Labour Leader: Keir Starmer II

[SteveS1]

Climate change is always someone elses problem in political terms; to make meaningful change you have to face down the motoring lobby, this is never seen through.

Really? Global carbon output - 30% is “Transport” of which about 70% of that is road vehicles. Take lorries, buses, vans out of that and I’m not sure “the motoring lobby” is in need of ‘facing down’ but it sure is a popular lighting rod away from the more significant contributors. It’s also useful to demonise and tax heavily while pretending there are workable alternatives - except that raises costs of everything that needs moving of course.

 

[thebigfredc]

Diane Abbott interview:

"She recalls how, when she won her seat in 1987, after displacing the sitting Labour MP, Ernie Roberts, a party officer “turned and looked at me in a very unhappy way and said: ‘Poor old Ernie.’” A few weeks later, a regional officer said, “not in a completely unpleasant way: ‘We had no idea you would win. If we’d known, we would have done something.’”

“The national party didn’t think it was anything to be proud of, to have elected a black woman.” It was, however, the first time any British party had; she is now the longest-serving black MP in parliament. "

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...acism-my-problem-because-it-would-destroy-you

Yes she’s been an MP for 23, no 27, sorry 103, no definitely 43 years or is it weeks, anyway it doesn’t matter for far too long anyway. She went to one of our elite universities, Cambridge, in the days before fees and her and Jeremy had ....erm relations.

 

[Woodface]

Really? Global carbon output - 30% is “Transport” of which about 70% of that is road vehicles. Take lorries, buses, vans out of that and I’m not sure “the motoring lobby” is in need of ‘facing down’ but it sure is a popular lighting rod away from the more significant contributors. It’s also useful to demonise and tax heavily while pretending there are workable alternatives - except that raises costs of everything that needs moving of course.

A councillor in Hackney has received death threats over the low traffic zones. Let that sink in.

We need active travel solutions which are zero emissions. Reducing traffic is not possible unless people use cars less, it is not just about emissions, look at the environmental costs of road expansion.

Air travel is a significant factor, how many are willing to forego their foreign holidays?

Try bringing in any traffic reducing measure & watch who complains, nearly always motorists.

 

[SteveS1]

We need active travel solutions which are zero emissions.

Yes but we prefer to blame and tax people for using what is available to them rather than changing what is available to them. You can't suddenly pretend the whole country isn't structured around a road network, it requires more than that. Anyway, whole different subject.

 

[gavreid]

Yes she’s been an MP for 23, no 27, sorry 103, no definitely 43 years or is it weeks, anyway it doesn’t matter for far too long anyway. She went to one of our elite universities, Cambridge, in the days before fees and her and Jeremy had ....erm relations.

What's your point mate? You always come across as a kn*b - I'm not convinced that you are (all the time anyway) but you're coming across as a racist now.

 

[Woodface]

Yes but we prefer to blame and tax people for using what is available to them rather than changing what is available to them. You can't suddenly pretend the whole country isn't structured around a road network, it requires more than that. Anyway, whole different subject.

Ultimately we have finite space, how can we give more room for safe cycling, walking, scootering without changing priorities? 76% of all car journeys are less than 6kms, that is utterly nuts.

Fewer cars means more room for public transport, freight etc which means more efficiency.

Taxation does not seem to deter motorists so the only answer is viable alternatives & a challenge to existing behaviour.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Diane Abbott interview:

"She recalls how, when she won her seat in 1987, after displacing the sitting Labour MP, Ernie Roberts, a party officer “turned and looked at me in a very unhappy way and said: ‘Poor old Ernie.’

He drove the fastest milk cart in the West.

 

[droodzilla]

A couple of decent articles about Starmer's politics (or lack thereof) focusing on the influence of his policy chief, Claire Ainsley:

https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/starmer-ainsleyism-methodology-behind-starmers-week/

https://novaramedia.com/2020/09/10/...ling-his-politics-and-they-arent-progressive/

Have to say it sounds like a rehash of the same "blue Labour" stuff that was tried by Ed Milliband. Is the argument that he didn't try hard enough, or that he was too much of a weird lefty to pull it of? Starmer, on the other hand...

