Alexandole Boris de Pfeffel Johnson

[Rascal]

So the only reason labour has lost its connection with labour voters is due to the labour voters becoming complacent.
Nothing to do with people having aspirations and hopes and dreams
Wanting to be more and better than our parents had.
Maybe if labour stopped telling us how shit our lives are because of the Tory’s and actually sold us a dream of how our lives could be better we could relate
Instead of treating us all like we are useless and need their help to think for ourselves

The power of Tufton Street, the Frankfurt school, the Taxpayers alliance and numerous other right wing think tanks have certainly made their mark on the British psyche. You have to hand it to them, they have convinced so many people that voting in the interests of those with capital will one day mean they also have capital. Its the translation of the American dream into the UK way of thinking, it allowed for the destruction of the post WW2 social concensus and has taken the UK away from the collectivist ideals of Council housing, state welfare systems, National Health services into the realms of dog eat dog capitalism.

The ideals of social markets has been replaced by capital markets and all that has resulted in is the misnomer of trickle down economic theory, neo-hayekian laissez faire extremism which as lead to ever increasing levels on inequality across the UK. The Tories aided by their outriders have sold you this dream that your life could be better if you hand more of your surplus value into the hands of the idle capitalists, if you work harder that could be yours and by fuck they have been clever at it, so clever millions fall for it time after time and inequality carries on increasing.

They painted the Labour party as the party of dependency, the reason they did that is not because they believe it to be true but because a strong state means taxation and those with capital hate paying taxes, taxes are paid by those who aspire and the titbits given by Tory chancellors of a couple of quid here and there are just a smokescreen for the huge cuts in taxes for their donors and friends.

There is nothing wrong with dreaming, just beware the snake oil salesmen, they are only after one thing and its not for your benefit

 

[The perfect fumble]

 

[Tb1981]

The power of Tufton Street, the Frankfurt school, the Taxpayers alliance and numerous other right wing think tanks have certainly made their mark on the British psyche. You have to hand it to them, they have convinced so many people that voting in the interests of those with capital will one day mean they also have capital. Its the translation of the American dream into the UK way of thinking, it allowed for the destruction of the post WW2 social concensus and has taken the UK away from the collectivist ideals of Council housing, state welfare systems, National Health services into the realms of dog eat dog capitalism.

The ideals of social markets has been replaced by capital markets and all that has resulted in is the misnomer of trickle down economic theory, neo-hayekian laissez faire extremism which as lead to ever increasing levels on inequality across the UK. The Tories aided by their outriders have sold you this dream that your life could be better if you hand more of your surplus value into the hands of the idle capitalists, if you work harder that could be yours and by fuck they have been clever at it, so clever millions fall for it time after time and inequality carries on increasing.

They painted the Labour party as the party of dependency, the reason they did that is not because they believe it to be true but because a strong state means taxation and those with capital hate paying taxes, taxes are paid by those who aspire and the titbits given by Tory chancellors of a couple of quid here and there are just a smokescreen for the huge cuts in taxes for their donors and friends.

There is nothing wrong with dreaming, just beware the snake oil salesmen, they are only after one thing and its not for your benefit

Fair points
At the same time is it not true that labours answer to absolutely every issue seems to be to tax the rich
I am not rich and I don’t mind paying more tax for better services, but i want honesty. If we all put more in we get more out
Trying to get the masses against the top 5% isn’t the way either

 

[bluethrunthru]

Fair points
At the same time is it not true that labours answer to absolutely every issue seems to be to tax the rich
I am not rich and I don’t mind paying more tax for better services, but i want honesty. If we all put more in we get more out
Trying to get the masses against the top 5% isn’t the way either

No its not. Anybody in their right minds should want what Labour proposed which is fair taxation. The problem is you have a Chancellor set out his budget based on what is needed to run the country. After that what you find is people who find a way not to pay what is expected thus undermining the Chancellors plans. This happens under every Chancellor and is practised by individuals and corporations alike.

So many people at this time "value" the key workers but already calls for them to get properly rewarded have fallen away and in a few weeks the Mail and the Telegraph will be calling the Teaching Unions out for cowardice and not supporting the national effort and fire fighters will be going on strike again.

Its not about taxing the rich its about those who are identified in a budget as being required to pay tax paying the fucker not dodging it end of and simples.

 

[journolud]

Is there a Labour Party thread somewhere that I can read a discussion about why they lost the last few elections? This one just seems to be about the shortcomings of our prime minister.

 

[Chris in London]

. If Starmer wants to really unite the party he has to get rid of every single one of the traitorous fuckers and ban them from the party for life otherwise the Labour party will just become the party of the FBFE fruitcakes.

