UK Politics

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, lazyred said:

I'm not a flag waver myself and its tricky. I don't want to wave my national flags but eqully I don't want them to be symbols of the far right. If the union and george flags can be reclaimed from the far right they can't be used to intimidate people as they heve been in the past.

The article says it is some labour activists who don't want to deliver the leaflets. That is a problem because it highlights the difference between the party and the voters they need to attract. This messaging is required to show Labour have changed after Corbyn.

Well when I stop getting the c-slur shouted at me virtually every month I'll wonder if some reclaiming of the flags can be done. As it is, I'll continue to cross to the other side of the road when I see a load of white men waving flags.

I want to emphasise, that the link between flag-waving and racism has grown massively in the last 10 years. Post-Brexit post-covid the racists have felt empowered, and have done flag-waving with it. In 2015 Miliband often stood in front of union jacks and I and others were happy campaigning with it. It's just the country's flag, it's going to be on some material saying you want to serve the country. That's fine.

I completely agree that Labour need to shown to voters they've changed since Corbyn. But I also think Labour has gone way too far the other way, and I don't trust the former human rights lawyer to stand up for human rights. It's not just the anti-migrant stuff and backing Coyle. It's that I also think Starmer has an incredibly low opinion of what traditional Labour voters in "the red wall" are like. I know people who live up there, they aren't anywhere near as racist as the portrayal of "Wokingham man". Starmer has sold the Labour party out to chase voters who aren't as racist as he believes they are.

[Neil]

5 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Some people like this patriotic flag waving shite, some people don't. That is the issue. 

means different things to different people. when we're voting for a leader of the tribe, a few tribal icons to rally around means what you choose it to mean.

[mattiloy]

4 hours ago, lazyred said:

They have to be closer to the tories (but I still think there are big differences) to win. The left are all or nothing but public attitudes take time to change. If a centrist labour party can change the electoral pattern to win 3 out of every 4 elections then over time we will become a more left wing society. 

Why did public attitudes change? In the post war era people were happy to invest in public infrastructure and pay more taxes. Can it be that the intellectual capitulation of the nominally left wing party to the neoliberal thatcher/reaganite consensus of the 80s has directly contributed to the erosion of the credibility of left wing economics? If so, is the route back to double down and undermine your own economic philosophy? Seems farfetched.

[mattiloy]

3 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

Oh look

 

 

[Neil]

25 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Why did public attitudes change? In the post war era people were happy to invest in public infrastructure and pay more taxes. Can it be that the intellectual capitulation of the nominally left wing party to the neoliberal thatcher/reaganite consensus of the 80s has directly contributed to the erosion of the credibility of left wing economics? If so, is the route back to double down and undermine your own economic philosophy? Seems farfetched.

it was things like huge losses at nationalised industries that destroyed the credibility of left wing economics, along with the "thatcherite  economic miracle", which got the uk out of deep sh*t, and got itself some credibility via that  which helped undermine left wing alternatives

[Neil]

31 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Why did public attitudes change?

if you don't know then the last 40 years of uk politics has passed you by.

[lazyred]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

Why did public attitudes change? In the post war era people were happy to invest in public infrastructure and pay more taxes. Can it be that the intellectual capitulation of the nominally left wing party to the neoliberal thatcher/reaganite consensus of the 80s has directly contributed to the erosion of the credibility of left wing economics? If so, is the route back to double down and undermine your own economic philosophy? Seems farfetched.

The Attlee govt was effectively one term. The tories moved left to cover the new centre ground. They kept the NHS and welfare state, built houses and were in  power for 13 years. Labour now have to move right to track the current centre

The 1970s global fuel rises and high inflation gave the right the chance to challenge the post war polices. In Britain thatcher was helped into power by the trades unions actions and perceived  failures of labour policy. 

Don't forget labour went left in the 1980s,the labour right split and formed a new party. The electorate had changed and so a leftwing labour party was not popular enough to win. As we saw in 2017 and 2019 that is still the case. 

Its not what I want but not enough peopje agree with me so I accept what I can get. 

[clarkete]

Let's not forget a few wealthy billionaires doing their utmost to influence many millions of voters....

 

 

[LJS]

3 hours ago, Neil said:

the "thatcherite  economic miracle", which got the uk out of deep sh*t, 

Thatcher destroyed vast swathes of British industry, laying waste to dozens of communities in the process. She glorified greed and staged an assault on any notion of social responsibility.

