O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[PedroTheFisherman66]

Hated?… nah… only by the establishment, never ordinary people. A man of principle, honesty and integrity… values sadly lacking in the current Labour regime. I went to many of the rally’s where he spoke… thousands upon thousands turned up to listen to him speak.

Remember Glastonbury?

https://youtu.be/w2uW5YsJkOE

Sorry GP but he (Corbyn) was hated by the ordinary man because of his links to the IRA , they believe he was part of them as opposed to the one discussing peace with them! i know many people that detested him for this and no matter what you say wouldn't get past those links. Pair this with him wanting rid of our nuclear arms leaving us wide open to an invasion from Russia then he has a full house of detractors and voters see him as unelectable !

[i961pie]

Sorry GP but he (Corbyn) was hated by the ordinary man because of his links to the IRA , they believe he was part of them as opposed to the one discussing peace with them! i know many people that detested him for this and no matter what you say wouldn't get past those links. Pair this with him wanting rid of our nuclear arms leaving us wide open to an invasion from Russia then he has a full house of detractors and voters see him as unelectable !

I agree, he also seemed to hate this country.

[PedroTheFisherman66]

I agree, he also seemed to hate this country.

He probably just hated the Tories and their Tory ways , who can blame him !

[BigFatPie]

I don't think so, the PLP will fight it tooth and nail (but the fact that the grass roots wants it so strongly will make it hard for them to resist)



It's you that brought 'nirvana' into it...a really poor characterisation of what I'm saying. Seeing the end of our dreadful electoral system is key to giving the country a chance to change - I don't think we can survive any more cycles of tories, red tories, tories...

Yes, it was my word to describe the electoral scenario you seem to be imagining. What word would you use? To dismiss the 1997-2010 Labour government as ‘red Tories’ is nonsense. Are you trying to pretend there’s no difference between that and what we’ve had for the last 12 years? Because if you are you’ve been damn lucky. And I fully acknowledge that Blair could have done much more with the majority he had.

[the_anticlough]

Yes, it was my word to describe the electoral scenario you seem to be imagining. What word would you use? To dismiss the 1997-2010 Labour government as ‘red Tories’ is nonsense. Are you trying to pretend there’s no difference between that and what we’ve had for the last 12 years? Because if you are you’ve been damn lucky. And I fully acknowledge that Blair could have done much more with the majority he had.

So 'nirvana' is an election outcome that delivers no workable Govt?
I think it's a likely scenario and could bring positive change in the long run. We would be protected from having a Govt like the Pfeffel one...unlimited power on just 30% of the electorate.

Yes, I'll always regard the Blair Govt as Red Tories - no lasting change was enacted. But 'no difference' is you jumping to an extreme again to misrepresent what I'm saying. Demand more and working class people will get more.
The nature of the Labour leadership, the way Westminster and the media works, the mechanics of Whitehall - all of that points to piecemeal changes only and the exclusion of any voices/ideas calling for more radical change. What's wrong with wanting more than that?
As I said I'll vote Green. Labour has lost my vote and millions like me I'd guess.

[the_anticlough]

He probably just hated the Tories and their Tory ways , who can blame him !

Wanting your country to be better, fairer, happier is the best definition of patriotism there is.

[BigFatPie]

.
As I said I'll vote Green. Labour has lost my vote and millions like me I'd guess.

Well currently 15 points ahead in the polls so hopefully not too many lost votes so far. A few gained probably.

If Labour do end up losing the votes of people like you, then the only thing you’ll end up with is another Tory government. And if the current troglodyte contest going on is anything to go by, it’ll be worse than what we’ve already had. Imagining any government led by Starmer wouldn’t be a million times better than anything they have to offer is mistaken imo.

[the_anticlough]

If Labour do end up losing the votes of people like you, then the only thing you’ll end up with is another Tory government..

Socialists cannot be locked into this trap forever - the strait-jacket of the two party FPTP system. If you don't want a Thatcherite, you can have a Blairite for a few years and the country stays basically the same. The sooner the cycle is broken, and the whole system replaced, the better.