What Starmer wants to do, I suspect, is win. If you go in to politics to improve the lot of ordinary working people you wont achieve that by constantly being in opposition. The last Labour government enacted laws that made life better for literally millions of people. Every Labour Leader since has achieved nothing. Even without investing a penny in schools and hospitals Starmer would make life better for most people by simply not being Boris Johnson.

It is interesting to think about the things that need to happen for Labour to win in 2024. Obviously, it needs to win back the red wall seats, but I think that is quite probable anyway. I doubt that it will win back Scotland, but if the SNP continues to dominate there will be a number of kindred spirits in parliament from there.

But those things are not enough. To win, Labour needs about 150 more seats than it currently has, or 100 if you count Scotland. So it needs to win in marginals like Basildon, High Peak, Worcester and Watford as well as hang on to places like Kensington and Chelsea and Canterbury and St Albans, all of which they won against a backdrop of Brexit. Now that Brexit is finally over, and all that remains is to see how damaging it will be for our economy, Labour’s success in 2024 will depend upon policies that attract floating voters. I personally don’t see a left wing manifesto as doing that.

Even then, Labour will need other things to go its way. One of those is public perception. Starmer needs to deal with the anti semitism issue, with momentum, with the former anti-Corbyn element and so on and he needs to bring all in the party around the same table and get them focussed on beating the government. I don’t see him achieving party unity by delivering an internal bloodbath, and even if he did I don’t see that doing so would make Labour a more attractive prospect to the electorate. Starmer has got the beating of Johnson at the dispatch box, and I think that will go a long way towards reuniting the left and right wings of the party: there is nothing like success for breeding success. If the need to shift the current set of liars and chancers that passes for a government doesn’t unite the Labour Party, it will deserve the oblivion that will await it.

You mention the possibility that the left would desert the party if a centre-left manifesto was adopted, so even if it appealed to centreground voters Labour still wouldn’t win. In my view, that’s not likely to happen. It didn’t happen after Kinnock expelled the Militant tendency in 1985: it might have been through gritted teeth but militant members still largely voted labour in 1987 and 1992 and again in 1997. If it did, well, that just increases the chances that the clown in No 10 will stay there another five years. It was as clear as it could be in 1997 that Blair stood for free market principles underpinned by a greater concern for social cohesion than had shown for the previous two decades. Did you vote for him anyway? I’d have guessed you did. I think the same will happen, even if you are right about the left leaving the party in 2024.

Like I said, allowing the perfect, as some would see it, to be the enemy of the good Will just make it more likely that the current government will remain in power for another decade. That is an utterly chilling thought.

 

[west didsblue]

Fair points
At the same time is it not true that labours answer to absolutely every issue seems to be to tax the rich
I am not rich and I don’t mind paying more tax for better services, but i want honesty. If we all put more in we get more out
Trying to get the masses against the top 5% isn’t the way either

Odd that you don’t mind paying extra tax yourself but you are defending the rich from Labour imposing more taxes on them.
It’s the people in the middle that get squeezed the most for tax. The very rich have the resources to minimise their tax burden through any number of loopholes and schemes. I’d rather these loopholes and offshore schemes were addressed before they add to everyone else’s tax bill, but this government appear to be doing their best to protect the very rich who coincidentally are their biggest donors.

 

[Rascal]

What Starmer wants to do, I suspect, is win. If you go in to politics to improve the lot of ordinary working people you wont achieve that by constantly being in opposition. The last Labour government enacted laws that made life better for literally millions of people. Every Labour Leader since has achieved nothing. Even without investing a penny in schools and hospitals Starmer would make life better for most people by simply not being Boris Johnson.

It is interesting to think about the things that need to happen for Labour to win in 2024. Obviously, it needs to win back the red wall seats, but I think that is quite probable anyway. I doubt that it will win back Scotland, but if the SNP continues to dominate there will be a number of kindred spirits in parliament from there.

But those things are not enough. To win, Labour needs about 150 more seats than it currently has, or 100 if you count Scotland. So it needs to win in marginals like Basildon, High Peak, Worcester and Watford as well as hang on to places like Kensington and Chelsea and Canterbury and St Albans, all of which they won against a backdrop of Brexit. Now that Brexit is finally over, and all that remains is to see how damaging it will be for our economy, Labour’s success in 2024 will depend upon policies that attract floating voters. I personally don’t see a left wing manifesto as doing that.

Even then, Labour will need other things to go its way. One of those is public perception. Starmer needs to deal with the anti semitism issue, with momentum, with the former anti-Corbyn element and so on and he needs to bring all in the party around the same table and get them focussed on beating the government. I don’t see him achieving party unity by delivering an internal bloodbath, and even if he did I don’t see that doing so would make Labour a more attractive prospect to the electorate. Starmer has got the beating of Johnson at the dispatch box, and I think that will go a long way towards reuniting the left and right wings of the party: there is nothing like success for breeding success. If the need to shift the current set of liars and chancers that passes for a government doesn’t unite the Labour Party, it will deserve the oblivion that will await it.

