Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hold your nose and vote Labour?

Will you vote Labour?

  • Yes

    Votes: 70 32.1%

  • No

    Votes: 148 67.9%
  • Total voters
    218
Gramsci said:
To be fair to the Greens in Lambeth they were ( they lost seats at last election) helpful to the people on estates that the Labour Council was trying to "regenerate". Pre Kerslake report.

Rashid stood as Green Cllr in my Coldharbour ward several times. And I would see him out and about canvassing.
Click to expand...
To be fair to Rashid he has been seen at Angell Town related events at the Baytree and 336, but never overtly campaigning as a Green representative on the estate itself, and I have still never had a leaflet from the Green Party.
 
Eric Jarvis said:
If they manage to form a national party then the membership apparently gets to choose the party's name. (I think to some extent because it is understood that Transform is not a good name for a political party but nobody actually has a better idea yet).
Click to expand...
It’s a really tough job choosing a party name. I’ve no doubt that it makes a big difference. It needs to get the big idea across in a single word, so that people can rally behind a quickly agreed vision. “Labour” creates the impression of fighting for workers . “Conservative” indicates stability and continuity. The fact that neither of those parties live up to those ideals (or even maintain them as ideals) doesn’t matter — people are still persuaded by the word itself. The word “Independence” within ‘UK Independence Party’ really helped UKIP in a way that ‘Veritas’ had failed to.

All this is by way of saying that leaving the choice of the name for the members to decide strikes me as a bad idea. You’ll end up with something bland (or, worse, offensive or in-jokey). Whoever the party’s leaders are need to decide on their vision — their core idea — and choose a word that best communicates that message. You can’t start by collecting people and then decide the message afterwards.
 
Get a load of this Knob. Fucking Mandelson.

what we need in this country is good strong trade union leaders who are responsible, skilled collective bargainers who will work with management in order to create better workplaces and more success for businesses and public services.

“Some of the trade union legislation has gone too far in my view. But we have to be very careful in my view about how we reform them.

“It sends a very difficult signal to people if business and international investors get the wrong idea that we are abandoning flexibility in our labour market in a fast-changing economy with technologically driven working practices. We need trade unions but we need trade unions of the 21st century not the last one.”
Click to expand...

Even thinks he is funny

At the start of his speech, Mandelson also joked that Labour is now so mainstream on business that the City of London Corporation was “almost to the left” of it
Click to expand...

Though occasionally he genuinely is

We failed as a party to offer a proper alternative to the Conservatives and that is the importance of what Keir has done: reclaiming the Labour party and switching us back from weird to normal is what he has done and I congratulate him
Click to expand...
 
kabbes said:
It’s a really tough job choosing a party name. I’ve no doubt that it makes a big difference. It needs to get the big idea across in a single word, so that people can rally behind a quickly agreed vision. “Labour” creates the impression of fighting for workers . “Conservative” indicates stability and continuity. The fact that neither of those parties live up to those ideals (or even maintain them as ideals) doesn’t matter — people are still persuaded by the word itself. The word “Independence” within ‘UK Independence Party’ really helped UKIP in a way that ‘Veritas’ had failed to.

All this is by way of saying that leaving the choice of the name for the members to decide strikes me as a bad idea. You’ll end up with something bland (or, worse, offensive or in-jokey). Whoever the party’s leaders are need to decide on their vision — their core idea — and choose a word that best communicates that message. You can’t start by collecting people and then decide the message afterwards.
Click to expand...

Socialism McSocialistface
 
kabbes said:
It’s a really tough job choosing a party name. I’ve no doubt that it makes a big difference. It needs to get the big idea across in a single word, so that people can rally behind a quickly agreed vision. “Labour” creates the impression of fighting for workers . “Conservative” indicates stability and continuity. The fact that neither of those parties live up to those ideals (or even maintain them as ideals) doesn’t matter — people are still persuaded by the word itself. The word “Independence” within ‘UK Independence Party’ really helped UKIP in a way that ‘Veritas’ had failed to.

