Labour Leader: Keir Starmer IV

[Dave H.]

Yes. Exactly. Our system is designed very carefully to remove all votes from anyone other than the governing Tory elite and a largely controllable token opposition, Labour. All other votes are literally binned at a local level. As an example, much as I hate it, Farage’s xenophobic UKIP party took something like 4 million votes in one election and got no seats/MPs at all. It only takes a few thousand to return a Tory MP under FPTP.

Green voters exist in fairly large numbers, as they do across the world, but are bright enough to grasp they can’t win in an non-democratic playing field. If we had PR I’d expect the Green vote to treble overnight. I vote Green purely to register my vote in national voteshare. I fully understand I am disenfranchised and voiceless. I will never have political representation under the current system.

I make a standing monthly donation to the Greens. I’m not a member, and I wouldn’t actually want them to be in power as they are now - I know from experience that they are a long way from being the party of Caroline Lucases in waiting that the world probably needs them to be.

But I try to contribute to the journey towards the ideal. And that gives me a sense of having a stake in the world that ISTM the voting system currently denies me.

 

[Woodface]

Because Burnham ran a shit, timid campaign. He's more confident in his core beliefs now and has openly repudiated some of what happened under New Labour (he's on record as saying that some of his more progressive ideas were undermined my MPs on the right of the party).

I did actually vote for him, I think he is more confident on local & domestic issues.

Everyone involved in politics is wise after the event. As said before, I would quite like David Lammy.

 

[Woodface]

I'll come clean and say that whilst I consider myself to be a socialist, I've never been much of a supporter of Labour; they've never really been progressive enough for me tbh. An effective opposition would be a good start, but Labour don't even seem to be able to be that. I hate the Tories with a vengeance & I'd hate to see a decade of them in power, but that's where we're heading right now. The Labour party is so broken, that its difficult to see how they can turn things around. Its all very well talking about Greens etc, but there would have to be a huge swing away from Labour in order for any other party to form an opposition, let alone a government.

To quote from the Labour web site:

"The Labour Party was formed out of the trade union movement to give working people their own political voice."

They seem to be a mile away from that right now. There must be a path that gives people a voice, has a social conscious & is progressive enough to allow society to develop for the good of all of it's citizens. The lack of enough good social housing, the severe under-funding of the NHS, social inequality, the sale of our publicly owned companies, mostly abroad, I could go on; where are Labour on these issues?

The voting system doesn't help; in our area, any vote other than Tory is a wasted vote. Don't even get me started on the Liberals (or their latter-day alternative)- what a waste of time they are! The opportunities they have squandered! Most of their problems have come from poor leadership.

To answer @paulfromcamden 's question, maybe Clement Attlee? He was before my time, but an elderly friend is full of praise for his leadership.

To answer Paul's other question, defeating the Tories is an important ambition, but I hate this namby-pamby centre-ground politics that everyone seems to aspire to.

With respect to the accusation of @Woodface of me not wanting working class people to better themselves, I come from a very poor background and my parents did their best with the little they had. I have been fortunate enough to be able to be able to take advantage of higher education and have earned good money in my time, but even those opportunities are being eroded now.

It's really difficult for youngsters these days; even having a good, well paid job doesn't help you to get somewhere decent to live. The over-reliance of the private sector for rented accommodation and the skyrocketing prices of houses to buy, even if you manage to save a deposit! I realise now, how luck I have been.

The swing away from Labour in the North of England, is difficult for me to understand tbh. I assume that people feel let down or else they have been won over by the promises that things will get better. The deindustrialisation of the UK must have had a massive impact in terms of employment, so growing the green economy is obviously something that Labour must take on board if they are to have any chance of getting back into power.

I see no problem with social mobility, if you are being honest with yourself you are probably now firmly middle class but with WC roots. I never understand why people are ashamed to see themselves as middle class, I don’t see it as a pejorative term.

I went to University, I have a decent job which pays quite well, as does my wife, we own our home, we are middle class. Can’t get away from it. My other half’s dad was also a toolmaker

 

[wylton]

I see no problem with social mobility, if you are being honest with yourself you are probably now firmly middle class but with WC roots. I never understand why people are ashamed to see themselves as middle class, I don’t see it as a pejorative term.

I went to University, I have a decent job which pays quite well, as does my wife, we own our home, we are middle class. Can’t get away from it. My other half’s dad was also a toolmaker

All of that applies to me too. My wife says that we are 'professionals' but I think what you call yourself is mostly related to your background & I steadfastly refuse to call myself middle class! It was Thatcher's ambitions to convince working class people that they were (or could be) middle class, that got us into this mess in the first place! Middle class? Bah-humbug!

