What is the point of Labour ?

[Antlion]

Just now, Salt n Vinegar said:

I was on a zoom call with a pal who is a long-standing Labour Party supporter.  He was having the usual "go" about results, mandates and so on. I asked him what was so great about Anas Sarwar, and... I kid you not, with a straight face, he said "well, he's better than Willie Rennie." 

Well, that's me convinced! 

I have some toenail clippings he can vote for, if ‘better than Willie Rennie” is where his bar’s set.

[Detournement]

4 minutes ago, Pato said:

But I've never seen you attack the substance of his stuff, it's his background with RCP/Living Marxism & its corresponding links with Spiked. Sometimes background is disqualifying in your eyes and sometimes it isn't.

There is a difference between the circumstances of your birth and choosing as an adult to associate with Furedi, Fox, O'Neill etc. 

I'm fairly certain that I've posted that I think Curtis's method is designed to undermine materialist analysis with nonsense like focusing on Mao's wife or Limonov. Class struggle and imperialism barely exist for him which is why he is supported and promoted by the BBC.

 

[Detournement]

[Ross.]

2 hours ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

We did that in 2017. Unfortunately, Jeremy had a beard and liked gardening.
As posted above, voting for a character seems to be the way forward. I guess stopping children starving isn't as big a vote winner as serial lying, adultery and corruption.

Unfortunately for Labour, Corbyn has too much of the “grandad” about him and no matter what he done, the press were able to paint him as some eccentric old duffer who means well but punches like being tickled by a feather, and is perhaps going senile. Even with that, he was able to Garner what now looks like a sensational number of votes when he stood for election. Labour should have doubled down on that, but sadly for the UK they decided to go with a guy who really wouldn’t be out of place in the current government, and seem to be making all their strategic decisions based on that.

[Florentine_Pogen]

I’d add to that they also need a presentable, preferably celebrity, leader. Unfortunately, that’s what voters in England seem to want of their parties: “characters”, preferably good old British eccentrics. 

To quote Winston Wolf in Pulp Fiction - "Just because you have character doesn't make you a character."

[SANTAN]

28 minutes ago, Ross. said:

Unfortunately for Labour, Corbyn has too much of the “grandad” about him and no matter what he done, the press were able to paint him as some eccentric old duffer who means well but punches like being tickled by a feather, and is perhaps going senile. Even with that, he was able to Garner what now looks like a sensational number of votes when he stood for election. Labour should have doubled down on that, but sadly for the UK they decided to go with a guy who really wouldn’t be out of place in the current government, and seem to be making all their strategic decisions based on that.

Without dragging the argument out it wasn't just the fact he was an old man it was also the past association's with terrorist groups that didn't really do him well with patriotic English voters. 

You can make your arguments about one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter all you want and I do agree with it generally speaking but I don't think it was hard for Tories or anyone anti Labour to paint him as untrustworthy to the general "British position" on things. 

My hot take is an old man gardener socialist type like Corbyn that didn't have the awkward history would have won the general election on the back of the manifesto. 

[Granny Danger]

3 hours ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

We did that in 2017. Unfortunately, Jeremy had a beard and liked gardening.
As posted above, voting for a character seems to be the way forward. I guess stopping children starving isn't as big a vote winner as serial lying, adultery and corruption.

I agree with Corbyn’s politics on most issues and celebrated when he was elected leader, but it quickly became obvious he was a terrible leader.

Really, really terrible.  Totally awful.

Any leader of any political party whose aiming for electoral success has to be far better than Corbyn in so many ways.

[Ross.]

22 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

Without dragging the argument out it wasn't just the fact he was an old man it was also the past association's with terrorist groups that didn't really do him well with patriotic English voters. 

You can make your arguments about one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter all you want and I do agree with it generally speaking but I don't think it was hard for Tories or anyone anti Labour to paint him as untrustworthy to the general "British position" on things. 

My hot take is an old man gardener socialist type like Corbyn that didn't have the awkward history would have won the general election on the back of the manifesto. 

