Labour Leader: Keir Starmer V

[Kirk]

So much wrong in this untutored diatribe. Where to begin? It's difficult because it mostly relies on simplistic empty pejoratives like 'hard left' and 'Leninism'. On the question of Brexit, the non-monetarist section of the Labour Party was always Eurosceptic. Maybe you're just not that observant? Or just too young to remember or too lazy to check? In that respect Corbyn's position maintained absolutely a consistent position. As did Dennis Skinner, whatever anyone may think of their view. No doubt this did not chime with the New Labour contingent and their gaggle of economically clueless (and historically clueless) supporters. Hardly surprising.
The fact a left party doesn't gain traction in British elections is not an argument against rightness/wrongness, truth/falsity of their view or position, but as always in elections on who can better 'persuade'. Or in clearer terms: whose propaganda is best. And since right-wing propaganda appeals in a broad way to emotional and simplistic views far better (and has better funding), we have what we have.

You clearly have understood nothing in appointing yourself a cheerleader for the economically impotent centre-left. You think Blair and co gained 'power' by merely shifting itself away from 'the hard left' into so-called practical modernisation? Think again. He merely made friends with the holders of actual power and influence by conceding political power. Dinner with Rupert Murdoch got him to be championed by The Sun. Concession to corporate Britain got him to be supported by corporate Britain. What you got with New Labour is a party that gained office, but not power. And office for whom? Very big difference there amigo, upon which you might like to ponder for a while.

I realise the far left (better?) continue to struggle in the UK and are now, arguably, irrelevant to political debate in 2021. This is largely down to voter preferences, the effectiveness of the Tories and JC's tenure - he did more to undermine the left (and Labour in general) than anyone. So be it. But what of the far left abroad. There too things aren't going that well - for example, Venezuela (MMT fans, and fondly spoken of by Corbyn). Like other far left countries, it can't seem to operate without a big dollop of totalitarianism. And why for all the glory of far left economic policy is it that the common Venezuelan man (and woman and child) is suffering the most. It's a shame as the country is blessed with natural resources. There is China of course, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and communism - but they seem to be doubling down on the Communism part. And Xi is no democrat.

Re: your post: it seems you have taken hard left and Leninism, and my post in general for that matter, personally - and reacted accordingly, but briefly...re: JC - he is and always was a EU-skeptic, and was inconsistent in his position during the referendum. The far left really need to understand the electorate more fully and talk to voters more often, especially the ones they don't like (inclusion and national conversations, etc) if they want to get into No.10. Generally in democracies, the losing party (with its manifesto) realise they have taken a misstep and change their course, message and manifesto. It makes sense. I did see the BBC programme on Blair/Labour/Murdoch a while back - very interesting and well worth watching.

 

[Kirk]

That extraordinary outburst of unsustainable ill-informed nonsense demonstrates quite clearly that you have no interest in a proper discussion about the left and that your past questions on the topic have not been asked in good faith.

What is difficult to understand is that as a right winger, you have what you want. You have a political environment in which right wing ideology is dominant and set to rule the near future at least. You’ve got what you wished for, so why the anger? Or is it just trolling?

Seem to have struck a nerve so there must be something in what I've posted. And I'm not sure who is angrier about my post, you or LB.

Anyway, didn't Corbyn write for the Morning Star?

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

I realise the far left (better?) continue to struggle in the UK and are now, arguably, irrelevant to political debate in 2021. This is largely down to voter preferences, the effectiveness of the Tories and JC's tenure - he did more to undermine the left (and Labour in general) than anyone.

That does seem a rather 'skating the surface' view of the reality. Under the surface those 'voter preferences' etc are largely a product of the distortions and myths presented by much of the media - new as well as old.

 

[ks.234]

I realise the far left (better?) continue to struggle in the UK and are now, arguably, irrelevant to political debate in 2021. This is largely down to voter preferences, the effectiveness of the Tories and JC's tenure - he did more to undermine the left (and Labour in general) than anyone. So be it. But what of the far left abroad. There too things aren't going that well - for example, Venezuela (MMT fans, and fondly spoken of by Corbyn). Like other far left countries, it can't seem to operate without a big dollop of totalitarianism. And why for all the glory of far left economic policy is it that the common Venezuelan man (and woman and child) is suffering the most. It's a shame as the country is blessed with natural resources. There is China of course, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and communism - but they seem to be doubling down on the Communism part. And Xi is no democrat.

