Marathon too That presumption is the basis of your entire argument isn't it? Could be true but I haven't seen it anywhere. Labour over the last 40 years isn't the same Labour it was founded as and continued to be for the 60 years after that. For what type of party it should be, the clue is in the name. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted August 15, 2021 Share Posted August 15, 2021 1 hour ago, Jareth said: I take it the aim is to appeal to the masses and not to these loony left marxists who call themselves members - like that Ken Loach fella. I think it should be clarified that this is actually the plan. Any Labour fanboys out there who want to confirm? I think the aim is to piss off all the socialists so much they all leave, all the unions disaffiliate and the Blairites are left with the name 'Labour' to have another go at ChangeUK/The Independent Group/Which? Magazine Political Party. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted August 15, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted August 15, 2021 52 minutes ago, darrenm said: I think the aim is to piss off all the socialists so much they all leave, all the unions disaffiliate and the Blairites are left with the name 'Labour' to have another go at ChangeUK/The Independent Group/Which? Magazine Political Party. I'd buy that for a dollar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 15, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 15, 2021 53 minutes ago, darrenm said: I think the aim is to piss off all the socialists so much they all leave, all the unions disaffiliate and the Blairites are left with the name 'Labour' to have another go at ChangeUK/The Independent Group/Which? Magazine Political Party. Behind that point is the serious thing of the division between the kind of Corbynite/McLuskeyite side of Labour and the more traditional Labour side. I actually think the opposite of your comment - I think in trying to keep the party together they're just prolonging the problem, trying to upset neither one side nor the other and pleasing no-one. Some elements have almost acted to get themselves kicked out, but apart from them, it seems like the leadership is trying to keep everyone on board. Union "disaffiliation" is interesting too - because the different Union leaderships are a) by no means all anti-Starmer, and b ) subject to elections themselves. The Union leaders hold too much influence over the support (or lack of) given to the Labour Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted August 15, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 15, 2021 28 minutes ago, blandy said: Behind that point is the serious thing of the division between the kind of Corbynite/McLuskeyite side of Labour and the more traditional Labour side. Not to mention the division between that side of Labour and the New Labour Tory-Lite of Starmer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted August 15, 2021 Share Posted August 15, 2021 (edited) Ironic that the people doing the purging at the moment are the same people who were screaming, "Stalinist purge" everytime grassroots members got any support in trying to democratise the way we pick candidates. Hard place being on the left in the Labour Party at the moment. Getting it from both sides. Was at a Trades Council meeting in the week, and my mate who has been in the party since he was a teenager (he's in his early 60s now), got told by a 20 something year old Wolfie Smith look-a-like he wasn't a socialist/revolutionary socialist because he was a member of the Labour Party. My mate calmly pointed out that actually he was fighitng the far right when they were lobbing bricks and petrol bombs, and that he'd had the living shit kicked out of him by the police on many a picket line. Holding SWP placards and selling papers is the way to bring about socialism apparently. Fun times. Edited August 15, 2021 by dAVe80 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 15, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 15, 2021 3 hours ago, darrenm said: That presumption is the basis of your entire argument isn't it? Could be true but I haven't seen it anywhere. Loach as good as said it himself Darren, what I said is hardly a conspiracy theory Quote "Labour HQ finally decided I'm not fit to be a member of their party, as I will not disown those already expelled." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 I hold my hands up I thought Starmer would be the right man to lead Labour forward, I was massively wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted August 16, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2021 4 hours ago, avfcDJ said: I hold my hands up I thought Starmer would be the right man to lead Labour forward, I was massively wrong. That was never his job, he's the new Kinnock, not the new Blair 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 23 minutes ago, bickster said: That was never his job, he's the new Kinnock, not the new Blair Stale, boring, the break from the Corbyn era before the next person comes in and wins votes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 16, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2021 16 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: Not to mention the division between that side of Labour and the New Labour Tory-Lite of Starmer. Frame it however you like, really. The point I think is that trying to be one party is pretty hopeless. It’s not, any more. They’ve been so long out of power that they’ve forgotten what they’re for, what they need to do, who they need to represent. Instead they’re just factionally fighting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 6 minutes ago, blandy said: Frame it however you like, really. The point I think is that trying to be one party is pretty hopeless. It’s not, any more. They’ve been so long out of power that they’ve forgotten what they’re for, what they need to do, who they need to represent. Instead they’re just factionally fighting. Yep, the party really does need to split. I know people cite the SDP fiasco handing the Tories power but I don't think the current situation is the same because the party has never been this divided before. I just wish there was a way to allow it to happen with PR so you don't have 2 diametrically opposed groups fighting over the name. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 4 hours ago, avfcDJ said: I hold my hands up I thought Starmer would be the right man to lead Labour forward, I was massively wrong. I did too. So did thousands of people, quite a number of which were Corbyn supporters who were told Starmer would continue with the popular policies but not have the attackable history. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 5 minutes ago, darrenm said: quite a number of which were Corbyn supporters who were told Starmer would continue with the popular policies but not have the attackable history. Nobody in the media will ever talk about this for obvious reasons, but it shouldn't be forgotten. What would we expect a man to govern like, if he was a man who simply lied about who he was and what he believed in to win power in an internal election? Would we expect him to seek the advice of others, consider a range of opinions, have a more cooperative relationship with his cabinet and with Parliament? Or would we expect a person who only accepts his own way, listens to a narrow band of advisors who tell him what he wants to hear, and crushes dissent? The answer seems obvious to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 16, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2021 44 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Nobody in the media will ever talk about this for obvious reasons, but it shouldn't be forgotten. What would we expect a man to govern like, if he was a man who simply lied about who he was and what he believed in to win power in an internal election? Bunkum. Tory papers, the genuinely biased ones, will be only to happy to attack a Labour politician for "lying". He hasn't lied about who he is. That's silly. Nor about what he believes in. I see no evidence of that at all. What I do see is a bit of a vacuum policy wise. Also he's been (IMO) a bit too reactive to some events of minor significance and a bit too red-wally focused, perhaps. The major problem isn't him - it's the actual party as a whole (as discussed many times previously). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 1 hour ago, blandy said: Bunkum. Tory papers, the genuinely biased ones, will be only to happy to attack a Labour politician for "lying". He hasn't lied about who he is. That's silly. Nor about what he believes in. I see no evidence of that at all. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this. The evidence that he intends to abandon his 'ten pledges' is absolutely obvious. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 16, 2021 Moderator Share Posted August 16, 2021 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: he intends So he hasn't (yet) - he may do, he may not. The party may decide on a different course - but none of that has happened, so IMO calling him a liar is (yet) unfair in the extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 1 minute ago, blandy said: So he hasn't (yet) - he may do, he may not. The party may decide on a different course - but none of that has happened, so IMO calling him a liar is (yet) unfair in the extreme. I'm not going to give him credit if he ends up being forced, kicking and screaming, into adopting measures he supposedly supports into the platform by party conference. The direction of travel within the party is abundantly clear; he has promoted the party right in the shadow cabinet, and demoted or sacked those to the left; he has chosen advisors only from the party right. He has done all he can to distance himself from previous policy commitments that he perceives to be too left-wing. I'm not going to pretend that there's some great mystery about who he is or what he thinks when there isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts