Quantcast
The New Leader of the Labour Party - Page 23 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Numero Veinticinco

The New Leader of the Labour Party

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, A Red said:

The next election will not be about Brexit, the Labour leader in 5 years time could have been a leaver or a remainer, it doesnt matter, it will have gone.

 

It is clear that the electorate dont want full on socialist policies or a leader that isnt seen to be patriotic

 

 

 

It will be though. It will be one side of the coin using any success to win an election, or the other side using the aftermath. Brexit will pretty much take up the whole of this new Decade in one way or another.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see where AoT & Liz are coming from , but I can't see any realistic Leftist candidate at present. RLB seems a really poor performer who could kill the Labour left off completely if she bombs as leader and Lavery is an old-style bruiser (literally ) and his baggage makes Corbyn look squeaky clean. I like Angela Rayner , but she obviously doesn't feel confident that she can be leader or he wouldn't be trying to smooth RLB's path to it.

 

It may come down to a gut-feel , but I think a Starmer / Rayner ticket may be the best available option at present. I think Starmer is not close to Corbyn in politics but nowhere near as reactionary as the right-wing wreckers like Phillips and Cooper , and with Rayner as deputy with the tacit support of the more leftist mp's and main officials he will be constrained in how far he can backtrack on policy ( hopefully he wont want to anyway , although they need streamlining a bit )

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why you say that, unlike most on this forum i warned that the leave vote is more entrenched in working class areas than most realise and that  has proven to be the case  

 

Corbyn had imo the right tactic in keeping his cards close to his chest, respect the put vote and wait for the tories to fuck it all up, which they will.  The right wingers in the labour party wanted a pro remain stance (agreed by many on hete) and it proved to be disastrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

Time and time again Labour are told that JC was toxic on the doorstep.  But it’s impossible to accept as he was built up to be bigger than Jesus. There’s an Alexi Sayle video where (paraphrasing) he describes JC as the kindest, most gentle man ever.  Really? It’s like calling someone a Nazi, once you go that far there’s no where else to go so it’s either double down or admit he may not be absolutely perfect.  

Do you think when someone uses a phrase like "the kindest, most generous man" they mean it literally  (and not just a way of adding emphasis to "very kind, very generous")?

 

If so, you are the stupidest person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ideal situation would be for us to have a PR voting system and for the party to split. Starmer is clearly more centrist than what many of us would like, if we had Labour with him and then a more actual left wing party it'd be good to have them in a coalition in the future. Neither party would get exactly what they want and none of us would be perfectly happy, but it'd be better than this shit and it'd at least reflect what voters want more.

 

Even if Labour win in the near future and even if it loses them the type of power they want shortly after, we have to change this fucking voting system. Anyone who leads the party next and that doesn't push for it to be changed deserves all the stick they get for it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, A Red said:

The next election will not be about Brexit, the Labour leader in 5 years time could have been a leaver or a remainer, it doesnt matter, it will have gone.

 

It is clear that the electorate dont want full on socialist policies or a leader that isnt seen to be patriotic

 

 

All of the above is correct bar for the "don't want socialist policies' bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People do want socialist policies, they just don’t realise that those policies are socialist. They’ve been falsely brainwashed that socialism is all gulags and three-day-weeks. Our policies were supported by a huge majority of the electorate in polls were they weren’t advertised as Labour policies. That is the most frustrating thing of all for me. To say we need to become more centrist is ludicrous. We just need to be seen as more centrist (i.e. for people to realise that our policies aren’t far-left, hardcore ideas, but perfectly mainstream policies that are working well in many other countries).

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Teasmaid said:

People do want socialist policies, they just don’t realise that those policies are socialist. They’ve been falsely brainwashed that socialism is all gulags and three-day-weeks. Our policies were supported by a huge majority of the electorate in polls were they weren’t advertised as Labour policies. That is the most frustrating thing of all for me. To say we need to become more centrist is ludicrous. We just need to be seen as more centrist (i.e. for people to realise that our policies aren’t far-left, hardcore ideas, but perfectly mainstream policies that are working well in many other countries).