Re: your post: it seems you have taken hard left and Leninism, and my post in general for that matter, personally - and reacted accordingly, but briefly...re: JC - he is and always was a EU-skeptic, and was inconsistent in his position during the referendum. The far left really need to understand the electorate more fully and talk to voters more often, especially the ones they don't like (inclusion and national conversations, etc) if they want to get into No.10. Generally in democracies, the losing party (with its manifesto) realise they have taken a misstep and change their course, message and manifesto. It makes sense. I did see the BBC programme on Blair/Labour/Murdoch a while back - very interesting and well worth watching.

The fact that you see Corbyn as a ‘hard left’ ‘leninist’ only shows how far your view of the political spectrum has been distorted by your azure tinted glasses. Quite how you’ve gone from Corbyn to Totalitarianism in the space of a single sentence underlines a prejudice that goes way beyond reason.

Corbyn’s position on the EU was not inconsistent, he held a consistent position until persuaded to accept a second referendum by Starmer. Neither is he responsible to the position Labour is currently in. The Labour Party has been in decline for most of the millennium, the problem is that the Blairites have failed to see why and have determined that the only way back to power is to be more like the Tories. Labour have been so blinded by this dogma that have failed to notice, and capitalise on, the areas that the Tories have behaved more like Labour.

The problems that Labour are now in are entirely self inflicted. Self inflicted by the Labour Party itself who choose to attack their leader and not the government, and by those who supported them.

Finally it is deeply ironic that you see the need to understand the electorate on a left right split, but have no understanding and no little contempt for the electorate over Brexit. On Brexit at least, Corbyn did understand the electorate.

 

[Le Baron]

I realise the far left (better?) continue to struggle in the UK and are now, arguably, irrelevant to political debate in 2021. This is largely down to voter preferences, the effectiveness of the Tories and JC's tenure - he did more to undermine the left (and Labour in general) than anyone. So be it. But what of the far left abroad. There too things aren't going that well - for example, Venezuela (MMT fans, and fondly spoken of by Corbyn). Like other far left countries, it can't seem to operate without a big dollop of totalitarianism. And why for all the glory of far left economic policy is it that the common Venezuelan man (and woman and child) is suffering the most. It's a shame as the country is blessed with natural resources. There is China of course, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and communism - but they seem to be doubling down on the Communism part. And Xi is no democrat.

Your analysis is extraordinarily weak and uninformed. Relying on empty pejoratives, desperately trying to make a repetitive distinction between 'far left (also known as just 'the left') and some sort of other 'left', which appears to be the monetarist centre. I understand that you're ideologically on the political right, masquerading as something else, but it wouldn't hurt to just attempt a neutral assessment. Again the linking of MMT and Venezuela and Corbyn. It's meaningless because they have no relationship, I already informed you about this, but you persist in repeating it. Why? Laziness? Reluctance to learn?

Venezuela doesn't have total monetary sovereignty and has recently even taken more steps to undermine it, therefore no iteration of MMT can apply. Do you understand this? And of course you desperately want to avoid the known fact that Venuzuela is under economic and political pressure from the U.S. and its satellite assistants in South and central America. Who also failed to install their parachuted-in candidate from the School of the Americas. Maybe you need to read up on this?
China 'doubling down on the communist part'? More like the capitalism part. Remind me which country it is where you get maced or shot by police if you don't instantly comply even when not under arrest? It ain't China. Since most people have never set foot in China they rely on spoon-fed fairy stories about it being somehow a particular kind of hellhole as compared to say the hellhole of the U.S.

Re: your post: it seems you have taken hard left and Leninism, and my post in general for that matter, personally - and reacted accordingly, but briefly...re: JC - he is and always was a EU-skeptic, and was inconsistent in his position during the referendum. The far left really need to understand the electorate more fully and talk to voters more often, especially the ones they don't like (inclusion and national conversations, etc) if they want to get into No.10. Generally in democracies, the losing party (with its manifesto) realise they have taken a misstep and change their course, message and manifesto. It makes sense. I did see the BBC programme on Blair/Labour/Murdoch a while back - very interesting and well worth watching.

