Scrutable

Or, y'know, you can argue for your position, and make it more popular.

greyspoke wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:10 pm Yes, but the next election is probably already lost for Labour. The ground may have shifted by the time of the one after that. You can change your position to what is popular now, or set it so it will be popular when will be relevant to you. If you can predict that accurately enough. As I said, Labour has to play the long game from here and that necessarily involves looking ahead, quite a long way ahead.

Just to point out, Labour are in roughly the same place that the tories were in 2005, seats wise. There's a lot still that can go wrong for the Tories, and if* Labour don't elect a tw.t, then things could turn around.

Up to point. Labour weren't in anything like this kind of disarray back then, they were still winning, only less so. They still existed in Scotland in 2005, and weren't facing the constituency boundary changes and other gerrymanderings which Johnson will certainly implement. And it's hard to imagine Labour in a coalition, which Cameron needed eventually, as the LDs (if they even exist by then) and the SNP are internally and electorally toxic, respectively.

The Tories don't have Agent Brown on their side this time, like in 2010, but I have little doubt Labour will come up with an alternative. Labour still have to play out the aftermath of the worst electoral defeat anybody can remember andf that will involve much bloodletting. And they seem to have already focussed entirely on those angry northerners, who think they are c.nts, and have forgotten about all the people who actually did vote for them.

And now Corbyn has issued a new year message saying how labour is the only opposition to Johnson's Tories, how strong their movement is and generally how great they are.

Can't find the part about leading them to the largest defeat anybody under 100 can remember, or the part about why the useless, hypocritical c.nt is, entirely inexplicably, still there.

Join Labour he says. I can think of a way to stop people packing their exit doors, if that helps.

If Labour can just find somebody comforting and empathitic with no history of photoshoots with the IRA and Hamas or being an outspoken remainer to re-present Corbyn's policies, they could be enormously popular; wages haven't kept up these last 20 years.

JQH wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:07 pm So back when a majority of the working class was racist and homophobic, what stance should Labour have taken?

I that would've been true of the general population in Harold Wilson's time (the middle and upper classes were no less racist, and the majority of people thought of homosexuality as a kind of sexual perversion or mental disorder well into the 1980s).

This is the manifesto Harold Wilson's Labour party won with in 1964

https://web.archive.org/web/20141113000 ... esto.shtml

They don't spend any time sowing division with identity politics here. They paint an optimistic vision of the future they believe will benefit everybody.

Something for chippy, whiney, progressives of today to learn from perhaps.

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 11:06 am

JQH wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:07 pm So back when a majority of the working class was racist and homophobic, what stance should Labour have taken?

I that would've been true of the general population in Harold Wilson's time (the middle and upper classes were no less racist, and the majority of people thought of homosexuality as a kind of sexual perversion or mental disorder well into the 1980s).

This is the manifesto Harold Wilson's Labour party won with in 1964

https://web.archive.org/web/20141113000 ... esto.shtml

They don't spend any time sowing division with identity politics here. They paint an optimistic vision of the future they believe will benefit everybody.

Something for chippy, whiney, progressives of today to learn from perhaps.

So do you think Roy Jenkins was right or wrong as Home Secretary to introduce legislation outlawing racial discrimination and abuse, and supporting a decriminilising homosexual acts?

And now Rayner "will endorse" Long Bailey.

This is the dream ticket, as in the electorate will sleep through it.

They'll start branding her as "RLB" now, to make her sound more like AOC and less like she eats olives and avocados.

JQH wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:15 pm

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 11:06 am

JQH wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:07 pm So back when a majority of the working class was racist and homophobic, what stance should Labour have taken?

I that would've been true of the general population in Harold Wilson's time (the middle and upper classes were no less racist, and the majority of people thought of homosexuality as a kind of sexual perversion or mental disorder well into the 1980s).

This is the manifesto Harold Wilson's Labour party won with in 1964

https://web.archive.org/web/20141113000 ... esto.shtml

They don't spend any time sowing division with identity politics here. They paint an optimistic vision of the future they believe will benefit everybody.

Something for chippy, whiney, progressives of today to learn from perhaps.

So do you think Roy Jenkins was right or wrong as Home Secretary to introduce legislation outlawing racial discrimination and abuse, and supporting a decriminilising homosexual acts?

He was right to, but they never made these things their central message. They understood they had to offer the majority of people a vision of a better life. 'You're all racist troglodytes and we are here to improve you' is not a good way to win a popularity contest. I agree with quite a lot of what David Starkey has to say about the 'new puritanism' of the middle-class centre left. It's destroying liberalism.

GeenDienst wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:24 am And now Corbyn has issued a new year message saying how labour is the only opposition to Johnson's Tories, how strong their movement is and generally how great they are.

Can't find the part about leading them to the largest defeat anybody under 100 can remember, or the part about why the useless, hypocritical c.nt is, entirely inexplicably, still there.

Join Labour he says. I can think of a way to stop people packing their exit doors, if that helps.

Or the trajectory of his electoral performance.

First - lose to Theresa May, quite possibly the most hapless PM of the last 100 years.

but because she was so bad, and because there was tactical voting, the result flattered him.

Then lose badly to Johnson in an election Corbyn and Swinson could have prevented and actually harmed Johnson's political position.

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:50 pmI agree with quite a lot of what David Starkey has to say about the 'new puritanism' of the middle-class centre left. It's destroying liberalism.

what puritanism?

plodder wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:06 pm

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:50 pmI agree with quite a lot of what David Starkey has to say about the 'new puritanism' of the middle-class centre left. It's destroying liberalism.

what puritanism?

You know - banning cockfighting and bear baiting and being against foxhunting.

Introducing the idea of hate crimes for a little racist banter.

sheldrake wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 4:18 pm

greyspoke wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 2:59 pm

sheldrake wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 12:26 pm Lewis' 'If only we'd come out more solidly for remain we could have won' is exactly the kind of deep delusion the centre left has to purge itself of to gain power again. This is so incredibly and deeply wrong.

Backing remain and continuing to do so would have been a long game with an uncertain outcome. It will be the "I told you so" option in the next election but one, or a dud. But the approach they took was the worst of all, if they had gone firmly remain (or firmly leave) they would have lost by less. From where Labour is now, it should be playing a long game as there is little in the short term to play for.

The Labour party today, in my view, is tasting the blowback from telling working class people what they ought to think, rather than representing what they actually think, and this resentment has been brewing up for a while.

I may be biased by having been a leaver myself, but I think in some respects this helps me understand other leavers; I don't see an upside to one day possibly being able to tell people they had been wrong. Winning elections is about being popular, not about being right.

Telling the working classes what to think is an accusation that had traction against New Labour but that scarcely explains Corbyn's drubbing. Boris saw an upside to losing in order to play the long game; it was exactly his intention in backing Leave in the referendum, which was not expected to win, lest we forget. He cynically planned to become the champion of the plucky losers as his best path to future advancement.

plodder wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:06 pm

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:50 pmI agree with quite a lot of what David Starkey has to say about the 'new puritanism' of the middle-class centre left. It's destroying liberalism.

what puritanism?

Embrace of self-punishing beliefs, censoriousness and convincing themselves that people who disagree with them are not just wrong but evil.

Martin Y wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:29 pm Telling the working classes what to think is an accusation that had traction against New Labour but that scarcely explains Corbyn's drubbing.

It absolutely does explain the drubbing. The coterie of middle class Londoners that refused to accept the referendum result and forced Corbyn away from his 2017 stance are responsible for the flight of the core vote in the last election result. Starmer, Cooper and Thornberry own this result as much as Corbyn.

jimbob wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 7:36 pm

GeenDienst wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 10:24 am And now Corbyn has issued a new year message saying how labour is the only opposition to Johnson's Tories, how strong their movement is and generally how great they are.

Can't find the part about leading them to the largest defeat anybody under 100 can remember, or the part about why the useless, hypocritical c.nt is, entirely inexplicably, still there.

Join Labour he says. I can think of a way to stop people packing their exit doors, if that helps.

Or the trajectory of his electoral performance.

First - lose to Theresa May, quite possibly the most hapless PM of the last 100 years.

but because she was so bad, and because there was tactical voting, the result flattered him.

Then lose badly to Johnson in an election Corbyn and Swinson could have prevented and actually harmed Johnson's political position.

