Hold your nose and vote Labour?

[redcogs]

Never want a tory government, or MP, but my vote makes no difference to any outcome whatsoever. i might abstain or spoil ballot or vote SNP. No enthusiasm in any direction really, so i can relax. Labour are a terrible option, even in Scotland. i'm not exactly apathetic, more angry and pissed off and worn down that people in overwhelming numbers still seem to accept capitalism despite all the evidence of the damage it does. If a socialist candidate became available i might be moved to place an x in that box

 

[Pickman's model]

If starmer is shit and labour are shit, that's not down to the Tory government but the state of politics in this country.

i think that is such a facile statement which obscures rather more than it reveals. many years ago there was a profile of a labour politician in the sunday telegraph (i think it was margaret hodge, but i can't recall) in which the journalist said that after being defeated by thatcher in 1987 kinnock decided to discard labour party principles in the pursuit of power. and where we are is the logical development of that position. by trying a range of methods to gauge the popularity of various policies the labour party has built its policy foundations on shifting sands for many years now - focus groups might work well in some settings, but not, i believe, in the establishment of political strategies.

alongside kinnock's decision, which has been followed by pretty much every subsequent labour leader, the development of the political class whereby people who had largely gone to oxbridge, studied ppe, and worked their way up the labour party ranks instead of following a career in 'the real world' began to dominate the ranks of the parliamentary labour party. of course this also occurred in the tory party, but not so swiftly and not so widely. people whose only life experience is based around working within the labour party clearly have little understanding of the experience of people outside that bubble. they simply pursue any policy which will offer them an ephemeral advantage over their rivals, which when their rivals are authoritarian nationalists draws them toward authoritarian nationalism too. - the blairite triangulation is an example of this in practice.

where previous centuries saw mass political bodies like the primrose league, political activism in the labour and tory parties has been largely sidelined. the labour party in particular is micromanaged by the leadership to an extent which kinnock, smith, miliband and corbyn - and possibly brown - would have found intolerable. wilson and callaghan would have been horrified by what's happening within the labour party now, as it becomes a narrow church in which shammer's fiat rules. this isn't to me a reflection of the shit state of politics in the uk, but very conscious and deliberate choices about the sort of party shammer wants. it's going much further than the defenestration of militant by kinnock. it shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the shammerites, that they can't cope with any dissent within the party. and - as above, so below - gives an indication of the sort of society shammer and his acolytes desire to see and if necessary create.

but none of this was inevitable. none of this was caused by the shit state of politics. but by shammer wanting power and not having the political principles which once differentiated the labour party, however slightly, from the tory party in its approach to managing british society and capitalism. now we have someone who wants to out-herod herod, who claims radical roots but has clearly lost any socialist notions he once affected.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Nah, it's those dumb proles' fault for voting wrong, clearly.

Yes. It’s very strange to hear professed socialists claiming that the problem is the people and not the politics/the way power and culture operates.

I always thought that our starting point was an inherent belief that people had within them the capacity to change things and build something better. Otherwise, what’s the point? Where do your politics go if you don’t believe in your fellow men and women? Whose doing the change of not us?

 

[Karl Masks]

It doesn't change a thing but highlights the problem is not with the Tories but the electorate

The problem I'm talking about is the destructiveness and toxicity of the current tory party. Sadly Starmer seems intent on aping it, but I still believe there is more to work with there than there will be with the tories

 

[Karl Masks]

Nah, it's those dumb proles' fault for voting wrong, clearly.

No one said this

 

[The39thStep]

The problem I'm talking about is the destructiveness and toxicity of the current tory party. Sadly Starmer seems intent on aping it, but I still believe there is more to work with there than there will be with the tories

Out of interest how are you proposing to ‘work ‘ with them there?

 

[krtek a houby]

The electorate is not to blame for the conspiracy to purge all vaguely left-wing politics from the Labour party and political discourse in general.

This is a country where light entertainment TV presenters can instruct the labour party leader to give the left 'a good kicking' and the party leader will enthusiastically support that suggestion.

Never underestimate the power of light entertainment

 

[Pickman's model]

The electorate is not to blame for the conspiracy to purge all vaguely left-wing politics from the Labour party and political discourse in general.

This is a country where light entertainment TV presenters can instruct the labour party leader to give the left 'a good kicking' and the party leader will enthusiastically support that suggestion.

What passes for the labour left now is well to the right on many if not most issues to the Labour leadership of the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, who weren't exactly socialist themselves

 

[NoXion]

No one said this

"the problem is not with the Tories but the electorate"

Sure sounds like it to me!

 

[Karl Masks]

Out of interest how are you proposing to ‘work ‘ with them there?

