advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer II

Status
Not open for further replies.
h.g. said:
He made a decision to make and he opted for a bold one. Abstaining or a free vote would have been easier since it would not have upset as many of his supporters and would have been more inline with his previously stated views. Few here agreed with his reasoning including myself but a fair bit of it involves predicting how the general public will tend to view our relationship with Europe over the next 4 years. He might have called it right (I don't think he has) but we will have to see.
Click to expand...

That's a description of a sheep, not a leader.
 
How does whipping to support the deal with one hand while pointing out the obvious costs and flaws with the other make sense?

Starmer has the backing of the party hierarchy, MP’s far more united behind him than not long ago and easy ride in the press yet he still can’t provide leadership and direction.

In the pursuit of power to the exclusion of all else, the Labour Party seems to have forgotten what it stands for
 
ks.234 said:
How does whipping to support the deal with one hand while pointing out the obvious costs and flaws with the other make sense?

Starmer has the backing of the party hierarchy, MP’s far more united behind him than not long ago and easy ride in the press yet he still can’t provide leadership and direction.
Click to expand...
He’s provided leadership and direction all right. We just don’t like the direction.
 
PsB said:
He’s provided leadership and direction all right. We just don’t like the direction.
Click to expand...
If you mean the direction is turning 180°away from opposing the Tories and into a full on charge to join them, I agree
 
According to the ‘I’ today his stance was a result of some polling the LP has had done. At least it is a kind of decisiveness. Only time will tell if the strategy works.
 
It’s tactically correct and probably the most principled thing to do. It’s just that, you know, they could have done it when it would have made a difference, and it would have been the Conservatives who imploded and not Labour. But Starmer and those now praising his pragmatism wouldn’t have it.

Isn’t anyone here angry at having been played?
 
Look at his dark, pudgy eyes. All dark and pudgy.

The dark, pudgy eyes of a Brexit-enabling fiend!

5ywXvLEO
 
Seanm said:
Isn’t anyone here angry at having been played?
Click to expand...

Yes, by Blair, Brown, Milliband, Corbyn and Starmer. Every time one thinks, even for a split second, that the Labour Party may actually be an alternative to the Tories and right-wing imperialist ideology, xenophobia and authoritarianism, it turns out it isn’t.
 
A useful summary of the Labour rebels who defied Starmer's whip and didn't vote for the deal:

https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1344331128891699200
Here's a list of all the Labour rebels, along with who they nominated in the 2020 leadership election. The stats are: 14 RLB, 10 Starmer, 6 Phillips, 2 Nandy, 2 Thornberry, 2 Lewis and 1 none.
Click to expand...
Interesting that the rebellion cut across the factional lines within the party (RLB supporters vs Starmer and Jess Philips suporters).
 
droodzilla said:
A useful summary of the Labour rebels who defied Starmer's whip and didn't vote for the deal:

https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1344331128891699200

Interesting that the rebellion cut across the factional lines within the party (RLB supporters vs Starmer and Jess Philips suporters).
Click to expand...
The left are trolling, I reckon, and who could blame them. All things being equal - I.e. abstracting from the history of cynical manoeuvring and duplicity - Starmer’s right and Corbyn’s wrong.

Anyway, good article here from David Edgerton on what Labour should do now, in broad strokes. Voting for the deal fits rather better with this picture than taking a symbolic stand, IMO.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-national-illusions-labour-alternative-future

“Yet the ideological maelstrom of Brexit gives Labour the opportunity to abandon old nostrums and re-energise itself with a new national mission and a new history of its own. The left needs to disabuse itself of the cosy and outdated notion that Britain’s ills are caused by imperial hangovers and a consequently incompetent upper-class elite. Labour needs to wake up and offer an alternative future to contest the Tory narrative – one that amounts to more than just better welfare and more administrative competence.

Labour could start by being nostalgic not for a Tory past, but a Labour one: of greater equality, of common purpose, of strong trade unions, of rising wages, of meaningful work. Labour could embrace the idea of a refreshed democracy, of really taking back control – of an anti-elite politics rather than a reheated technocracy. It could once again become the party that offers a national, collective critique of the elite and its power – as it was from the 1930s into the 1970s – and propose a policy of national reconstruction and equality. Labour should be the party that speaks in realities, not in celebratory fantasies, and seeks to create a truthful democratic politics, which is essential to any real programme of progressive change.