You mention the possibility that the left would desert the party if a centre-left manifesto was adopted, so even if it appealed to centreground voters Labour still wouldn’t win. In my view, that’s not likely to happen. It didn’t happen after Kinnock expelled the Militant tendency in 1985: it might have been through gritted teeth but militant members still largely voted labour in 1987 and 1992 and again in 1997. If it did, well, that just increases the chances that the clown in No 10 will stay there another five years. It was as clear as it could be in 1997 that Blair stood for free market principles underpinned by a greater concern for social cohesion than had shown for the previous two decades. Did you vote for him anyway? I’d have guessed you did. I think the same will happen, even if you are right about the left leaving the party in 2024.

Like I said, allowing the perfect, as some would see it, to be the enemy of the good Will just make it more likely that the current government will remain in power for another decade. That is an utterly chilling thought.

There are millions who are not Johnson who would be better than him, my next door neighbours 2 year old son would do a better job, at least he would be honest, but the only person who will beat Johnson, is Johnson himself. He can throw away his goodwill if he carries on with his support of Cummings and carries on treating the job of PM as some sort of bauble to be placed on his mantlepiece. Hopefully the realisation he is anything but a self serving **** will hit home and people realise they made a huge mistake putting their trust in a man that is so incredibly unsuited for a job of the PMs magnitude.

Starmer has real issues to deal with if he is to be that man, I seriously doubt he is capable and if is raison d'etre is to win on whatever platform is necessary then what is the point of the Labour party at all? Just rename it the Starmer party and be done with it, accept that Labour will be a softer version of the Tory party and appease the establishment who then could be comfortable with the Starmer party as he would offer no threat to their hegemony.

Its interesting of late that all of a sudden anti-Semitism has disappeared, where have they all gone? Has Starmer magically wished them away with an abracadabra or is the truth that there were not that prevalent anyway and the issue was being used by LFI and its cronies to oust Corbyn. Who needs enemies when your supposed friends are all too willing to stab you in the back or in the front as that stupid cow Jess Phillips famously said.

I did vote for Blair and have regretted it ever since, he was a charlatan and I believe Starmer is cut from the same cloth, I don't dislike Starmer by the way, he is an able politician, he is "forensic" at PMQs *rolls eyes* but he was pivotal in undermining the Labour party leadership before the last election and is as culpable for Johnson as anyone. He is an advocate for the free movement of labour and supported a second referendum, like it or not in these Brexit times that will go down like a lead balloon in the red wall seats.

Starmer has to rail back on these positions if he has any hope of power, the COVID crisis is proving the EU is incapable of acting as one and is still stuck in its capitalist ways and neo=liberal orthodoxy of balanced budgets, that is hurting countries like Italy and Spain right now who do not have the fiscal freedom to act because they are stuck with the EURO. This is Johnsons major card, he is the man taking us out of the EU and much of what he will do will be forgiven because he is the man who is doing that. Opposing him on that issue will be utterly pointless and Labour will be out of power for generations rather than decades. If the FBFE fruitcakes succeed in making Labour a pro-EU rejoin party, the dream of Socialism is finished.

 

[Tb1981]

Odd that you don’t mind paying extra tax yourself but you are defending the rich from Labour imposing more taxes on them.
It’s the people in the middle that get squeezed the most for tax. The very rich have the resources to minimise their tax burden through any number of loopholes and schemes. I’d rather these loopholes and offshore schemes were addressed before they add to everyone else’s tax bill, but this government appear to be doing their best to protect the very rich who coincidentally are their biggest donors.

It’s not odd at all
What is odd is telling 95% of the country they won’t pay more tax yet outlining a spend programme like never before
I’d say it’s disingenuous

Hopefully starmer will be more Blair than Corbin.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

All good points , I could add that some people underestimate the power of charisma. Whether you like him or not, Johnson has it, Clinton had it, Blair initially had it before he turned the electorate against him with his foreign policies , Corbyn, May and Miliband didnt have it. Voters like it, its helps parties win. Whether Starmer has is open to question a bit like Cameron ?

Yes, I would agree, of the three Labour leaders you quote, I would see Miliband as the most
charisma free, but the other two were not exactly effervescent.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Maybe if labour stopped telling us how shit our lives are because of the Tory’s and actually sold us a dream of how our lives could be better we could relate
Instead of treating us all like we are useless and need their help to think for ourselves

Nail on head.
And the problem they have, is they're still doing it.
Which is why they keep losing.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

He is an advocate for the free movement of labour and supported a second referendum, like it or not in these Brexit times that will go down like a lead balloon in the red wall seats.

In the honeymoon period that Starmer is enjoying, and the guarded admiration he appears
to be receiving, what you say here is the unalloyed truth. If he persists with anything that is
remotely pro EU, now we're out of it, the lead balloon analogy becomes reality.