There will still be activists and party members sympathetic to better ideas.

Starmer can't afford to kick everyone out and with a minority he'll have to work with others. Though i woudln't rule out him eschewing the left and forming some weird 'national unity' government with the tories.

It;s all shit but there are differences

 

[Shechemite]

No one said this

Who was it who said:

‘I condemn the people of Milton Keynes for the mistakes that they made in the May election but they will have a chance for (sic) correct their mistakes hopefully in the very near future.’

 

[Karl Masks]

"the problem is not with the Tories but the electorate"

Sure sounds like it to me!

Sounds like?

"Nah, it's those dumb proles' fault for voting wrong, clearly. "

Your inability to comprehend isn't my problem

 

[Magnus McGinty]

You've got to wonder what Labour have done to piss everyone off to the extent that the Tories keep getting in.

 

[Pickman's model]

The problem I'm talking about is the destructiveness and toxicity of the current tory party. Sadly Starmer seems intent on aping it, but I still believe there is more to work with there than there will be with the tories

yeh right. A party which expels people for old tweets and simply sharing a stage in their official capacity with people booted out by shammer. There's nothing to work with there, there really isn't, not after the slightly pinkish tinged social democracy of corbyn was so roundly trounced and the current shower installed 3 years ago. All my life people have been wittering on about reclaiming the Labour Party but we've seen how the plp treated corbyn. How he was persecuted in a way no other politician has been for years on end. The Labour left is a busted flush. Any further attempt to retake the Labour Party, to try and shuffle it to the left, to make shammer moderate his policies, is 99.9% certain to fail. And if the 0.1% chance occurs, it'll be damned by the media and by a great many Labour politicians

 

[Pickman's model]

Sounds like?

"Nah, it's those dumb proles' fault for voting wrong, clearly. "

Your inability to comprehend isn't my problem

You stupid boy.

 

[NoXion]

Sounds like?

"Nah, it's those dumb proles' fault for voting wrong, clearly. "

Your inability to comprehend isn't my problem

My ability to comprehend is just fine, it's your inability to understand paraphrasing that's making you post like a fuckwit.

 

[The39thStep]

There will still be activists and party members sympathetic to better ideas.

Starmer can't afford to kick everyone out and with a minority he'll have to work with others. Though i woudln't rule out him eschewing the left and forming some weird 'national unity' government with the tories.

It;s all shit but there are differences

Well here's something you can work with the activists and party members sympathetic to better ideas on

 

[Gramsci]

I really cant vote Labour next time.

My local Labour Council ( Lambeth) have been saying for years they have to cut things and are not able to fund things due to Tory cut. The attitude being that one needs to vote in a Labour government to change this.

Its clear now this is not going to happen. Rachel Reeves/ Starmer fiscal rules have already ruled out for example , in real terms, a Green New Deal.

Second reason is that Starmer , despite what he said when he was trying to be leader , is running the party like the Lambeth Labour Cllr group run Lambeth. Top down, heavily whipped, Cllrs cannot step outside leadership line to support their residents and expelling Cllrs who are not part of the New Labour / Progressive faction.

Some of my Cllrs arent necessarily on the hard right of the party but they have to keep quiet on pain of losing seats. As has happened.

Other similarity between Lambeth Council and Starmer led national party is that the micro management does not apply to those on right of party.

Being involved in a small way in local issues Ive seen how the right of the party operate and its not pleasant.

Voting for Starmer led party , now the fiscal rules rule out any real change, means to me giving support to the way he has purged the party.

I remember the FT doing a series of articles on "Corbynomics" before last election. They were fair and John McDonnell came out of them well. In short the FT said the policies advocated would put UK in same league as Western European countries like Germany in terms of state intervention/ direction of the economy. The radical bit was that they were going to try and do this in one term. Move from Thatcherism. It was in FT view standard social democratic policy.

Now not even going to get that under Rachel Reeves. So what is the point.

 

[Pickman's model]

There will still be activists and party members sympathetic to better ideas.

Starmer can't afford to kick everyone out and with a minority he'll have to work with others. Though i woudln't rule out him eschewing the left and forming some weird 'national unity' government with the tories.

It;s all shit but there are differences

the fucking point of the shammer purge is that he is getting rid of a great number of these activists and party members. have you not seen this? this is not the labour party of yore, shit tho that was, it is the party of shammer. and labour party activists and party members could vote the sky was green and the land blue at the next party conference, they could pass the best motions that capture the most progressive and class conscious policies but shammer - and to be fair previous leaders - wouldn't adopt it as policy or move to enact it should he win the election.

your entire series of posts on this thread are based on misapprehensions, ignorance and conclusions drawn from stupidity. well may you hide your blushes behind masks

 

[maomao]

I don't think holding my nose would do it; I'd have to cut my whole face off.