The one good thing to come out of Brexit is the bonfire of national illusions which is about to rage. It would be tragic if Labour were to try to put it out. For in its own way, Brexit has forced some essential understanding of Britain’s place in the world.”
 
droodzilla said:
Interesting that the rebellion cut across the factional lines within the party (RLB supporters vs Starmer and Jess Philips suporters).
Click to expand...

Also worth noting they only abstained, all but one didn’t have the moral fibre to join the progressive parties in opposing.
 
Tony L said:
Also worth noting they only abstained, all but one didn’t have the moral fibre to join the progressive parties in opposing.
Click to expand...
The moral fibre to cynically manoeuvre for party political purposes in a different way to Labour more like. Why do you continue to invest in these people, when they’ve shown you exactly what they are?
 
Seanm said:
The moral fibre to cynically manoeuvre for party political purposes in a different way to Labour more like. Why do you continue to invest in these people, when they’ve shown you exactly what they are?
Click to expand...

Because they consistently vote against authoritarianism, English nationalism, racism, and all campaign for a proper fair election system. Labour however remain entrenched on the wrong side of just about every argument.

I have no idea why you endorse a party that followed the Republicans into Iraq, tried to implement detention without charge, defended and enabled UKIP/NF/Tory policy, who’s leader even retweeted vile Der Sturmer grade racist anti-Semetic caricatures, that can’t even decide if war criminals should be above the law or whether the state should snoop on our private communications, and a party who has never once in its history supported a proper representative democracy. Seriously, WTAF?! Why do you bother with this shit?

I’m just an anti-fascist who wants to live in a proper free, open and environmentally responsible democracy. I’ll vote for whichever party is closest to that position at any election, just as I have all my life, and I’ll judge that on voting record. Labour aren’t even in the shortlist. Their voting record is just not credible.
 
Tony L said:
Because they consistently vote against authoritarianism, English nationalism, racism, and all campaign for a proper fair election system. Labour however remain entrenched on the wrong side of just about every argument.

I have no idea why you endorse a failed party that defended and enabled UKIP/NF/Tory policy, who’s leader even retweeted vile Der Sturmer grade racist anti-Semetic caricatures, who’s replacement can’t even decide if war criminals should be above the law, whether the state should snoop on our private communications, and a party who has never once in its history supported a proper representative democracy. Seriously, WTAF?! Why do you bother with this shit?

I’m just an anti-fascist who wants to live in a proper free, open and environmentally responsible democracy. I’ll vote for whichever party is closest to that position at any election, just as I have all my life, and I’ll judge that on voting record. Labour aren’t even in the shortlist.
Click to expand...
Don’t know how many times I’ll have to say this: I’m not endorsing Labour! I’m pointing out that the other parties are just as cynical if not more so and have spent the last few years more or less sitting their followers down and explaining this to them. It’s beyond weird that some people can take that all in and then applaud them for their principled stance.
 
Seanm said:
The left are trolling, I reckon, and who could blame them. All things being equal - I.e. abstracting from the history of cynical manoeuvring and duplicity - Starmer’s right and Corbyn’s wrong.

Anyway, good article here from David Edgerton on what Labour should do now, in broad strokes. Voting for the deal fits rather better with this picture than taking a symbolic stand, IMO.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-national-illusions-labour-alternative-future

“Yet the ideological maelstrom of Brexit gives Labour the opportunity to abandon old nostrums and re-energise itself with a new national mission and a new history of its own. The left needs to disabuse itself of the cosy and outdated notion that Britain’s ills are caused by imperial hangovers and a consequently incompetent upper-class elite. Labour needs to wake up and offer an alternative future to contest the Tory narrative – one that amounts to more than just better welfare and more administrative competence.

Labour could start by being nostalgic not for a Tory past, but a Labour one: of greater equality, of common purpose, of strong trade unions, of rising wages, of meaningful work. Labour could embrace the idea of a refreshed democracy, of really taking back control – of an anti-elite politics rather than a reheated technocracy. It could once again become the party that offers a national, collective critique of the elite and its power – as it was from the 1930s into the 1970s – and propose a policy of national reconstruction and equality. Labour should be the party that speaks in realities, not in celebratory fantasies, and seeks to create a truthful democratic politics, which is essential to any real programme of progressive change.

The one good thing to come out of Brexit is the bonfire of national illusions which is about to rage. It would be tragic if Labour were to try to put it out. For in its own way, Brexit has forced some essential understanding of Britain’s place in the world.”
Click to expand...

A Labour past of "greater equality, of common purpose, of strong trade unions, of rising wages, of meaningful work" are things that Labour now seem to be rowing away from, not towards
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top