 

[Seanm]

A couple of decent articles about Starmer's politics (or lack thereof) focusing on the influence of his policy chief, Claire Ainsley:

https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/starmer-ainsleyism-methodology-behind-starmers-week/

https://novaramedia.com/2020/09/10/...ling-his-politics-and-they-arent-progressive/

Have to say it sounds like a rehash of the same "blue Labour" stuff that was tried by Ed Milliband. Is the argument that he didn't try hard enough, or that he was too much of a weird lefty to pull it of? Starmer, on the other hand...

The New Socialist piece registers the Groundhog Day dimension but wonders how Miliband’s efforts might have panned out had he been less awkward, had the press not been united against him, and had his own party not been working against him. Hadn’t thought of it like that. He might actually have won.

Different now anyway: the Tories have Brexit and a solid voting bloc, and winning on a programme like Miliband’s wouldn’t be much help.

 

[ks.234]

A couple of decent articles about Starmer's politics (or lack thereof) focusing on the influence of his policy chief, Claire Ainsley:

https://newsocialist.org.uk/transmissions/starmer-ainsleyism-methodology-behind-starmers-week/

https://novaramedia.com/2020/09/10/...ling-his-politics-and-they-arent-progressive/

Have to say it sounds like a rehash of the same "blue Labour" stuff that was tried by Ed Milliband. Is the argument that he didn't try hard enough, or that he was too much of a weird lefty to pull it of? Starmer, on the other hand...

Two articles that give an insight into current thinking at the top of Labour, many thanks.

Unfortunately if Labour is only going to base political communication and policy on the hearts and minds of the ‘new working class’, and if Labour’s approach is to be managerial rather than transformative, then promises on education will get forgotten.

Education is not high in the public consciousness but as a vital public service it is a front line target for those wishing to open wider public services up to private interests.

The reality is that the academisation and free schools process is well underway and would be difficult to undo, and any attempt to challenge current education policy will be met with anger and indignation on an unprecedented scale. If Labour is to be managerial rather than transformative, and if education is not foremost in the hearts and minds of the new working class, then it will not be up for the fight to defend this public service and then be in a much weaker position when it comes to the NHS.

The right wing of the Tory party has it’s eyes on opening up Health to US private interests and has identified Education as a soft target to ease the way and gain public acceptance for further privatisations “across all areas within 5 years” as has been made explicit here...

https://www.cato.org/publications/w...ment-free-traders-perspective#related-content

Education is primed and ready for further steps towards opening up this public service to private interest, and once this happens, Health will be next.
“health services are an area where both sides would benefit from openness to foreign competition, although we recognize any changes to existing regulations will be extremely controversial. Perhaps, then, for other areas the initial focus should be on other fields such as education”

Is the loss of Education and Health as public services a price worth paying to gain power?

 

[Tony L]

Have to say it sounds like a rehash of the same "blue Labour" stuff that was tried by Ed Milliband. Is the argument that he didn't try hard enough, or that he was too much of a weird lefty to pull it of? Starmer, on the other hand...

It appears to be exactly the cowardly focus-group bland ideology-free mush on the inside as it appears to us on the outside. I’d describe it as a “what would Nigel’s voters want” mindset more than anything, and as such the party is of zero use to progressives. We now have a choice of Green, Lib Dem, SNP and Plaid Cymru.

I could no more vote for a party that cowed to the Tories breaking the Geneva Convention with the Overseas Operations Bill than I could one who cowered in the face of the ethnic nationalism and xenophobia of Brexit. Sadly Labour are, yet again, entirely unfit for purpose.

PS I agree with everything in the post above regarding education and health and I would hope to see a clear direction from the Greens, Libs, SNP and PC here. I don’t expect it from New Meh Labour.

 

[tuga]

It appears to be exactly the cowardly focus-group bland ideology-free mush on the inside as it appears to us on the outside. I’d describe it as a “what would Nigel’s voters want” mindset more than anything, and as such the party is of zero use to progressives. We now have a choice of Green, Lib Dem, SNP and Plaid Cymru.

I could no more vote for a party that cowed to the Tories breaking the Geneva Convention with the Overseas Operations Bill than I could one who cowered in the face of the ethnic nationalism and xenophobia of Brexit. Sadly Labour are, yet again, entirely unfit for purpose.

PS I agree with everything in the post above regarding education and health and I would hope to see a clear direction from the Greens, Libs, SNP and PC here. I don’t expect it from New Meh Labour.