But this was the big Momentum myth, they were and probably still are convinced that it was their bight eyed cadres preaching the Message that closed that poll gap.

Labour's Remainers were not a handful of Islington luvvies. They were most of Labour's voters. Or do you imagine 48% of the country usually vote LibDem? You have a weird notion that if Labour had gone full-on Leave they might not have lost. That's fantasy as surely as if they had gone full-on Remain.

jimbob wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:12 pm Introducing the idea of hate crimes for a little racist banter.

I'm in favour of legal powers againt threats of violence, but this is clearly way too far https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/26/man-inte ... t-8395224/
I don't agree at all with the idea that people have a right not to read or hear things they find offensive; that's an obvious short step away from totalitarianism.

Significant sections of the left have been actively campaigning to end free speech for people they disagree with, both online and at speaking venues and most of the country finds it creepy.

Because make no mistake, it is creepy, and it's definitely got nothing to do with a popular working-class movement for economic empowerment. It's a weird middle-class obsession with appearing virtuous taken to a self-destructive extreme.

Martin Y wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:48 pm Labour's Remainers were not a handful of Islington luvvies. They were most of Labour's voters

They were what was left of Labour's vote, in their worst result since 1935.

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:50 pm

Martin Y wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:48 pm Labour's Remainers were not a handful of Islington luvvies. They were most of Labour's voters

They were what was left of Labour's vote, in their worst result since 1935.

Again you're just assuming all Labour's Remain voters voted Labour this time.

Martin Y wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:59 pm

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:50 pm

Martin Y wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:48 pm Labour's Remainers were not a handful of Islington luvvies. They were most of Labour's voters

They were what was left of Labour's vote, in their worst result since 1935.

Again you're just assuming all Labour's Remain voters voted Labour this time.

I'm not, but I am noting that a significant proportion of Labour's leavers ended up not voting Labour or Lib Dem this time. Significant defections to the Brexit Party up north. Not much of a shift to the Lib dems or Greens

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:49 pm

jimbob wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:12 pm Introducing the idea of hate crimes for a little racist banter.

I'm in favour of legal powers againt threats of violence, but this is clearly way too far https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/26/man-inte ... t-8395224/
I don't agree at all with the idea that people have a right not to read or hear things they find offensive; that's an obvious short step away from totalitarianism.

Significant sections of the left have been actively campaigning to end free speech for people they disagree with, both online and at speaking venues and most of the country finds it creepy.

Because make no mistake, it is creepy, and it's definitely got nothing to do with a popular working-class movement for economic empowerment. It's a weird middle-class obsession with appearing virtuous taken to a self-destructive extreme.

what the f.ck even is this? some weird american campus argument you want to bring to the uk?

plodder wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 2:14 am

sheldrake wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:49 pm

jimbob wrote: Tue Dec 31, 2019 8:12 pm Introducing the idea of hate crimes for a little racist banter.

I'm in favour of legal powers againt threats of violence, but this is clearly way too far https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/26/man-inte ... t-8395224/
I don't agree at all with the idea that people have a right not to read or hear things they find offensive; that's an obvious short step away from totalitarianism.

Significant sections of the left have been actively campaigning to end free speech for people they disagree with, both online and at speaking venues and most of the country finds it creepy.

Because make no mistake, it is creepy, and it's definitely got nothing to do with a popular working-class movement for economic empowerment. It's a weird middle-class obsession with appearing virtuous taken to a self-destructive extreme.

what the f.ck even is this? some weird american campus argument you want to bring to the uk?

It's already here, I didn't bring it. Police officers in the UK are questioning people about random stuff they write, like or retweet where there's no threat of violence involved.
We've had campus no-platforming here for years. I'm not talking about people like Nick Griffin, I'm talking about people like Germaine Greer.
This isn't about compassion or tolerance, this is stasi-like. Surely you don't think we should just accept or ignore this?

This is not our grandparents' Labour movement.

The new left is starting to behave like a religious cult and is widely seen as creepy because of it. It deserves to lose until it relinquishes this nutty authoritarianism and mob--rule tactics.

Sorry, the labour party how?

plodder wrote: Wed Jan 01, 2020 8:08 am Sorry, the labour party how?

Momentum's membership, people I complained about above; hand in glove

The police were trained to behave like that under the last Lavour govt.