 

[Woodface]

All of that applies to me too. My wife says that we are 'professionals' but I think what you call yourself is mostly related to your background & I steadfastly refuse to call myself middle class! It was Thatcher's ambitions to convince working class people that they were (or could be) middle class, that got us into this mess in the first place! Middle class? Bah-humbug!

Well, I fundamentally disagree, you are just deluding yourself. I really hated Thatcher, campaigned against her, nearly all of my family have been involved in the Labour Party at some level over many years.

You cannot compel people to stand still, even the lowly working classes have ambitions & Labour needs to have an aspirational message. At present people are only listening to positive messages (a lot of them lies).

Most of the things you enjoy on a daily basis are formed out of middle class (nearly always white) demand. Hifi, fancy coffee etc.

I bet you love a flat white

So, in conclusion you are not working class & many people that are, are currently voting Tory.

 

[Tony L]

I never understand why people are ashamed to see themselves as middle class, I don’t see it as a pejorative term.

I’m not. My background is inescapably middle class, though I suspect I am far to much the outlier to fit any class pigeonhole now (I rejected everything, did my own thing, and I’m still doing it now!). I far prefer to think of myself as a pretentious woke green artisan micro-business-owning twunt.

 

[wylton]

..twunt.

Twunt? I just looked that up & apparently it means you're either a fool or extremely objectionable person! I'm sure you're neither Tony!

 

[i.j.russell]

Putting people into classes doesn't make any sense today. If you want to divide people, like the Tories do, you need poor vs not poor, homeowner vs renter, educated vs skool of life, native vs immigrant, white vs not white, old vs young, progressive vs regressive, and socially liberal vs socially conservative. As long as the Tories convince 40% of the voters to back them, they are fine. Unless the more progressive parties can get their act together to form an alliance, we are doomed to continuous Tory rule.

 

[paulfromcamden]

I make a standing monthly donation to the Greens. I’m not a member, and I wouldn’t actually want them to be in power as they are now.

I was almost a member - in true Green Party style when I tried to join up a while back the website crashed then thanked me for joining but they've never taken any subs. I occasionally get emails sent to members so I guess I'm on some sort of list. I like your idea of a monthly donation. I think I'll do that - thanks.

I'm occasionally horrified at the quality of candidate they put up for election but I guess with a small party they can't afford to be too picky. I'm just glad they're fielding someone. They're obviously not going to be forming a government any time soon but it would be nice if they had more seats so environmental issues had more of a voice.

 

[wylton]

Putting people into classes doesn't make any sense today. If you want to divide people, like the Tories do, you need poor vs not poor, homeowner vs renter, educated vs skool of life, native vs immigrant, white vs not white, old vs young, progressive vs regressive, and socially liberal vs socially conservative. As long as the Tories convince 40% of the voters to back them, they are fine. Unless the more progressive parties can get their act together to form an alliance, we are doomed to continuous Tory rule.

Yes, I do agree with you. I was watching C4 news the other day & they were reporting on the Covid crisis in India. They interviewed an Indian person (I can't remember his name) and he said that he hangs his head in shame at the way the caste system has let down his people; the ultimate in class distinction?

 

[h.g.]

nobody's going to buy from you if you have nothing to sell....Labour have no storyworld for us to emotionally engage in...Corbynism just needed a better storyteller?

It is hard to see any story that would let people lacking a hard left faith trust Corbyn and cronies. The policies put forward were neither radical nor unpopular but the hard left wasn't trusted to deliver them because of their faith. People quite reasonably feared that once in power they would also try to implement more extreme policies in line with their faith. Corbyn, a not overly bright but honest man, did nothing to suggest otherwise.

Now had those same policies been pursued by a labour party that wasn't controlled by the hard left they would almost certainly have gained more support. There was an expectation that Starmer would largely do this since it was broadly aligned with his 10 pledges but it was also, of course, in direct conflict with being seen to disempower the hard left in order to rebuild trust. If labour do start to define their position I would expect to see policies not too far removed from the previous ones. Perhaps waiting for trust to grow and the hard left to recede is why labour has been taking it's time about defining it's position.

 

[Woodface]

I’m not. My background is inescapably middle class, though I suspect I am far to much the outlier to fit any class pigeonhole now (I rejected everything, did my own thing, and I’m still doing it now!). I far prefer to think of myself as a pretentious woke green artisan micro-business-owning twunt.