All this is by way of saying that leaving the choice of the name for the members to decide strikes me as a bad idea. You’ll end up with something bland (or, worse, offensive or in-jokey). Whoever the party’s leaders are need to decide on their vision — their core idea — and choose a word that best communicates that message. You can’t start by collecting people and then decide the message afterwards.
Click to expand...
Personally I've stopped caring. All of the available names are lousy and I don't think the new party will be ready in time for the general election anyway. I would be happy with Lefty McLeftface. At least it does what it says on the tin.
two sheds said:
Democratic Socialists seems free :)

I think - hard to tell.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately "democratic" and "democrat" are somewhat devalued from decades of abuse. It's like the word "people's". If any party has that in the name you can guarantee they are referring to a maximum of 5 people.
 
redsquirrel said:
Why? Why do we have to compare it against other parties? If the reply one gives to the statement "look at this racist action the the Labour Party has done", is "but the Tories are worse" then that is pretty much a clear example of whataboutery.
Click to expand...
Is it whataboutery to point out that the membership of organizations is made up of people taken from society, and so reflect the views of society at that time? Feels like a bit of a stretch to me.

Those quotes in quote marks aren’t mine by the way. You know it’s dishonest making up quotes and pretending they’re what someone’s said. Please don’t do it.
redsquirrel said:
The Labour has been in government or the official opposition for 100 years now. It is not just been "tainted" by society's racism, it has played a key role in forming the racist policies and actions of the state over that time.
To dismiss, or downplay, the racism of the Labour Party (and Liberal Democrats, SNP, etc) is what allows the far-right to grow. The anti-immigrant policies of New Labour assisted the BNP, Macron's bashing of Islam played right into the hands of the RN.
Click to expand...
Very interesting, and as before I’d generally again agree.

I’m not sure how it relates to my discussion with Orang Utan, though. As I made clear in my post (which you cut out of your quoting, which I feel is also a bit dishonest) that wasn't what I was referring to. I was specifically discussing the membership when Corbyn was leader to ask whether it became more racist under Corbyn. The membership, note, not even Labour MPs let alone what Labour has done while in government or official opposition.
 
They don't "reflect the views of society at that time." They reflect the views of a relatively small subsection of that society which is comfortable enough with its direction and leadership to endorse its position. Important conceptual difference to be clear about. In fact in many cases, not least economic, Labour is well to the right of public opinion more generally.

"I was specifically discussing"

Yes but what you want to discuss is clashing with quite a lot of other people who'd rather not turn this thread into another rehash of the Is Corbs Antisemitic Show.
 
Rob Ray said:
They don't "reflect the views of society at that time." They reflect the views of a relatively small subsection of that society which is comfortable enough with its direction and leadership to endorse its position. Important conceptual difference to be clear about. In fact in many cases, not least economic, Labour is well to the right of public opinion more generally.
Click to expand...
Although the views I was discussing were particularly on antisemitism and how Labour members compare.

Rob Ray said:
"I was specifically discussing"

Yes but what you want to discuss is clashing with quite a lot of other people who'd rather not turn this thread into another rehash of the Is Corbs Antisemitic Show.
Click to expand...

Yep fair enough, I was picking up on Orang Utan's remark on Corbyn but happy to finish now.
 
Last edited:
two sheds said:
Is it whataboutery to point out that the membership of organizations is made up of people taken from society, and so reflect the views of society at that time? Feels like a bit of a stretch to me.

Those quotes in quote marks aren’t mine by the way. You know it’s dishonest making up quotes and pretending they’re what someone’s said. Please don’t do it.
Click to expand...
But the LP does not merely reflect society, it is responsible for policies and actions that have reinforced the structural racism that exists in society.

