Keir Starmer's time is up

[Rob Ray]

It was almost successful in 2017

Tbh I think the left could stand to be a bit clearer-headed about 2017. It was almost a hung Parliament, not a big left victory and certainly not one which, even in the best case scenario, would have given Corbynism room enough to do anything much apart from slowly implode under the weight of ongoing internal crisis while carrying the can for both Brexit fallout and a likely Parliamentary deadlock as Covid came in (if it even survived that long, which I don't think it would have).

As it is, Corbynistas can at least say "we couldn't possibly have been worse than Johnson's crew" — in charge they would have been monstered as murderers no matter the death count.

 

[killer b]

It was almost a hung Parliament

nah, it was actually a hung parliament.

 

[hitmouse]

I havent really paid enough attention to the rhetoric of the Stop the War coalition in recent years to be able to fully form an opinion on the following yet, but I expect its another clear example of Starmer trying to show his "middle ground" status quo credentials, wave some flags, and wind up the left, and there are plenty of Keir quotes in it that make me groan. He certainly resembles someone who wont be short of war rhetoric of his own if he ever finds himself in charge when such death opportunities knock.

Keir Starmer accuses Stop the War coalition of siding with Nato’s enemies

Exclusive: Labour leader affirms support for transatlantic alliance and attacks organisation in which Jeremy Corbyn is leading figure

www.theguardian.com

I mean, from what I've seen of StW a lot of that's probably true, but also hard to say what relevance they have to anything much in 2022. Is he going to enlighten us with his hot takes on the Libertines and Miss Dynamite next?

 

[Rob Ray]

nah, it was actually a hung parliament.

Fine, technically for five minutes until the DUP inevitably jumped on board, for all it matters. Point is Corbynist Labour was nowhere near, at any point, getting into government, let alone with a majority, and was absolutely miles away from a workable one in which the left could actually do anything useful. And there's lots of reasons for that (not least because he came in well after the political left's reach had collapsed across much of Britain), but when comparing to Starmer's rightist approach we can't really say "if only he'd stayed left it could have been a winner" because it wasn't, not even against Theresa May.

 

[Sprocket.]

Starmer will be beating Quakers up next and posting white feathers out.

 

[ska invita]

I think the core Labour vote is simply smaller than the core Tory one, any Labour Leader has to negotiate a somewhat tricky path between not pissing off left leaning voters enough that they stay home and right leaning voters don't vote for someone else.

Depends on definition of core: I think the key issue is less the size of core votes and more so the distribution across seats
But Labour Party history suggests that isnt the source of pandering to the right, its not just realpolitik calculations around vote share, its an ideological split thats been there from the start

 

[AmateurAgitator]

Labour facing bankruptcy as union donor Unite says it could pull remaining support

Sir Keir says Labour will not be ‘influenced by threats’

www.independent.co.uk

It has never been the party for workers though. It is a party of the middle and upper classes and always has been.

Edit : Oh I see Serge Forward got there first

 

[Serge Forward]

Though I wouldn't exactly say it's always been a party for the middle class. In the past it had mass working class membership, but politically, it's always been a leftish faction of capital.

 

[redsquirrel]

Unite is by far and away Labour's biggest donor so them withholding cash is going to hurt but it can't afford to have a parting of the ways with the Labour Party no matter how much it may be pissed off with them. What's it going to do then? donate money to the Tory Party or the LibDems? Labour is the ONLY political force that pays ANY attention to what the TUC or Unite think about anything. Bankrupting them and helping to guarantee a permanent Tory government not the smartest move in the playbook. As for donating it to other political 'projects' they might as well just chuck their money on the fire and burn it the end result will be the same.

Yep TUs should just keep funnelling cash to the LP regardless of how it is attacking workers. The labour movement exists solely to put the LP into power.

Unlike some other posters a Labour council is not directly attacking me at this moment but not one of our local Labour MPs has shown any support for the strikes we've had since 2018 and are about to enter again. Indeed we've more action from the Tory MPs (including the odious Philip Davies) than the labor ones.

 

[redsquirrel]

They could give their money to the CBI. The result would be much the same.

Hell last year the CBI ended up to left of Labour, the LP making a far bigger deal about the rise in corporation tax than the CBI

 

[RileyOBlimey]

He’s a waste of shit brylcreem.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

I mean, from what I've seen of StW a lot of that's probably true, but also hard to say what relevance they have to anything much in 2022. Is he going to enlighten us with his hot takes on the Libertines and Miss Dynamite next?

Agree on point one. StW’s politics are shite. Much more interesting is your reference to The Libertines. Starmer probably ‘quite likes’ a few of their tracks, but overall prefers the more cerebral and gritty northern soul grooves of Elbow. Ideal for listening to in his boot cut jeans.