Unfortunately with FPTP there's little chance any of those 4 parties will ever get to govern, although they could as part of a coalition.

 

[Joe Hutch]

I fear that the hard truth may be that there simply aren't enough votes to achieve a majority for a progressive party. With the sole exceptions of Attlee's victory in 1945*, and Wilson's in 1966, Labour post-war wins have either been by a bare majority (Wilson in 1964 and 1974), or under a non-progressive leader (Blair x 3).

* And many of Attlee's policies, eg on Europe, were the reverse of 'progressive'.

 

[Seanm]

I fear that the hard truth may be that there simply aren't enough votes to achieve a majority for a progressive party. With the sole exceptions of Attlee's victory in 1945*, and Wilson's in 1966, Labour post-war wins have either been by a bare majority (Wilson in 1964 and 1974), or under a non-progressive leader (Blair x 3).

* And many of Attlee's policies, eg on Europe, were the reverse of 'progressive'.

Not enough votes in the right places, anyway.

But it’s not like progressive votes are a natural resource, of which a country has a given amount.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I fear that the hard truth may be that there simply aren't enough votes to achieve a majority for a progressive party. With the sole exceptions of Attlee's victory in 1945, and Wilson's in 1966, Labour post-war wins have either been by a bare majority (Wilson in 1964 and 1974), or under a non-progressive leader (Blair x 3).

Attlee's victory in 1945 was, at least in some degree, a reaction to the war, and the hardships and suffering endured by the population. I think he won partly by not being the party that had taken us into (and out of) that dark place, but also because he had something new and progressive to offer.

We are currently in another dark place, the similarities are starting to stack up, and if Brexit happens it's quite possible they'll become even more so. We may not yet be approaching the other side, but while trying not to drown in despondency I'm clinging to a little log of hope that the conditions may return under which a genuinely different and progressive political party could emerge victorious.

 

[wacko]

Do countries have to be in ascendency, confident and open to be progressive ?
Or desperate ?

 

[Seanm]

Attlee's victory in 1945 was, at least in some degree, a reaction to the war, and the hardships and suffering endured by the population. I think he won partly by not being the party that had taken us into (and out of) that dark place, but also because he had something new and progressive to offer.

We are currently in another dark place, the similarities are starting to stack up, and if Brexit happens it's quite possible they'll become even more so. We may not yet be approaching the other side, but while trying not to drown in despondency I'm clinging to a little log of hope that the conditions may return under which a genuinely different and progressive political party could emerge victorious.

There was an organised workers’ movement in 1945, and there isn’t now, not at the same scale. I don’t think conditions themselves determine positive outcomes. Someone has to actually demand them.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

There was an organised workers’ movement in 1945, and there isn’t now, not at the same scale. I don’t think conditions themselves determine positive outcomes. Someone has to actually demand them.

Bugger.

*little log of hope becomes increasingly waterlogged*

 

[ks.234]

There was an organised workers’ movement in 1945, and there isn’t now, not at the same scale. I don’t think conditions themselves determine positive outcomes. Someone has to actually demand them.

Yes, Labour grew out of a long history of workers organising and demanding their rights. The working class, or even Claire Ainsley’s new working class, isn’t demanding anything anymore.

If we, the general electorate, don’t want to change anything, we won’t get change

 

[Tim Jones]

There was an organised workers’ movement in 1945, and there isn’t now, not at the same scale. I don’t think conditions themselves determine positive outcomes. Someone has to actually demand them.

Well, apologies for returning to the same old boring point, someone has to be elected to implement them.

I appreciate your post on compromises and red lines, thanks. We'd all like to agree on the racism principle, and that a "5" on the dial is as bad as a "7", but (as one or two of the posts above would seem to illustrate) some of the symbolism is open to suspicion, accusation and interpretation.

One thing that isn't clear from your post is how far you'd be prepared to go to win back the Red Wall votes, etc. It's such an obvious point that I'm sure lots of people have made it, and probably for some time, but the strategic worry might well be that there's a growing gap between the kind of socialism illustrated by your principles and what those traditionally Labour constituencies are interested in. That doesn't just go for "positions" on an issue (especially on public/private ownership and several other issues that seem, if not irrelevant, certainly a bit tired), but also what the issues are in the first place.