Hardly personally since I am not a 'Leninist'. Simply highlighting your weak reliance on cheap and easy terminology. Since Corbyn's elevation brought with it the largest rise in membership the Labour Party has known in decades, I'd say it's the current leadership who has things confused. The only issue causing a divide turned out to be Brexit, and on that issue Corbyn was at odds with the New Labourites, not the traditional Labour voter or the average Brexiteer. Refresh your memory by recalling who actually was running the Brexit office from Labour in 2016-2019. You seem to be drawing a direct line relationship between Corbyn's tenure and the bunch of neo-liberal party-within-a-party group who worked hard to make sure he was undermined (all thoroughly documented). In general though any Labour leader of any persuasion would have been caught in a bind because Brexit crossed party lines.

My advice to you is to know what you're talking about before ever entering into an exchange. Right now you're not doing that.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I see the description of Corbyn as ‘hard left’ or ‘far left’ as a bit of a ‘tell’. Maybe 30 years ago, he’d have been pretty mainstream.

 

[ks.234]

Seem to have struck a nerve so there must be something in what I've posted. And I'm not sure who is angrier about my post, you or LB.

Anyway, didn't Corbyn write for the Morning Star?

No anger here, just surprise. Surprise that you continue to repeat what has been shown to be nonsense.

No anger from LB either, just another straightforward demonstration of your error.

The fact that you obviously seek to cause anger rather than engage in a meaningful debate says more about you that anyone else

 

[droodzilla]

I realise the far left (better?) continue to struggle in the UK and are now, arguably, irrelevant to political debate in 2021. This is largely down to voter preferences, the effectiveness of the Tories and JC's tenure - he did more to undermine the left (and Labour in general) than anyone. So be it. But what of the far left abroad. There too things aren't going that well - for example, Venezuela (MMT fans, and fondly spoken of by Corbyn). Like other far left countries, it can't seem to operate without a big dollop of totalitarianism. And why for all the glory of far left economic policy is it that the common Venezuelan man (and woman and child) is suffering the most. It's a shame as the country is blessed with natural resources. There is China of course, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and communism - but they seem to be doubling down on the Communism part. And Xi is no democrat.

Re: your post: it seems you have taken hard left and Leninism, and my post in general for that matter, personally - and reacted accordingly, but briefly...re: JC - he is and always was a EU-skeptic, and was inconsistent in his position during the referendum. The far left really need to understand the electorate more fully and talk to voters more often, especially the ones they don't like (inclusion and national conversations, etc) if they want to get into No.10. Generally in democracies, the losing party (with its manifesto) realise they have taken a misstep and change their course, message and manifesto. It makes sense. I did see the BBC programme on Blair/Labour/Murdoch a while back - very interesting and well worth watching.

What a load of patronising, ill-informed w@nk.

 

[ks.234]

I see the description of Corbyn as ‘hard left’ or ‘far left’ as a bit of a ‘tell’. Maybe 30 years ago, he’d have been pretty mainstream.

And in a European context, still is.

 

[russel]

… There is China of course, a sort of hybrid of capitalism and communism - but they seem to be doubling down on the Communism part. And Xi is no democrat.

China is a one party authoritarian state that has communism in its title, it’s got more in common with a country like Iran which is also an authoritarian state but has the word Islamic in its title instead.

 

[droodzilla]

Hardly personally since I am not a 'Leninist'. Simply highlighting your weak reliance on cheap and easy terminology. Since Corbyn's elevation brought with it the largest rise in membership the Labour Party has known in decades, I'd say it's the current leadership who has things confused. The only issue causing a divide turned out to be Brexit, and on that issue Corbyn was at odds with the New Labourites, not the traditional Labour voter or the average Brexiteer. Refresh your memory by recalling who actually was running the Brexit office from Labour in 2016-2019. You seem to be drawing a direct line relationship between Corbyn's tenure and the bunch of neo-liberal party-within-a-party group who worked hard to make sure he was undermined (all thoroughly documented). In general though any Labour leader of any persuasion would have been caught in a bind because Brexit crossed party lines.

My advice to you is to know what you're talking about before ever entering into an exchange. Right now you're not doing that.

I wouldn't worry about the members. If the right of the party gets its way, they're about to be shafted:

https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1440004655682043918

For the Twitter-phobic, there are plans to replace the current OMOV system (one member, one vote) with an electoral college, split three ways between members, unions and the PLP. It's back to the future, as a similar system was in place a few years ago. Ironically, the labour right pushed to scrap it when the union vote made "the wrong Milliband brother" leader. Now they can't stand OMOV because they know that members will never vote for an MP from the right of the party.