Wouldn't be my definition of a miracle.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, LJS said:

Thatcher destroyed vast swathes of British industry, laying waste to dozens of communities in the process. She glorified greed and staged an assault on any notion of social responsibility.

Wouldn't be my definition of a miracle.

It was written in quotes.

[Neil]

10 minutes ago, LJS said:

Thatcher destroyed vast swathes of British industry, laying waste to dozens of communities in the process. She glorified greed and staged an assault on any notion of social responsibility.

Wouldn't be my definition of a miracle.

those industries were f**ked which everyone knew who was paying attention, she chose to stop throwing huge amounts of money at them. thatcher just pulled the trigger on those f**ked industries. the 'miracle' was turning thing around from no jobs and no hope into something almost booming "loads of money"

[clarkete]

15 minutes ago, LJS said:

Thatcher destroyed vast swathes of British industry, laying waste to dozens of communities in the process. She glorified greed and staged an assault on any notion of social responsibility.

There's a lot of data here to support those conclusions...
https://academic.oup.com/cje/article/44/2/319/5550923?login=false

[Neil]

1 hour ago, clarkete said:

Let's not forget a few wealthy billionaires doing their utmost to influence many millions of voters....

lets not pretend that red robbo and scargill didn't influence at least as many voters.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, clarkete said:

Let's not forget a few wealthy billionaires doing their utmost to influence many millions of voters....

 

 

I think that's rather fanciful to be honest. If people vote for who their favourite paper tells then to, then that's their problem and they deserve what thay get.

I think it was more due to people voting in line to how their parents votes. Thankfully, that's changed

[clarkete]

1 minute ago, Ommadawn said:

I think that's rather fanciful to be honest. If people vote for who their favourite paper tells then to, then that's their problem and they deserve what thay get.

I think it was more due to people voting in line to how their parents votes. Thankfully, that's changed

You really think that 4 million people reading something every day presenting a certain view of the world doesn't have any impact on their perspective?

Extraordinary.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, clarkete said:

There's a lot of data here to support those conclusions...
https://academic.oup.com/cje/article/44/2/319/5550923?login=false

But people still voted Conservative in their droves.

Mind you, the opposition wasn't up to much.

[Neil]

9 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Labour membership falls by 23,000 the more they become just like the Tories.

and green party membership is what?????and green members are like tory members having a pop at labour.

or in Bristol this week, arrested for theft - (hands in the till like a tory.)

Edited March 31, 2024 by Neil

[Guest]

Just now, clarkete said:

You really think that 4 million people reading something every day presenting a certain view of the world doesn't have any impact on their perspective?

Extraordinary.

I think people are much less gullible than you may think. Like everyone else, I have a brain and can think for myself,

[Neil]

3 minutes ago, clarkete said:

You really think that 4 million people reading something every day presenting a certain view of the world doesn't have any impact on their perspective?

Extraordinary.

never underestimate the ability of labour's left to f**k thing up! i think reports each day on the news of another £50M to failing striking industries also had an impact, but people like to forget about that, vote corbyn!!!!

 

 

[Neil]

12 minutes ago, clarkete said:

You really think that 4 million people reading something every day presenting a certain view of the world doesn't have any impact on their perspective?

Extraordinary.

your guy has gone to help prop-up the new Murdoch, no one agrees with nick.

[Neil]

12 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

I think people are much less gullible than you may think. Like everyone else, I have a brain and can think for myself,

wish the labour left had a brain and could think - the UK  would be quite different if it could.

[LJS]

47 minutes ago, Neil said:

those industries were f**ked which everyone knew who was paying attention, she chose to stop throwing huge amounts of money at them. thatcher just pulled the trigger on those f**ked industries. the 'miracle' was turning thing around from no jobs and no hope into something almost booming "loads of money"

She created the "no jobs and no hope"

[Neil]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

She created the "no jobs and no hope"

she inherited a country f**ked by the unions, and changes in the world around it, the uk was trying to adapt to changed trading terms due to the end of empire.

[LJS]

5 hours ago, Neil said:

she inherited a country f**ked by the unions, and changes in the world around it, the uk was trying to adapt to changed trading terms due to the end of empire.

Just out of curiosity, Neil, was that your view at the time? Or have you revised it with the "benefit" of hindsight?

Edited March 31, 2024 by LJS

[steviewevie]

Working classes down south switched to Tory in the 80s and the working classes up north switched to Tory in the 2010s. Labour is now trying to win both those back.