Keir Starmer

Rascal said:
It doesn't

It should fold or split into parties that represent each faction.

I am traditional Labour btw, i am a Socialist. There is nothing hard left about Socialism, nothing hard left about wanting what is best for the working class, nothing hard left about state interventionism, nothing hard left about union involvement.

I couldnt care less about identity politics, most Socialists don't, they care about class politics, I will rubbish UK history when that history is portrayed wrongly though. The narrative about standing alone in WW2 and other such nonsense is just nationalistic bullshit designed to appeal to flag shagging populists who long for visions of Empire. You can not change history, but you can portray it properly. It is not rubbishing history, it is teaching history correctly on not relying on myth.
Click to expand...
It's a valid viewpoint of course but not one that seems to be gaining any traction. The policies you list are essentially the ones that Corbyn fought two elections on. He lost both, the second by a huge margin.
 
metalblue said:
It’s not what the establishment want, it’s what the majority of voters want.
Click to expand...
It is what the establishment want, that is why they went so far to destroy Corbyn and have been so forgiving of Starmer.

Corbyn could and should have won if it wasn't for a sustained campaign of vitriol aimed at him by the centrist and RW establishment. The vote is Hartlepool has just shown that, they deserted Labour because what is the point of Tory lite when you can Tory have proper.
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
It's a valid viewpoint of course but not one that seems to be gaining any traction. The policies you list are essentially the ones that Corbyn fought two elections on. He lost both, the second by a huge margin.
Click to expand...
I've just heard some shadow cab Lab politico suggesting that Labour needs to adopt a 'radical' agenda. They seemingly want to return to the kind of result they landed Michael Foot with. Labour will never return to a governmental party until they keep the likes of McCLuskey off screen.
 
71ab8d100cae65f683604a4e8703473b.jpg
 
Rascal said:
It is what the establishment want, that is why they went so far to destroy Corbyn and have been so forgiving of Starmer.

Corbyn could and should have won if it wasn't for a sustained campaign of vitriol aimed at him by the centrist and RW establishment. The vote is Hartlepool has just shown that, they deserted Labour because what is the point of Tory lite when you can Tory have proper.
Click to expand...
Thats's a nonsense put about by the left that would only lead to more Tory election wins. Where are all these voters that are waiting for some mythical left wing socialist to sweep up their votes. Who are they voting for now?. Winning back the centre ground is the only option for Labour. Appealing to what voters want not telling them what you think they should want.
My advice for Labour would for now at least stick with Starmer, because a knee jerk from one defeat will only cost Labour in the end.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Why is it nonsense? depends how you run your household, If you dont spend more than you earn then its a resonable assumption. If you think credit cards are there to run up large debts which you will deal with at some undertermined time in the future then you wont have any concern over Corbyn style politics.
Click to expand...


Countries are not run like households .... please tell me who we will borrow Sterling from? Had we been required to ''live within our means'' then we would've been broke within the first year of World War 2.
 
This is perhaps a great observation and sums up the problems Labour is facing. It does go beyond that, Blair is touted a lot as bringing sides together but Blair gained Scottish votes which will never be seen again. Appealing to the working class depends upon your definition of the working class.

 
Rascal said:
RW visions of little old Britain standing alone against the might of Fascism. It is a myth.
Click to expand...
well apart from the commonwealth countries, that were able to offer little support mainly due to geographical reasons we did stand virtually alone vs hitler and the nazis from the fall of France to Pearl Harbour. Which bit dont you believe Rascal.
 
aguerrrroooooooooooo said:
Starmer seems an intelligent bloke but has all the personality and charisma of a plank of wood. Completely uninspiring leader.

I can't stand him but you can't deny Johnson has at least some level of character about him which the electorate obviously love
Click to expand...

Corbyn had a personality about him, what difference did that make ?

Labour are just divided, half want more left socialist other half want liberal middle left.

they're screwed, whatever leader they get won't please, he will be set in one camp or the other and it's Labour voters that will squabble about it. meanwhile , the Tories will just roll on.
 
inbetween said:
This is perhaps a great observation and sums up the problems Labour is facing. It does go beyond that, Blair is touted a lot as bringing sides together but Blair gained Scottish votes which will never be seen again. Appealing to the working class depends upon your definition of the working class.

Click to expand...

She's right.

But as she's already labeled a hard left, communist nut job the people who need to hear the message in labour won't.
 
inbetween said:
This is perhaps a great observation and sums up the problems Labour is facing. It does go beyond that, Blair is touted a lot as bringing sides together but Blair gained Scottish votes which will never be seen again. Appealing to the working class depends upon your definition of the working class.

Click to expand...

Out of purdah now so can comment. Labour's problem is that the old notion of "the working class" ended when Thatcher got elected in 1979. Those people, who would normally turn out to vote in droves for the Labour Party, suddenly found they could own their own houses, cars, go on foreign holidays, own shares, get credit easily, etc. And suddenly they were more bothered about things like exchange and interest rates. People had money in their pockets and lots of things to spend it on.

