If the Labour Party was to split would you be more likely to join?

[friendofdorothy]

All the internal squabbling in the parlimentary LP and the talk about splitting is just a gift to the Tory party.
Hard to imagine that any new party of any kind would be electable for decades.

It feels like the 80s again to me - with the Tories reaching out to working class voters and the left just arguing amongst themselves while the assets of our country was sold and the riches of our oil wealth given as a tax cut to high earners.

I'm giving up giving a fuck and going to get trashed - unless anyone has any more constructive ideas.

 

[mauvais]

I'm not sure that "ready to do the job" applies now in the same way it did 30 or even 20 years ago. There's much more of a need now to take both the parliamentary and the national memberships along with the general policy initiatives (which is where May has played a good hand - she's catered to a broad range of prejudices with her appointments and with the few policy-related issues she's commented on) than there used to be. Top-downism used to be the order of the day, but now you have to carry thememberships with you, which can make doing substantive "jobs" very difficult indeed.

For some definition of "ready" and "the job". I would say they're more than capable of being re-elected. Whether they get re-elected or not depends on what they do, but they have the foundation of a competent party, even if it's painful to say so.

And whether any given Tory is fully on board or opposed to the current flavour, they're still getting something along the lines of their politics, unlike the opposition who are out and currently staying out - structurally fucked.

Inaccurate.

The only real difference between the Labour left and the Tory right, is that the Labour left air their issues in public, whereas the Tories keep a tight lock on news about dissent, and do everything under cover. Talk to any member of a local right-oriented Conservative club, and they're just as full of tales of shenanigans as any leftward Labour party, they merely resist publicising the war between the "traditional" Tories; the one-nationers; the business-oriented "modernists"; the neoliberals; the Thatcherites, and the headbanging rabid everythingophobes.

This in itself is a large part of what I mean. I don't know or care what disputes there are within the party, they don't spill out, they don't split the party (except some occasional kippers) and they don't render the whole thing unelectable, more's the pity. They have one public-facing vehicle with a veneer of unity and they internalise division.

I say large part because I don't believe it's purely a case of keeping it indoors either. I think they are better at politics. I think it's more tactical and more strategic. I might be wrong, but I can't imagine them doing anything quite so incoherent, crass or downright dim (certain individual figures aside) as the Labour PLP and NEC's actions of late , even if translating that to the Tory context takes a stretch of the imagination in the first place. Their divisions are borne of calculating opportunism. There's no potential for splitting the party (unless the Blairites present one?) because it would set back the common objectives, even if the commonality is thin, by several decades, and they recognise that - unity is pragmatic.

 

[redsquirrel]

This seems to assume that a split in the Labour Party is somehow a split on the left, it isn't. Large sections of the Labour Party are in no way on the left. The division in the Labour Party is between the left and the right. The Labour party is not the left and the left is not the Labour party.

And even more importantly the left isn't labour.

Some of the responses on this thread show exactly why getting involved with the internal politics of the Labour Party is a dead end.

 

[coley]

Yes. Absolutely. I mean look at the Tories, no divisions there, right?

Apart from that 30 year feud that's just led to some trifling referendum of course.

At least none of their MPs would defect. Would they?

Oh. Well, not counting the couple that went to UKIP that is.

Nah. Splitting is not the reason the Left is losing right now.

Fair points, but when it comes to winning elections they somehow manage to present a unified front, a broad tent, something the left seems incapable of.
Bugger labour, after a lot of thought, I'm joining the Green Party.

 

[redsquirrel]

Yeah totally united from 92-05. FFS

 

[mauvais]

Yeah totally united from 92-05. FFS

Whereas 'the left' last had it together in...?

Even in the 90s the disaster that was Tory government kept on trucking until voted out, whereupon its successor stuck its flag in the position heavily defined by it. Then it didn't split, didn't destroy itself, and here it is again.

 

[redsquirrel]

Whereas 'the left' last had it together in...?

Well from the logic of some in this thread apparently ~94-05

 

[DotCommunist]

All the internal squabbling in the parlimentary LP and the talk about splitting is just a gift to the Tory party.
Hard to imagine that any new party of any kind would be electable for decades.

It feels like the 80s again to me - with the Tories reaching out to working class voters and the left just arguing amongst themselves while the assets of our country was sold and the riches of our oil wealth given as a tax cut to high earners.

I'm giving up giving a fuck and going to get trashed - unless anyone has any more constructive ideas.

play your favourite albums. Its been a boon to me to do mine a few spins in recent times (ok its online not vinyl but the head on my hard drive still spins and so does the fan so we are keeping the saying). Its turning into a long hot summer. Of rage from me.


as to the OP I would not join a labour-left split. Corbyns a decent chap from what I can see but no, for reasons stated many times. Record in power. Its not full communism. Fabians. Sandals. Everything

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Not for DC the:

Not even the:

Only the full monty is good enough for the working class:



Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[YouSir]

Not for DC the:

Not even the:

Only the full monty is good enough for the working class:

View attachment 89662

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Shameless decadence, true victory is these for all...

 

[danny la rouge]

It's Abernethies for me.

 

[DotCommunist]

View attachment 89687 It's Abernethies for me.

I like how they state particularly that those biscuits are scottish, because the name itself doesn't give the consumer a massive clue as to the origin of the snack

 

[danny la rouge]

I like how they state particularly that those biscuits are scottish, because the name itself doesn't give the consumer a massive clue as to the origin of the snack

Well, you don't want to accidentally eat a foreign biscuit.

 

[charlie mowbray]

Abernethy biscuits are almost as boring as Rich Tea biscuits.

 

[danny la rouge]

Abernethy biscuits are almost as boring as Rich Tea biscuits.

Enough of that kind of talk.

 

[discokermit]

rich tea are subtle. not boring.

 

[Sue]

I prefer the worker's bourbon.

 

[DotCommunist]

rich tea are not for the inexperienced dunker though. Leave it a second too long and disaster, half a biscuit floating in the mug

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I prefer the worker's bourbon.

What about it's anemic cousin the custard cream?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Sue]

What about it's anemic cousin the custard cream?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

Two biscuits and a creamy filling for all!

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Two biscuits and a creamy filling for all!

That just sounds like filth!

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Sue]

That just sounds like filth!

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[emanymton]

Oi, this is a serious thread and not for talking about biscuits!

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Oi, this is a serious thread and not for talking about biscuits!

You calling biscuits frivolous?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[skyscraper101]

No. Never felt the need to join a political party outside of supporting one or another at elections.