There is nothing more middle class than rejecting everything & doing your own thing

I am just happy that I have been able to provide for my children so that they can pursue their own interests & not miss out on anything.

 

[Seeker_UK]

... I steadfastly refuse to call myself middle class!

I steadfastly refuse to call myself a fat, middle-aged waste of DNA. However, that's how others pigeonhole me and that has a greater impact on my progress in this world than any handle I choose to give myself.

You're middle class now, even if you don't come from those roots.

 

[Seanm]

It is hard to see any story that would let people lacking a hard left faith trust Corbyn and cronies. The policies put forward were neither radical nor unpopular but the hard left wasn't trusted to deliver them because of their faith. People quite reasonably feared that once in power they would also try to implement more extreme policies in line with their faith. Corbyn, a not overly bright but honest man, did nothing to suggest otherwise.

Now had those same policies been pursued by a labour party that wasn't controlled by the hard left they would almost certainly have gained more support. There was an expectation that Starmer would largely do this since it was broadly aligned with his 10 pledges but it was also, of course, in direct conflict with being seen to disempower the hard left in order to rebuild trust. If labour do start to define their position I would expect to see policies not too far removed from the previous ones. Perhaps waiting for trust to grow and the hard left to recede is why labour has been taking it's time about defining it's position.

I really don't think very many people GAF about "the hard left receding" or any of that: they just see a party obsessed with itself, which won't defend itself, and which only wants to talk about flags and John Lewis in the midst of a crisis. I mean of course there'll be some banging on about Marxist BLM supporters or whatever but these people are swine who would no more vote Labour than they would an actual Marxist party, and if it wasn't the "hard left" they were exciting themselves with it would be something else.

There's no plan here: Labour are not biding their time, waiting for the moment to strike. They're doing what they they think will win, which is mostly purging the left and apologising, but also includes, e.g., parading Mandelson and an unpopular arch-remainer around a Leave stronghold. They cannot understand why people don't like this kind of thing; they think they must not have been doing it long or hard enough, and so they're going to keep on doing it. They're idiots!

 

[Arkless Electronics]

I wonder how much the tories pay Starmer? They need to get Corbyn back ASAP!

I'm originally from Hartlepool and todays result would have been unimaginable a few years back. This is like the Socialist Workers Party winning Surbiton!

 

[ks.234]

Lot’s of thought provoking comments on World at One, and Peter Mandelson. His line about the two C’s - Corbyn, Corbyn, Corbyn and Corbyn - and Lose Blair Lose, were quite catchy, but the fundamental truth that Mandy doesn’t get is that a Labour Party that keeps attacking the Labour Party, is not a Labour Party that people will vote for, precisely because the Labour Party attacking the Labour Party for the last half decade or more, is not a good look.

But then Mandy is looking in a mirror at reflected glory rather than forward to certain realities

 

[Seanm]

Lot’s of thought provoking comments on World at One, and Peter Mandelson. His line about the two C’s - Corbyn, Corbyn, Corbyn and Corbyn - and Lose Blair Lose, were quite catchy, but the fundamental truth that Mandy doesn’t get is that a Labour Party that keeps attacking the Labour Party, is not a Labour Party that people will vote for, precisely because the Labour Party attacking the Labour Party for the last half decade or more, is not a good look.

But then Mandy is looking in a mirror at reflected glory rather than forward to certain realities

It is just bizarre that they think the best way to frame this is to shove one of the most hated men in Britain on to every media platform going. But that's who they are! I haven't seen any of this: has any presenter asked how Corbyn can win twice as leader, then lose as ex-leader? Or are they just nodding along? Because if he keeps using this explanation it *surely* has to occur to even the dimmest of bulbs that it has some holes in it.

 

[Kirk]

"The Labour party is now mainly an argument about which wing of itself was worse". Gotta love Marina.

 

[Ptah]

But then Mandy is looking in a mirror at reflected glory rather than forward to certain realities

But he got Labour electable. And New Labour had a majority in Hartlepool of 17,500. You may have forgotten that.

Ayesha Hazarika was making a lot of sense today on TV.

 

[Seanm]

But he got Labour electable. And New Labour had a majority in Hartlepool of 17,500. You may have forgotten that.

Ayesha Hazarika was making a lot of sense today on TV.

Why is this more significant than Corbyn getting the biggest share of the vote in Hartlepool since 2001?

Again: a Blairite just lost. What are we supposed to learn from Blair at this precise moment?