I remember Michael Foot promising "exciting politics" just before that disastrous GE under his leadership. He and Benn had interesting things to say but most voters really didn't care about "exciting politics". They wanted good, well-paid jobs, a good standard of living but something to fall back on if they had a problem. Whatever you think of Blair and Brown, they understood that.

I've said before on this forum that had Corbyn kept to a few, simple but radical ideas, that had an impact on a wide range of people, he might have won power. Just promising to make the tax system fairer and nationalise the railways might well have done it. Shame he was an antisemite and a friend of antisemites as well, which didn't help, plus he went way over the top with far too many policies, some of which people found threatening.

You can't campaign in the 21st century on policies that wouldn't be out of place in the 1960's and 1970's. The world has moved on. If you want power, you need to appeal to at least 40% of the current electorate, which is enough to get you elected. I've no idea who Starmer is appealing to at the moment.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Countries are not run like households .... please tell me who we will borrow Sterling from? Had we been required to ''live within our means'' then we would've been broke within the first year of World War 2.
Click to expand...
They can and are run like households, a household can run up debt which has to be paid back similarly a country can do the same, and a country can go bust if it extends itself too far. The UK borrows money by selling bonds or gilts with guaranteed pay back dates including interest.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
well apart from the commonwealth countries, that were able to offer little support mainly due to geographical reasons we did stand virtually alone vs hitler and the nazis from the fall of France to Pearl Harbour. Which bit dont you believe Rascal.
Click to expand...
So you admit we never stood alone.

It is an enduring myth, a myth that is used by the right to stir nationalistic fervour. That is the point, certain parts of history are used to promote notions of English exceptionalism. Because some do not buy into these myths, we are then portrayed as hating the country. I do not hate my country, I hate what is happening to my country. I hate seeing the good people of this country taken for a ride by a collection of corrupt twats, I hate seeing people in this country treated so poorly, I hate to see people go hungry or without a home, that is what I hate. I hate how these enduring myths are used to keep people in power who do not care if children starve, or people sleep on the streets. I hate how these myths are used so they can carry on raping and pillaging the nations treasure, I want a country that is fair to everyone not just those fortunate enough to have capital or be born into capital.

This country has become a selfish country where individualism is seen as a good thing, I have always been a collectivist, I believe in humanity and the collective good overcoming the individual greed. I used to be proud of this country, now I see it being destroyed, our values diminished and and our sense of fairness lost. All lost to capital and we are now a country run for the needs of the few, not the many.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
They can and are run like households, a household can run up debt which has to be paid back similarly a country can do the same, and a country can go bust if it extends itself too far. The UK borrows money by selling bonds or gilts with guaranteed pay back dates including interest.
Click to expand...
A country with its own currency can not go bust.

A household does not have its own currency, it relies on income.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
They can and are run like households, a household can run up debt which has to be paid back similarly a country can do the same, and a country can go bust if it extends itself too far. The UK borrows money by selling bonds or gilts with guaranteed pay back dates including interest.
Click to expand...


Which country has ever gone bust then?

You can buy bonds and gilts with a negative interest rate.

try here

www.investopedia.com

What Is Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)?

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a macroeconomic theory that government spending should not be restrained due to the fear of rising debt.
www.investopedia.com www.investopedia.com
 
Rascal said:
So you admit we never stood alone.

It is an enduring myth, a myth that is used by the right to stir nationalistic fervour. That is the point, certain parts of history are used to promote notions of English exceptionalism. Because some do not buy into these myths, we are then portrayed as hating the country. I do not hate my country, I hate what is happening to my country. I hate seeing the good people of this country taken for a ride by a collection of corrupt twats, I hate seeing people in this country treated so poorly, I hate to see people go hungry or without a home, that is what I hate. I hate how these enduring myths are used to keep people in power who do not care if children starve, or people sleep on the streets. I hate how these myths are used so they can carry on raping and pillaging the nations treasure, I want a country that is fair to everyone not just those fortunate enough to have capital or be born into capital.

This country has become a selfish country where individualism is seen as a good thing, I have always been a collectivist, I believe in humanity and the collective good overcoming the individual greed. I used to be proud of this country, now I see it being destroyed, our values diminished and and our sense of fairness lost. All lost to capital and we are now a country run for the needs of the few, not the many.
Click to expand...
Well we stood alone as the only European country that carried on the fight. Make no mistake the US did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the US.

From those few countries that backed us it was the British manufacturing base and efforts that kept us in the fight and allowed us to stand up to the Nazis, If you want to play that achievement down then that is your perogative.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Well we stood alone as the only European country that carried on the fight. Make no mistake the US did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the US.

From those few countries that backed us it was the British manufacturing base and efforts that kept us in the fight and allowed us to stand up to the Nazis, If you want to play that achievement down then that is your perogative.
Click to expand...
Think the Russians might dispute that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top