If this gets through conference it will make Labour one of the least democratic political parties in Europe. Even the Tories have OMOV, once MPs have narrowed the choice down to two candidates.

PS: If you're familiar with the leaked Labour Party report, none of this will come as a surprise. In 2017, senior bureaucrats were already planning for Corbyn's successor (they assumed he would have to resign after a disastrous result) and how they could make sure an MP on the right of the party was installed as leader:

 

[Seanm]

Labour moving to ditch mass membership and centralise power in the PLP, with maybe councillors getting in on the action:

https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1440252569314463762?s=20

Will be popular with some. Just not anyone who's ever met an MP or councillor.

Guaranteed to make the party even less accountable, even more out of touch, even less something that young people will have any feelings for at all. Bad move electorally, then, but that's not the point: the point is to insulate unpopular representatives from reality.

 

[Seanm]

Of course, once you've made yourself safe from the base, you've got to make yourself safe from each other: rule change in the offing to make it more difficult for the PLP to trigger a leadership challenge:

https://twitter.com/alexnunns/status/1440268010996912131?s=20

Wearmouth confirming there that political journalists are among the least politically astute people in the country. This defensive move is not aimed at the left, it's aimed at the right.

 

[droodzilla]

Of course, once you've made yourself safe from the base, you've got to make yourself safe from each other: rule change in the offing to make it more difficult for the PLP to trigger a leadership challenge:

https://twitter.com/alexnunns/status/1440268010996912131?s=20

Wearmouth confirming there that political journalists are among the least politically astute people in the country. This defensive move is not aimed at the left, it's aimed at the right.

Aye. I was just about to write that an electoral college would be a death warrant for Starmer (the right of the party would ditch him as soon as they could), then I saw this.

Though I doubt that Starmer cares much either way. A cushy seat in the House of Lords awaits, for services rendered to the British State.

 

[ks.234]

Aye. I was just about to write that an electoral college would be a death warrant for Starmer (the right of the party would ditch him as soon as they could), then I saw this.

Though I doubt that Starmer cares much either way. A cushy seat in the House of Lords awaits, for services rendered to the British State.

And for services to the Tory Party

 

[droodzilla]

Good article about the proposed rule change from Simon Fletcher:

https://medium.com/@simonfletcher_17993?p=4d793e3641f

No-one can accuse Fletcher of being a disgruntled Corbynite: he worked on Starmer's leadership bid and continued to work for Starmer until recently.

He is simply stating plainly what is blindingly obvious: this is a cynical, anti-democratic power grab by the Labour right.

Once again: even the Tories use one member, one vote to elect their leader.

 

[ks.234]

https://fabians.org.uk/publication/the-road-ahead/

Reassuring to see that Starmer hasn’t fallen into the trap of meaningless 3 word slogans and gone for the much more substantial and much easier to understand 12,000 word meaningless slogan

 

[Seanm]

https://fabians.org.uk/publication/the-road-ahead/

Reassuring to see that Starmer hasn’t fallen into the trap of meaningless 3 word slogans and gone for the much more substantial and easier to understand 12,000 word meaningless slogan

Genuinely funny watching the centrist pundits' surprise at getting exactly what they asked for.

https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1440809724077756428?s=20

 

[droodzilla]

https://fabians.org.uk/publication/the-road-ahead/

Reassuring to see that Starmer hasn’t fallen into the trap of meaningless 3 word slogans and gone for the much more substantial and much easier to understand 12,000 word meaningless slogan

I suspect that Ed Milliband is a marked man. There's not a single mention in that document of nationalisation, or even shared ownership. But Milliband recently said (2 minutes in):

Can't imagine Starmer's handlers were thrilled by that.

There are also rumours that the GMB want Milliband out becuase they're not as keen on the green new deal as he is (It took a big effort by Rebecca Long Bailey to persuade the GMB to support it at the last Labour conference under Corbyn).

In any case, it's obvious that even Milliband's super-soft left politics are unwelcome in the current Labour Party.

 

[Le Baron]

They're obsessed with aid to countries rather than removing the obstacles that put them into debt and penury in the first place: foreign currency borrowing; forced privatisations.And so much 'aid' ends up as 'loans' anyway.
I was surprised to even hear Ed Miliband championing 'common ownership'. And you see that Maitliss jumped on it immediately, because the media just love extracting that from Labour interviewees so they can do nothing more than rehash the old circus of 'Labour communism'...it's tiresome stuff.