I'm not attributing those quotes to you, they are examples of a hypothetical response, hence my use of "one". I thought that was pretty clear from the context, but apologises if you thought otherwise.
I'm not discussing the anti-semitism stuff that's why I did not quote it.
 
two sheds said:
Is it whataboutery to point out that the membership of organizations is made up of people taken from society, and so reflect the views of society at that time? Feels like a bit of a stretch to me.

Those quotes in quote marks aren’t mine by the way. You know it’s dishonest making up quotes and pretending they’re what someone’s said. Please don’t do it.

Very interesting, and as before I’d generally again agree.

I’m not sure how it relates to my discussion with Orang Utan, though. As I made clear in my post (which you cut out of your quoting, which I feel is also a bit dishonest) that wasn't what I was referring to. I was specifically discussing the membership when Corbyn was leader to ask whether it became more racist under Corbyn. The membership, note, not even Labour MPs let alone what Labour has done while in government or official opposition.
Click to expand...
Pretty much ALL the racism within the Labour Party that I have directly encountered so far this century is Progress/Labour First/Labour To Win activists using anti-black racist and Islamophobic tropes and ideas to attack non white left wingers, and yes that did increase with Corbyn as leader, and it shows quite clearly that a LOT of the prime movers behind Starmer are at the very least completely unconcerned by bigotry or prejudice if they think they can use it for factional ends. That doesn't mean the left is perfect either. There's still a large component of white middle aged middle class people on the left who only want to talk amongst themselves, but the overt stuff has almost inevitably been from the right of the Party.
 
two sheds said:
Is it whataboutery to point out that the membership of organizations is made up of people taken from society, and so reflect the views of society at that time? Feels like a bit of a stretch to me.

Those quotes in quote marks aren’t mine by the way. You know it’s dishonest making up quotes and pretending they’re what someone’s said. Please don’t do it.

Very interesting, and as before I’d generally again agree.

I’m not sure how it relates to my discussion with Orang Utan, though. As I made clear in my post (which you cut out of your quoting, which I feel is also a bit dishonest) that wasn't what I was referring to. I was specifically discussing the membership when Corbyn was leader to ask whether it became more racist under Corbyn. The membership, note, not even Labour MPs let alone what Labour has done while in government or official opposition.
Click to expand...
That's not entirely the case. I've been changed to some degree by all the organisations I've been in, be they workplaces or political groups. And political parties seek to change society in line with their views. So it's not the lp reflects the views of society so much as the lp tries to shift the views of society. The internal democracy of a body contributes a great deal to its relationship with the rest of society and as there is effectively none in the Labour party that influences how it approaches other issues, eg planning reform, where they want to ride roughshod over local communities even more than is already the case. There are dynamics within society and within organisations, and dynamics in the relationship between organisations and wider society, it's facile to say the one reflects the other, in the case of large political parties be they the ccp, the lp or the nsdap it's rather more complicated than that
 
Fair points, and I wonder whether it was sloppy phrasing on my part. When I was saying Labour Party I particularly meant Labour membership. I'm sure I remember although I can't find the figures now that surveys were done of the membership which showed lower numbers for antisemitic opinions than in the population generally. Those surveys were what I was referring to.

Eta: this piece refers to them FactCheck: beware cherry-picked stats on Labour and antisemitism

Incidentally I'm surprised any of the papers could report with a straight face Corbyn's suspension for claiming that antisemitism within the labour party had been exaggerated. Just comparing the flood of newspaper reports about labour's antisemitism with those of the other parties over the previous couple of years sort of confirms what he said.

/finished now
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hitmouse
Unions and Labour
Replies
20
Views
920
Fedayn
Fedayn
P
In Blackpool South, did people vote because they are head over heals with Labour
Replies
27
Views
964
A380
A380
frogwoman
Jas Athwal - Labour MP owns several London flats full of ants and black mould
Replies
13
Views
730
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Humberto
Home Building Labour guff
Replies
1
Views
245
Humberto
Humberto
L
“Be Lazy. Just Vote”
Replies
3
Views
2K
Monkeygrinder's Organ
M
Back
Top Bottom