advertisement


Next Labour Leader II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just seen a quote from Angela Rayner saying that Labour will not win in 2021 (Scottish elections) “by trashing our record in Govt for 13 years”. Glad to see this penny has finally dropped, a few on here denied this ever happened.
 
I'm in my early 50's and during my time as a voter the only time Labour has been in power was during the "New Labour" years, when the party was dragged to the centre left. That, and the current situation, has led me to believe that Labour are fundamentally unelectable as a party in the UK, but that the success during the New Labour times has masked that and in particular the more left wing side of the party haven't realised it (or maybe have but don't care).

So for me that means that if Labour want to remain as a protest party then continuing with a more left wing stance is fine, but if they actually have any interest in being a party of government they'll need to consider a move to a more centre-left position. There isn't really much of a sign of that happening so it looks like the Tories could be in power for a long time.
 
I'm in my early 50's and during my time as a voter the only time Labour has been in power was during the "New Labour" years, when the party was dragged to the centre left. That, and the current situation, has led me to believe that Labour are fundamentally unelectable as a party in the UK, but that the success during the New Labour times has masked that and in particular the more left wing side of the party haven't realised it (or maybe have but don't care).

So for me that means that if Labour want to remain as a protest party then continuing with a more left wing stance is fine, but if they actually have any interest in being a party of government they'll need to consider a move to a more centre-left position. There isn't really much of a sign of that happening so it looks like the Tories could be in power for a long time.
Which of the current policies should be ditched in order to move right?
 
They didn't advocate abolishing public schools, just removing their charitable status.

I know that (although I suspect it'll be seen as a step on the way to abolishment) but couldn't be bothered going into more detail. Still stupid though, at a time when they need to be trying to attract a wider voter base.
 
It’s in the Daily Mail, and repeated in politics home, so it must be true eh.

I think she said it on The Marr Show yesterday before I switched off.

Marr was doing his usual Corbyn is the Devil and you Labour lot must be Satanists schtick. Oh and by the way, he added, would you make Corbyn your Foreign Secretary?

Something like that.

The Marr Show is another reason not to pay the BBC license fee. It is mostly right-wing central. When there is a Labour or Green politician on, Marr tries to slate the guest in order to please Johnson, Cummings and Farage.

The latter three all the same - racist Brexiteers, whose mouths and noses are upside-down crosses.

Jack
 
Stuff like nationalisation, abolishing private schools, free broadband for all - and any other similar stupidity.
Johnson has agreed that some nationalisation is a good idea, so perhaps it’s not an idea as left as it’s painted?
 
They didn't advocate abolishing public schools, just removing their charitable status.
To be pedantic, the manifesto only promised to ‘close tax loopholes’. Presumably some people feel it’s a good idea for private schools to enjoy tax loopholes?
 
To be pedantic, the manifesto only promised to ‘close tax loopholes’. Presumably some people feel it’s a good idea for private schools to enjoy tax loopholes?

I think all this is proving is that for some people the left side of Labour can do no wrong, and that due to that we're going to be stuck with a Tory government for a long, long time.
 
Stuff like nationalisation,

You don't believe something like the railways should be run as a loss making service like in other countries with decent railway systems? The current model of private industry taking profits where they can and leaving the tax payer to cover everything loss making is a good one particularly given the high price of tickets and low quality of service that currently exists?

Are there other privatised public services that are similarly too expensive, not investing in maintenance, research and development and providing an expensive poor service? I suspect one can make a reasonable case against pretty much all of them. Not that we have the money to do much about it given how cheaply they were given away and the state they are now in.

abolishing private schools,

Over the last 40-50 years the quality of the UK school system has slipped from near the top to rock bottom within the developed world rivalled only by the US in a lack of the basics like literacy and numeracy. Don't you think doing almost anything to address this might be wise?

I do agree that abolishing all private schools as emoted at the labour party conference by the hard left as part of their faith is an example of why the hard left should never be allowed anywhere near power. The manifesto quite reasonably put forward changing their tax status to better reflect their current role within our society. But nobody with any familiarity of the hard left will have much doubt about what would almost certainly happen if a hard left controlled party ever got elected with a majority of 80 seats. This lack of trust and it's basis is all but impossible to get across to our enthusiastic supporters of the hard left here. Nice example though.

free broadband for all -

You cannot see a strong case for providing broadband as a service like a growing number of other countries. What about roads? The homeless lad living under the covered walkway outside one of the estate agents in my town has to access broadband pretty much everyday or else he loses his support money. So he pays £30 for broadband out of his £235 a month. Is that reasonable given the relatively low cost that would be needed to provide broadband as a service?

and any other similar stupidity.

Would be good to hear further examples because large differences like this in how people view and value things is both interesting and important in understanding how it became possible to implement so many of the socially destructive decisions that have been made in the last few decades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top