Agreed, and I felt it was fucking stupid of Labour to be saying "this is the most radical manifesto ever" etc. That isn't the fucking sell. The sell was, as you allude to, this is bog standard centre left economics. The sort that can be seen all over Europe. There wasn't a great deal of "seizing the means of production" and nationalising bakeries. It was just, maybe make sure nurses don't have to go to food banks, try not to have millions of kids in poverty, etc. The language used allowed the dim to equate it with communism.

 

It should have been made quite clear that the current economic choices being made are considerably more radical than those than Labour were putting forward.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

Agreed, and I felt it was fucking stupid of Labour to be saying "this is the most radical manifesto ever" etc. That isn't the fucking sell. The sell was, as you allude to, this is bog standard centre left economics. The sort that can be seen all over Europe. There wasn't a great deal of "seizing the means of production" and nationalising bakeries. It was just, maybe make sure nurses don't have to go to food banks, try not to have millions of kids in poverty, etc. The language used allowed the dim to equate it with communism.

 

It should have been made quite clear that the current economic choices being made are considerably more radical than those than Labour were putting forward.

I agree with this; the party has been really poor with it's use of language in recent years for me. This may grate with some but I think they need to drop stuff like "comrade" because it just equates to Russian communism in the eyes of the general public. The right wing media are doing enough to scare the electorate without Labour exacerbating it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Red said:

 

It is clear that the electorate dont want full on socialist policies 

 

 

No it isn't; quite the opposite.

 

The (really limited and moderate) programme of decent public services funded by tax increases for the very richest which was at the heart of Labour’s manifesto consists of policies which are supported even by Tories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a clear leftist tendency in Corbyn's Labour, voters have identified it, most of you identify it (it's why some of you paid the membership so you can vote for it), most of you are worried that the new leadership may drop it and move to the center. How is that the overall conclusion that they are not socialist and after a crushing defeat, that people want them, but they are brainwashed into not wanting them and interpreting them as radical.

It hard to follow that logic sometimes.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sir roger said:

If you have opinions on the leadership election that's great , but shit like this suggests you are just being a cunt.

See, call anyone else whatever you want. In any thread people are called all sorts.  Insult the leader and...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, SasaS said:

There is a clear leftist tendency in Corbyn's Labour, voters have identified it, most of you identify it (it's why some of you paid the membership so you can vote for it), most of you are worried that the new leadership may drop it and move to the center. How is that the overall conclusion that they are not socialist and after a crushing defeat, that people want them, but they are brainwashed into not wanting them and interpreting them as radical.

It hard to follow that logic sometimes.

In our defence, you have just made it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Do you think when someone uses a phrase like "the kindest, most generous man" they mean it literally  (and not just a way of adding emphasis to "very kind, very generous")?

 

If so, you are the stupidest person.

I think if you build someone up, constantly use language like that and deny he’s capable of wrongdoing most people eventually say ‘Fuck off’ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, SasaS said:

There is a clear leftist tendency in Corbyn's Labour, voters have identified it, most of you identify it (it's why some of you paid the membership so you can vote for it), most of you are worried that the new leadership may drop it and move to the center. How is that the overall conclusion that they are not socialist and after a crushing defeat, that people want them, but they are brainwashed into not wanting them and interpreting them as radical.

It hard to follow that logic sometimes.

There is a clear, distinguishable difference between Socialism and Communism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jairzinho said:

Agreed, and I felt it was fucking stupid of Labour to be saying "this is the most radical manifesto ever" etc. That isn't the fucking sell. The sell was, as you allude to, this is bog standard centre left economics. The sort that can be seen all over Europe. There wasn't a great deal of "seizing the means of production" and nationalising bakeries. It was just, maybe make sure nurses don't have to go to food banks, try not to have millions of kids in poverty, etc. The language used allowed the dim to equate it with communism.

 

It should have been made quite clear that the current economic choices being made are considerably more radical than those than Labour were putting forward.