I think that aspect of it is overplayed. The folk who were upset by his associations were never going to vote Labour in that election anyway. I think it was more as @Granny Danger put it, he seemed anything but a leader, and was too easily dismissed and ignored in the commons.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

I think that aspect of it is overplayed. The folk who were upset by his associations were never going to vote Labour in that election anyway. I think it was more as [mention=22765]Granny Danger[/mention] put it, he seemed anything but a leader, and was too easily dismissed and ignored in the commons.

Yeah he just never had an air of authority about him. He only got a leadership nomination for little more than a bit of a wheeze, which probably didn't help matters.

[SANTAN]

18 minutes ago, Ross. said:

I think that aspect of it is overplayed. The folk who were upset by his associations were never going to vote Labour in that election anyway. I think it was more as @Granny Danger put it, he seemed anything but a leader, and was too easily dismissed and ignored in the commons.

I think both are factors but especially after the Brexit referendum you can't deny a swathe of long term Labour voters backed Brexit and therefore for the sake of this debate you can categorise them as the patriotic English voters I referred to before that didn't trust Corbyn to stick up for Are Island. 

Just take the recent Hartlepool by- election to boost my point. The red wall area that the Tories have taken from Labour were apparantly motivated more by the flag shagging Brexity ideals than who is actually able to come across as a big boy leader. I think the reluctant wishy washy Brexit stance from Labour ultimately cost them the election when you boil it down but I also think the past terrorist associations is definitely diametrically opposed to the ethos of patriotic Brexiteer type of voters and even if Labour has been pro Brexit then Corbyn still might not have passed their standards test. 

[NotThePars]

3 hours ago, Pato said:

But I've never seen you attack the substance of his stuff, it's his background with RCP/Living Marxism & its corresponding links with Spiked. Sometimes background is disqualifying in your eyes and sometimes it isn't.

 

2 hours ago, Detournement said:

There is a difference between the circumstances of your birth and choosing as an adult to associate with Furedi, Fox, O'Neill etc. 

I'm fairly certain that I've posted that I think Curtis's method is designed to undermine materialist analysis with nonsense like focusing on Mao's wife or Limonov. Class struggle and imperialism barely exist for him which is why he is supported and promoted by the BBC.

 

Yea for all I think that Detourney's analysis can be off in some regards I think he had one of the more reasonable critiques of Curtis even if I do still personally enjoy his docs in spite of his pitfalls. 

 

I still think there are barely any clean hands from the post-Soviet Union collapse as everyone on the left went mental between the years 1991-2008.

[NotThePars]

5 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

I think both are factors but especially after the Brexit referendum you can't deny a swathe of long term Labour voters backed Brexit and therefore for the sake of this debate you can categorise them as the patriotic English voters I referred to before that didn't trust Corbyn to stick up for Are Island. 

Just take the recent Hartlepool by- election to boost my point. The red wall area that the Tories have taken from Labour were apparantly motivated more by the flag shagging Brexity ideals than who is actually able to come across as a big boy leader. I think the reluctant wishy washy Brexit stance from Labour ultimately cost them the election when you boil it down but I also think the past terrorist associations is definitely diametrically opposed to the ethos of patriotic Brexiteer type of voters and even if Labour has been pro Brexit then Corbyn still might not have passed their standards test. 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-witness-archive/james-schneider/

I think this is an interesting interview with James Schneider the co-founder of Momentum. I really think the betrayal over Brexit was so essential in destroying a fragile but substantial coalition Labour built in 2017. It's ironic because all the biggest dickheads loved to say Labour talked to its members more than the electorate AND YET the one policy they should've ignored their membership over was a second referendum and that ultimately fucked them. 

[DA Baracus]

I see that all Scottish Labour MSPs and MPs have been briefed to mention 'drug deaths' whenever they are on radio or TV.

Saying "drug deaths!" whilst continuing to operate in the same, shite, pointless manner that has seen their support collapse is a bold strategy and definitely not a case of 'deckchairs on the Titanic'.

[Detournement]

Scotland's record on drug deaths is a disgrace. Our official policy is to park addicts methadone until they die. 

Labour aren't winning an election any time soon so focusing on issues which predominantly harm low income communities is the logical step to start the rebuild. 

[Ross.]

