Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Did you vote for Starmer?

Well did you


  • Total voters
    111
Yes, see edit.

Fine but don't pretend that supporting a LP that is backing an attack on people via austerity but not supporting a LP that challenged austerity doesn't say something about your politics. Let's be real, you are well to the right of the centre of gravity of the LP both at present and past. I mean contrast your views of Blair, MacDonald with the majority of current members.

You may be right on a lot of that. But yesterday’s result shows that your wrong about the current centre of gravity of the party.
 
Thing is fellas the argument that incremental progress is better than transformational change that never happens would hold more water if we hadn't been going backwards in terms of social protection and labour power for forty years, a big chunk of which was under a labour govt (a labour govt)

Show me where the alternative has been successful. Not a brave charge of the light brigade inspirational failure.
 
You may be right on a lot of that. But yesterday’s result shows that your wrong about the current centre of gravity of the party.
How so?
I think the centre of gravity of the party is mild social democracy (as it has been for most the LPs history), which is why Starmer who positioned himself well in the centre ground of the party won. He was backed by both the soft left and the liberal strands of the party. (The liberals backing him because any candidate they stood would have got a kicking like Philips did)
 
Thing is fellas the argument that incremental progress is better than transformational change that never happens would hold more water if we hadn't been going backwards in terms of social protection and labour power for forty years, a big chunk of which was under a labour govt (a labour govt)
This is crucial for me - if you keep the framework in place as you tinker its logic only embeds it further in the reproduction of social life and we become ever more inexorably fucked.
 
Fwiw. I don't know A380 but I do know we are from similar working class backgrounds from the same part of the country. I don't agree with him voting for Starmer but I do know he is not the class enemy or a liberal prick.

It depresses me the way the Left turn on each other. Sometimes I think we are more prepared to understand fascists and others who deviate from what we would ideologically like than we are prepared to understand and forgive each other.

Attacking him like this is bang out of order and no way to speak to a comrade who under the right circumstances would be fully on the correct side and more than willing to help.

Sorry redsquirrel but this is another of those occasions (I've mentioned before) where your language to a comrade just stinks of old left intolerance. The sort of shit I walked away from in revolutionary groups years ago.
 
William of Walworth said:
Protected from voting for any of them by being a PCS member .... :) ;)

Why would that stop you joining the Labour Party?
I know PCS is not affiliated, but that doesn’t stop its members from joining!

I was last an LP member in 2003 or 2004, but I did consider :confused: rejoining when Corbyn came in.

But for years, I'd told myself that I'd only get back into Labour through the trade union-affiliated route, and only long after Iraq :mad:.
Then the TU way was ruled out by the PCS thing (although to be fair, Mark Serwotka was publicly supportive of Corbyn/McDonnell)
Mind you, I did get into some local Labour leafletting duties during the election.
For what good that was worth in a safe seat! :(
 
Last edited:
Fwiw most of my immediate family either joined, paid the £3, or used their union vote to vote corbyn in '15, then became disenchanted (mainly cos of brexit) but backed him in '16 then back on bandwagon and posting stuff from rachel swindon and that on Facebook in '17 before becoming disenchanted again (brexit again, the stupidity of going remain when remainers weren't buying it) and then wetting themselves over posh chin last night and today (mostly cos of remain). So it's a common trajectory I think. And in six months they'll be full of regret and probably reposting starmer = blair memes from twitter dickheads. Such is life.

Edit - at least two of them voted libdem in 2010, natch
 
Fwiw. I don't know A380 but I do know we are from similar working class backgrounds from the same part of the country. I don't agree with him voting for Starmer but I do know he is not the class enemy or a liberal prick.

Sorry redsquirrel but this is another of those occasions (I've mentioned before) where your language to a comrade just stinks of old left intolerance. The sort of shit I walked away from in revolutionary groups years ago.
Fair enough. I apologise for the liberal prick jibe A380
(though it definitely applies to at least two of those that voted 'yes' in the poll)

Fwiw. I don't know A380It depresses me the way the Left turn on each other. Sometimes I think we are more prepared to understand fascists and others who deviate from what we would ideologically like than we are prepared to understand and forgive each other.

Attacking him like this is bang out of order and no way to speak to a comrade who under the right circumstances would be fully on the correct side and more than willing to help.
Here I'm not so in agreement. What is the correct side? Are Labour members that support Labour councils attacking workers on the correct side? What about those that argue that Labour councils 'have no choice' but to cut services? Sorry those people aren't on the same side as me, anymore than Starmer or Blair are.
 
Here I'm not so in agreement. What is the correct side? Are Labour members that support Labour councils attacking workers on the correct side? What about those that argue that Labour councils 'have no choice' but to cut services? Sorry those people aren't on the same side as me, anymore than Starmer or Blair are.

I thought it was so obvious I wouldn't have to spell it out, but ok, here goes.

NOT attacking workers. Not cutting services. None of that (I'd have thought was obvious) is the correct side. The correct side (and I apologize for such a wank term, couldn't think of another, my fail) would be revolutionary socialism. And given the right conditions, because A380 's lived experience is similar to mine, I'm pretty sure I can give him the benefit of the doubt and know which side he'd be on.

I said I didn't agree with him voting for Starmer. And I oppose everyone who did. But I'm not writing off a working class comrade for doing so.
 
The NHS proposed by a liberal and which was also in tory manifesto
And that's the problem, you have framed it far more elegantly than I could, thank you. The NHS, probably one of the things that has massively improved working class lives, but it's not pure socialist enough. Better we still had health panels and deaths from preventable disease than compromise on the true road to socialism.
 