[Mapperleypie]

Socialists cannot be locked into this trap forever - the strait-jacket of the two party FPTP system. If you don't want a Thatcherite, you can have a Blairite for a few years and the country stays basically the same. The sooner the cycle is broken, and the whole system replaced, the better.

I completely agree and the sooner the FPTP system is removed the better (the Tories love it but don't even use it for their poxy leadership election). It's *******ised the system for some time leading to many folks not really voting for who they really want to win but instead voting for the least worse option or worse completely wasting their vote.

I do think the only way FPTP is removed soon is by tactical voting at the next election potentially leading to a Lab/Lib Dem coalition.

If you think Labour have lurched too far to the centre for you anticlough I would recommend holding your nose at the ballot box. Sadly a vote for the Greens in nearly every seat in the UK (apart from Brighton & Hove) is a wasted vote under FPTP and assists the Tories.

[drillerpie]

Really interesting conversation this.

I'm pro PR but I think some people are missing a trick if they think moving to PR would turn Britain into a socialist paradise.

You would end up with Labour fracturing into Corbynite and Blairite parties, and before/during/after an election campaign they would have to compromise on policy, and the end result might not be very different to what we have now.

In addition we would probably have a centrist party (which might be the Blairite party plus a few moderate Conservatives).

On the other end of the spectrum the same thing would happen to the Conservative party and as well as helping parties further to the left it would also help those further to the right.

The big problem in my view remains that the number of people willing to vote for an old fashioned 'economic left' is quite high, but the economic left is so wedded to the current 'cultural left' or 'intellectual left' (mass immigration, extreme political correctness, perceived or real anti patriotism) that people would probably prefer to vote for the far right, which offers the working class something similar to the economic left but without the compromise on cultural issues.

[applepie2]

The big problem in my view remains that the number of people willing to vote for an old fashioned 'economic left' is quite high, but the economic left is so wedded to the current 'cultural left' or 'intellectual left' (mass immigration, extreme political correctness, perceived or real anti patriotism) that people would probably prefer to vote for the far right, which offers the working class something similar to the economic left but without the compromise on cultural issues.

I agreed with you up to this point - but the far right do not offer the working class something similar to the economic left. Instead they offer low tax, low public service, everyone for himself, which may seem fine for those who are coping but is a disaster for anyone who hits a bad patch. And it has, in my opinion, some very nasty social consequences.

[drillerpie]

I agreed with you up to this point - but the far right do not offer the working class something similar to the economic left. Instead they offer low tax, low public service, everyone for himself, which may seem fine for those who are coping but is a disaster for anyone who hits a bad patch. And it has, in my opinion, some very nasty social consequences.

I'm talking about further to the right than austerity Conservatives. Completely agree about the potential for nasty social consequences.

[applepie2]

I'm talking about further to the right than austerity Conservatives. Completely agree about the potential for nasty social consequences.

Ah, fair enough. I’d only thought about the far right Tory party Britannia Unchained mob.

[sinophile]

A quick question for those who talk about 'mass immigration'. You may have seen the recent census figures relating to the age spread of the population. Basically, we are getting older and the birth rate is very low. So, without 'mass immigration', where are all the workers and taxpayers going to come from to support the pensions and healthcare of an aging population? Not to mention all the infrastructure a modern society needs.

[GranthamPie]

A quick question for those who talk about 'mass immigration'. You may have seen the recent census figures relating to the age spread of the population. Basically, we are getting older and the birth rate is very low. So, without 'mass immigration', where are all the workers and taxpayers going to come from to support the pensions and healthcare of an aging population? Not to mention all the infrastructure a modern society needs.

Ssshhh the elephant in room! The Germans realised this decades ago… there is not a single country in Europe that has taken in so many refugees (economic or political). The fact that so many sectors in the UK… agriculture, hospitality, social care and healthcare are now suffering massive staff shortages due to those damned Eastern Europeans deciding to bugger off home, should be a warning sign that the country cannot function without migration.

When they raise the pension age to 70, reduce pension benefits, introduce payg doctors appointments, insurance based healthcare etc etc etc… then the xenophobes will finally wake up.