 

[Gromit]

The whole system needs to be changed. It’s been slowly corrupted and is no longer fit for purpose.

But that isn’t going to happen so it’s vote for the lesser evil. Labour.

13 years of Conservative rule has made Britain a worse place not a better one. We can’t afford further damage.

 

[Dystopiary]

Hold your labour and vote no.

 

[Shechemite]

I don't think holding my nose would do it; I'd have to cut my whole face off.

Understandable, but will make it hard to get past the voter id check

 

[Dystopiary]

Every vote those fuckers get tells them they can do whatever they like.

 

[Pickman's model]

Every vote those fuckers get tells them they can do whatever they like.

yeh don't vote, it only encourages them

 

[Karl Masks]

Well here's something you can work with the activists and party members sympathetic to better ideas on

You don't seem capable of having this conversation.

I'm no fan of Stephen Kinnock, but to argue that the Tory mess can instanlty be fixed, having (one assumes) already stuffed people onto barges as they have in hotels, is fiction. None of those situations should ever have come to pass. I don't even know if the Bibi will even see a single refugee, in which case this is a moot point. However, those people, if put on board, will have to have their claims processed. The problem here is that the Tories are refusing to do that, thus putting Labour in exactly this situation.

Even so, I' mnot sure what your silly bad faith comment is even meant to address. I simply stated that there are party members and activists, still loyal, who want the party to do better. Do you deny that?

 

[The39thStep]

You don't seem capable of having this conversation.

I'm no fan of Stephen Kinnock, but to argue that the Tory mess can instanlty be fixed, having (one assumes) already stuffed people onto barges as they have in hotels, is fiction. None of those situations should ever have come to pass. I don't even know if the Bibi will even see a single refugee, in which case this is a moot point. However, those people, if put on board, will have to have their claims processed. The problem here is that the Tories are refusing to do that, thus putting Labour in exactly this situation.

Even so, I' mnot sure what your silly bad faith comment is even meant to address. I simply stated that there are party members and activists, still loyal, who want the party to do better. Do you deny that?

If I'm not capable of having 'this' conversation what is the point of asking me to reply to your post?

 

[Puddy_Tat]

dunno really.

my enthusiasm for the starmer led labour party is somewhere on the negative side of zero.

my enthusiasm for another government of an increasingly far-right tory party is even less.

as far as where i live is concerned, the lib dems are better placed to come second than labour are (unseating the tory twunt is fairly unlikely - it's a rarity to go below 50% tory vote share) and i doubt there would even be a left party candidate here (the greens might stand - for what that's worth) so at local level, voting labour is not going to help anyone except the incumbent tory twunt.

at national level, there's maybe 2 or 3 constituencies in england where the greens might stand a slight chance, wales and scotland have alternatives, and n ireland is different, but there isn't much of a choice in england.

the UK government after the next election will either be a 'labour in name only' tory government led by starmer, or a far right 'tory' government led by whoever the tory leader is that week, with a small chance of one of them needing another party to form a coalition.

would a starmer 'labour in name only' government make things better? probably not.

would a 'tory' government make things worse? very probably yes.

the idea of an alternative left party (or at least one that does more than putting a huge amount of effort in to losing their deposit in a few seats) happening any time soon seems further away than ever.

the 'cheer on a far right government to encourage labour to be a proper left wing party instead of soggy liberals and / or bring on the revolution' hasn't worked so far.

i'm not sure i know the answer. voting seems increasingly pointless, but not voting and then sitting back and complaining about it all seems a bit of an indulgence.

does starmer deserve to get elected? no.

do the current bunch of crooks and loons deserve another 4 - 5 years in power? does the country deserve that?

 

[redsquirrel]

Out of interest how are you proposing to ‘work ‘ with them there?

Posting on bulletin boards

 

[The39thStep]

Posting on bulletin boards

Posting very badly on bulletin boards. What makes me laugh is that most of the 'vote Labour or you'll burn in hell' brigade you find on social media either voted Lib Dem last time, aren't members of the Labour Party or only rejoined under Starmer and aside from social media do fuck all politically. It's not the responsibility of people on the left to vote Labour its the responsibility of Labour , if it wants those votes of the left , to convince the left that they are worth voting for rather than some obligation or feudalistic vow of loyalty.

If people want to 'hold their nose and vote Labour' in winnable or marginal seats fine but where they have a large majority, or the seat is unwinnable what's the point of encouraging the red Tories?