 

[Rascal]

In the honeymoon period that Starmer is enjoying, and the guarded admiration he appears
to be receiving, what you say here is the unalloyed truth. If he persists with anything that is
remotely pro EU, now we're out of it, the lead balloon analogy becomes reality.

There in lies the problem the Labour Party face, with the moderates being overwhelmingly pro-EU I am certain it will become the party of rejoin. It may have traction if BREXIT turns out to be a disaster and with that fucking clown Johnson in charge that is certainly a possibility, but if Brexit is a success then Labour under Starmer if it does become the party of rejoin is well and truly fucked

 

[Vic]

Is there a Labour Party thread somewhere that I can read a discussion about why they lost the last few elections? This one just seems to be about the shortcomings of our prime minister.

It would appear not.

Let's get back on topic.

Johnson is a liar. Any dissent?

..... and wait for the whataboutery....

 

[Fred_Quimby]

Time to move this thread back on subject -

Johnson has been asked by previous foreign secretary's to lead an international group to combat China's 'take over' of Hongkong. The only problem with that is the word LEAD. This man couldn't lead the way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Johnson is a liar. Any dissent?

..... and wait for the whataboutery....

Whatabout the fact he’s principally a ****?

 

[Chris in London]

In the honeymoon period that Starmer is enjoying, and the guarded admiration he appears
to be receiving, what you say here is the unalloyed truth. If he persists with anything that is
remotely pro EU, now we're out of it, the lead balloon analogy becomes reality.

Morning, Trotsky.

I think the key word here is “if.” I don’t think rejoining is likely to be an issue for a very long time, certainly not this parliament. The whole country has, I suspect, had enough of Brexit, which is partly why ‘get Brexit done’ was so successful a message last time. I don’t see anyone choosing to sip again from that poisoned chalice for a long time.

Our future relationship with Europe is another matter: the fault line in the future that seems to me to be more likely to emerge is between the no deal hardliners and everyone else. (Do you remember the Article 24 of GATT argument? That died a quiet death didn’t it?). The border that is coming between NI and the rest of the UK may well become a running sore, and Starmer may make real headway with issues like that and policies that reverse the damage of a no deal Brexit. But Labour will not campaign, I would say, to rejoin. As I said in another post, Starmer wants to win and that is not a winning strategy.

 

[Chris in London]

There in lies the problem the Labour Party face, with the moderates being overwhelmingly pro-EU I am certain it will become the party of rejoin. It may have traction if BREXIT turns out to be a disaster and with that fucking clown Johnson in charge that is certainly a possibility, but if Brexit is a success then Labour under Starmer if it does become the party of rejoin is well and truly fucked

Completely agree, which is why I don’t think it will happen. ‘Success’ however is a qualified term. You will recall that Brexit changed from being a land of milk and honey and a free trade area from Iceland to the Russian border to people arguing that when they voted Leave they had knowingly voted to make themselves poorer. But even when they are poorer I don’t see there being a clamour to rejoin, nor do I see Labour wanting to open the issue up again. Too much damage has been caused. The government is arguing that its handling of Covid is a success and there are people on this forum who swallow that, so you can imagine what they will say about Brexit no matter what the actual consequences.

Anyway, back on topic.

That Johnson bloke. Is he a ****, or what?

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Morning, Trotsky.

I think the key word here is “if.” I don’t think rejoining is likely to be an issue for a very long time, certainly not this parliament. The whole country has, I suspect, had enough of Brexit, which is partly why ‘get Brexit done’ was so successful a message last time. I don’t see anyone choosing to sip again from that poisoned chalice for a long time.

Our future relationship with Europe is another matter: the fault line in the future that seems to me to be more likely to emerge is between the no deal hardliners and everyone else. (Do you remember the Article 24 of GATT argument? That died a quiet death didn’t it?). The border that is coming between NI and the rest of the UK may well become a running sore, and Starmer may make real headway with issues like that and policies that reverse the damage of a no deal Brexit. But Labour will not campaign, I would say, to rejoin. As I said in another post, Starmer wants to win and that is not a winning strategy.

Morning, Jeremy.
The country has indeed had enough, yet we see opposition leaders writing to the EU,
attempting to extend our transition/membership for two more years. If Sir Keir attempts
to align himself to these types, in any way shape or form, then as @Rascal says, the recently
lost red wall will stay lost.

 

[Chris in London]

Morning, Jeremy.
The country has indeed had enough, yet we see opposition leaders writing to the EU,
attempting to extend our transition/membership for two more years. If Sir Keir attempts
to align himself to these types, in any way shape or form, then as @Rascal says, the recently
lost red wall will stay lost.

I tell you this, comrade, Starmer has been taking long term tactical decisions all his working life. I suspect he can identify a bad idea when he sees one. But time will tell.