And that's the problem, you have framed it far more elegantly than I could, thank you. The NHS, probably one of the things that has massively improved working class lives, but it's not pure socialist enough. Better we still had health panels and deaths from preventable disease than compromise on the true road to socialism.

The NHS is something which should be defended, it's improved the lives of many. But it doesn't support the reason why you cited it, namely that a labour party seeking incremental progress within the existing political consensus is better than one committed to a more transformative social democracy. Because it wasn't an achievement of the labour party (perhaps the shape of it, not the institution of it though).

Its got fuck all to do with bring 'pure socialist' and without being a dick, framing political arguments in this sort of toddler speak is pointless
 
NOT attacking workers. Not cutting services. None of that (I'd have thought was obvious) is the correct side. The correct side (and I apologize for such a wank term, couldn't think of another, my fail) would be revolutionary socialism. And given the right conditions, because A380 's lived experience is similar to mine, I'm pretty sure I can give him the benefit of the doubt and know which side he'd be on.
I've apologised to A380 and I'll leave them to side, but considering the abstract surely the above does mean sometimes 'turning' on those on 'the left'. Some 'comrades' choose not to back the miners or the dockers, I know more than a few LP scabs. I might be able to understand, or even forgive, their choices but I don't think it's out of order to call them on their political choices.

And on the wider terrain while many of those in the LP share my class interests it would be daft not to recognise that they are opposed to my political aims.
 
Also by the by, not sure citing the labour party of '45 when kier starmer has just taken control of the LP as we are in midst of a crisis with the potential to transform how capital operates is really the best example for starmerites to use but I can't really be arsed putting any effort in to expand on this
 
Anyway I look forward to the grand old party of capital being to the 'left' on spending than keir starmer's another future is possible labour party, will be a fun little period
 
And why does any revolutionary socialist give a flying fuck for who is leader of the Labour party? Did you all expect RLB to deliver socialism on a plate? No you didn't.

I learned there was a thing called a disillusioned socialist when I was about 18. Doesn't mean I have to follow their path or agree with them. But I certainly understand why that's 'a thing'. Writing them off as liberal pricks or 'toddlers' serves no purpose whatsoever.

Yes, call them on their choices by all means. But that's far divorced from the language being used here. And not supporting the Miners in the midst and battles of that era is far from a poxy vote for a right wing candidate in a party we have no interest in, no?
 
Mate if you're not a disillusioned socialist then you've been doing it wrong.

Anyway I didn't call anybody a toddler and I haven't used the words revolutionary or socialist until this post. Not sure I would describe myself as either any more really. I said it was toddler speak, and indeed framing the point that the welfare state was capital defending itself as a criticism of the institutions that resulted not being 'pure socialist' enough was absolute dribbling shit, like something you read on twitter. I was remarkably polite.
 
The NHS is something which should be defended, it's improved the lives of many. But it doesn't support the reason why you cited it, namely that a labour party seeking incremental progress within the existing political consensus is better than one committed to a more transformative social democracy. Because it wasn't an achievement of the labour party (perhaps the shape of it, not the institution of it though).

Its got fuck all to do with bring 'pure socialist' and without being a dick, framing political arguments in this sort of toddler speak is pointless
I answered your question and gave you an opportunity to refute my answer.

I'm still waiting for that chance: "Show me where the alternative has been successful. Not a brave charge of the light brigade inspirational failure."
 
Yeah I mean I'll apologise again to A380 for the liberal prick jibe if it is not fair in their case (it certainly is in plenty of others). But it's not like they are/haven't dished out as good as they've got.

EDIT: I mean calling anyone who criticises a move to the right as Tory supporters is hardly fraternal greetings is it.
 
Last edited:
It's always fun to watch lefties have a punch up. They hate each other more than they do the Tories. :D
Remember true believers always hate heretics far more than they do non- believers.
 
Yeah I mean I'll apologise again to A380 for the liberal prick jibe if it is not fair in their case (it certainly is in plenty of others). But it's not like they are/haven't dished out as good as they've got.
Fair enough. I did call you a cunt after all.
 
I answered your question and gave you an opportunity to refute my answer.

I'm still waiting for that chance: "Show me where the alternative has been successful. Not a brave charge of the light brigade inspirational failure."
Would we even have got the incremental change we got without the threat of inspirational failures elsewhere?
 
I answered your question and gave you an opportunity to refute my answer.

I'm still waiting for that chance: "Show me where the alternative has been successful. Not a brave charge of the light brigade inspirational failure."

Not sure I really understand you although you obviously think its a gotcha. If you mean where has conflict delivered results as opposed to seeking incremental change within the consensus then there are literally millions of examples.
 
Not sure I really understand you although you obviously think its a gotcha. If you mean where has conflict delivered results as opposed to seeking incremental change within the consensus then there are literally millions of examples.

No, and you know that wasn’t the question. Where has there been a successful socialist revelation that delivered tangible and lasting benifits to working class people.
 
No, and you know that wasn’t the question. Where has there been a successful socialist revelation that delivered tangible and lasting benifits to working class people.

We're talking about labour under corbyn and you think that was a revolutionary movement, fucks sake. Nothing I have said has had anything to do with socialism let alone revolution. Its about whether a labour party that brings itself into conflict with the consensus has greater potential to bring about change than one that tries to be the consensus. I've been quite polite and restrained tbh cos I mostly like you but you can do one with this dribbling straw man bollocks
 
Back
Top Bottom