 

[Sue]

Agree on point one. StW’s politics are shite. Much mode interesting is your reference to The Libertines. Starmer probably ‘quite likes’ a few of their tracks but overall prefers the more cerebral and gritty northern soul grooves of Elbow.

(((elbows)))

 

[MickiQ]

'Blackmail' is a interesting word to use in this context.

Do X or we will penalise you by doing Y, of course it's blackmail, the first question is whether it is morally justifiable blackmail? An idea for which here at least there seems to be popular support and the second question is whether or not it will achieve anything and I at least still think it will not.

 

[Sue]

Do X or we will penalise you by doing Y, of course it's blackmail, the first question is whether it is morally justifiable blackmail? An idea for which here at least there seems to be popular support and the second question is whether or not it will achieve anything and I at least still think it will not.

'We voluntarily give you shedloads of money, we think you're shit and unless you stop being shit, we'll stop voluntarily giving you shedloads of money.' Not sure that's blackmail, more stopping throwing good money after bad.

 

[Pickman's model]

Do X or we will penalise you by doing Y, of course it's blackmail, the first question is whether it is morally justifiable blackmail? An idea for which here at least there seems to be popular support and the second question is whether or not it will achieve anything and I at least still think it will not.

Do you take the same tack with donors to the Tory party?

 

[MickiQ]

'We voluntarily give you shedloads of money, we think you're shit and unless you stop being shit, we'll stop voluntarily giving you shedloads of money.' Not sure that's blackmail, more stopping throwing good money after bad.

That's honest at least perhaps you should apply to be their press officer.

Do you take the same tack with donors to the Tory party?

I think the kind of people who donate to the Tory Party do so because it is already doing the kind of things they want it to do. Unites beef is that they giving money to the Labour Party and it isn't doing what they want it to.

 

[two sheds]

Actually yes @ tory party but I pay electricity supplier a regular amount, I wouldn't keep doing it if they stopped supplying electricity.

 

[belboid]

Do X or we will penalise you by doing Y, of course it's blackmail, the first question is whether it is morally justifiable blackmail? An idea for which here at least there seems to be popular support and the second question is whether or not it will achieve anything and I at least still think it will not.

If that’s the case, then Labour are simply running a protection racket. “Give us the money or someone even nastier will come along.”

 

[Sue]

If that’s the case, then Labour are simply running a protection racket. “Give us the money or someone even nastier will come along.”

See also Labour shafting their longstanding voters based on the same 'principle'.

 

[Rob Ray]

The idea that politicians are independent of their sources of income has always been a conceit/bald-faced lie that favours the Tories.

 

[MickiQ]

If that’s the case, then Labour are simply running a protection racket. “Give us the money or someone even nastier will come along.”

pretty much

 

[Smokeandsteam]

think the kind of people who donate to the Tory Party do so because it is already doing the kind of things they want it to do.

Or because they want billions of pounds of public money doors out by their chums in Government eh?

 

[AmateurAgitator]

Though I wouldn't exactly say it's always been a party for the middle class. In the past it had mass working class membership, but politically, it's always been a leftish faction of capital.

Yeah I am aware that it used to have a largely working class membership in the past, but I would still not count it as ever being pro-working class. I mean this is a party that once forced working class people into labour camps for starters, and sent troops against striking workers etc. But as you say - it's always been a capitalist party.

 

[MickiQ]

Or because they want billions of pounds of public money doors out by their chums in Government eh?

that's one of the things it's doing that they would like it to keep doing. The Tory Party is as bent as a £9 note, for all their many failings the LP is not even remotely in the same league.

 

[andysays]

Are you a member of a union MickiQ ?

 

[MickiQ]

Are you a member of a union MickiQ ?

No I'm self-employed

 

[andysays]

No I'm self-employed

So do you contribute financially to the Labour Party in any way, or do you just expect others to do it and then accuse them of blackmail when they decide they don't want to do it any more?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Promote working people fighting in their own class interests, back those in dispute, build fighting organisations, build for actions against the anti-union laws. That all takes time and money, you know. Fuck Labour. It's another party of the bosses.

Yeah, this stuff doesn't come for free. A union should be using its resources in the interests of its members and the working class in general. If funding Labour does that on balance, fine, if not, put them to better use.

It's not like resources can only be used in the context of political donations - that's awful talk.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Yeah I am aware that it used to have a largely working class membership in the past, but I would still not count it as ever being pro-working class.

I’m not convinced it’s ever had a ‘largely working class membership’, but what is beyond doubt is that from the outset it’s intellectual, theoretical and cultural origins were solidly upper middle class (the Webbs for example, who found the proles nauseating unwashed ruffians who needed to be watched and controlled). Hence why your latter point is spot on