FUCK GREGGS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jairzinho said:

In our defence, you have just made it up.

Which part was made up?

 

Just now, Brownie said:

There is a clear, distinguishable difference between Socialism and Communism.

 

Yes, indeed there is. How is this relevant though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sir roger said:

If you have opinions on the leadership election that's great , but shit like this suggests you are just being a cunt.

Rico? Being an inflammatory cunt who says nothing of value and is out for a reaction? 

 

Wash your mouth out!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

See, call anyone else whatever you want. In any thread people are called all sorts.  Insult the leader and...

You didn't insult Corbyn. You insulted Labour Party members by pretending we look to him as the Messiah. If you make shit up to insult people, those people are likely to think you're a  cunt.

 

5 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

I think if you build someone up, constantly use language like that and deny he’s capable of wrongdoing most people eventually say ‘Fuck off’ 

Literally nobody denies Corbyn is capable of wrongdoing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Brownie said:

There is a clear, distinguishable difference between Socialism and Communism.

 

I think that line has become a little blurrier since the Labour Party elected someone who contributed regularly to communist periodicals and who hired communists into senior staff roles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the new Labour leader doesn't condemn Israel for murdering innocent people or threaten the super-rich with a slightly higher tax rate that they won't even notice then they will get a fair and honest shot at the big job in 5 years or so. 

 

Play the game, don't question morality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really get this 'how is Starmer going to win back the leave voting North' stuff. Well, if the implication is that he's a Southerner posho, then the answer is that they voted for Boris Johnson. If it's that he's remain, is the suggestion that Corbyn should be followed by a leave campaigner? 

 

As for somebody who mentioned about selling off the NHS should he win... not sure what that's even in consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour policies are (mostly) popular on their own. Collectively, as a manifesto, it’s much less certain if they are popular as people may not agree they are affordable or necessary. How much of a priority they are for people plays a big part if they’re important at all. I mean, I’d like free internet and would be in favour of it if asked for a poll but it’s so far down my list of priorities that it would never be a factor in how I vote. Also stuff like abolishing private schools is just an unneeded distraction which doesn’t appeal to anyone apart from a small section of already committed Labour voters and fuels right wing attacks that Labour wants to punish successful people. 
 

One of the most potent smears the Tories and right wing press have got is making out that Labour bankrupt the county and any future Labour governments would do the same. They still dine out on the infamous “there is no money left’ note. 
 

Just my opinion but the best way around this, and it might not be popular with some,  is to match or offer just a little better than what the Tories offer. They offer the NHS an extra £20 billion a year, we offer an extra £21.5 billion a year. They pledge to recruit 20,000 extra nurses, we pledge to recruit 23,000 extra. It would cut most Tory attacks off at the knees if we were broadly committing to spending just a little more than what they are. 
 

And then when we get power we can up everything in future budgets. We can say that, actually, the NHS is in a much worse state than we thought due to Tory underfunding and we’re giving an extra £5, or £8 or £10 billion or whatever we want. We can hire many more nurses, police, civil servants than we said. We can’t do any of this if we aren’t in power in the first place. 
 

Similarly with taking back public ownership, there is absolutely no need to go mental and pledge to take back Railways, water, electricity, gas, Royal Mail and also broadband. Again, it just fuels the belief Labour will bankrupt the country or take it back to the 70s or whatever else they say. Just stick to the railways would be my preference, get in and get that done and running better than it is now and put yourself in a good position to win a subsequent election when you can expand taking other utilities into public ownership. We’ve got to be smart about this. 

 

As for someone like Starmer moving significantly to the right or whatever people are worried about, I don’t think anyone is going to be able to do that to any meaningful degree as the NEC and conference delegates, the makeup of a majority of CLPs etc... won’t allow it. The way the party membership is now I just can’t see it happening. 
 

And finally, totally agree with Brownie on language used. I cringe every time someone says ‘comrade’. Whenever I’m in a union meeting and it gets said it’s so off putting. 
 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×