17 hours ago, Stormzy said:

I think both are factors but especially after the Brexit referendum you can't deny a swathe of long term Labour voters backed Brexit and therefore for the sake of this debate you can categorise them as the patriotic English voters I referred to before that didn't trust Corbyn to stick up for Are Island. 

Just take the recent Hartlepool by- election to boost my point. The red wall area that the Tories have taken from Labour were apparantly motivated more by the flag shagging Brexity ideals than who is actually able to come across as a big boy leader. I think the reluctant wishy washy Brexit stance from Labour ultimately cost them the election when you boil it down but I also think the past terrorist associations is definitely diametrically opposed to the ethos of patriotic Brexiteer type of voters and even if Labour has been pro Brexit then Corbyn still might not have passed their standards test. 

The irony being that the EU probably done more for those areas through regeneration funds that the Tories ever have or will do.

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

I see that all Scottish Labour MSPs and MPs have been briefed to mention 'drug deaths' whenever they are on radio or TV.

Saying "drug deaths!" whilst continuing to operate in the same, shite, pointless manner that has seen their support collapse is a bold strategy and definitely not a case of 'deckchairs on the Titanic'.

 

25 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Scotland's record on drug deaths is a disgrace. Our official policy is to park addicts methadone until they die. 

Labour aren't winning an election any time soon so focusing on issues which predominantly harm low income communities is the logical step to start the rebuild. 

Aren’t most of the current deaths down to people who have been long term addicts now hitting their 40’s and 50’s and their bodies simply giving up? Labour probably share more of the blame than anyone for those folk. The SNP have simply continued with what was a fairly shite way of dealing with the issue in the first place.

[DA Baracus]

3 minutes ago, Ross. said:

The irony being that the EU probably done more for those areas through regeneration funds that the Tories ever have or will do.

 

Aren’t most of the current deaths down to people who have been long term addicts now hitting their 40’s and 50’s and their bodies simply giving up? Labour probably share more of the blame than anyone for those folk. The SNP have simply continued with what was a fairly shite way of dealing with the issue in the first place.

I genuinely don't know, and I don't doubt that there is an issue. But Labour will never be in a position to do anything about it since they refuse to change.

[Fullerene]

20 hours ago, Stormzy said:

Without dragging the argument out it wasn't just the fact he was an old man it was also the past association's with terrorist groups that didn't really do him well with patriotic English voters. 

You can make your arguments about one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter all you want and I do agree with it generally speaking but I don't think it was hard for Tories or anyone anti Labour to paint him as untrustworthy to the general "British position" on things. 

My hot take is an old man gardener socialist type like Corbyn that didn't have the awkward history would have won the general election on the back of the manifesto. 

The problem with the IRA was that these were not somebody else's terrorists.  These were people terrorising Britain.
It was probably one of many issues were Corbyn gave the impression he wasn't always proud to be British.  Not a good idea if you want to be British Prime Minister.
By contrast, Boris would probably suggest that the British Empire was jolly good fun and nothing to be ashamed of.

I think that people are often looking for someone new who will change everything for the better.
Tony Blair became Prime Minister in 1997 but only a few years earlier nobody knew who he was.

Was Jeremy Corbyn offering something new?  Some would say yes - a radical agenda that was neither Tory nor Tory-lite.
Others would say no - the same tired ideas he had been chasing for decades.
Thus he was a very polarising figure.

Labour's mistake with the EU referendum was concerning the first one.  Play it quiet, hope Remain wins, and that way you can avoid upsetting anyone.
That backfired.  The second referendum came across as simply wanting to reverse a vote that had gone the wrong way with no real explanation why it had become a more important issue after the first vote when it was not that important before it.
 

[Granny Danger]

Labour falls even further behind the Tories in the polls and Starmer’s personal popularity plummets amongst both Labour voters and the wider public.  Labour is going nowhere with this guy at the helm.
 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poll-opinium-labour-conservatives-hartlepool-b1848152.html

[NotThePars]

Andy Burnham’s had one good year and he’s gone Brendan Rodgers about it and you simply have to say, fair play!

[Detournement]

Compare and contrast with the huge crowds at the demos this weekend.