By Alex Smith / @alexsmith1982
In a spitting article in the Observer last weekend, Gary Younge said he’s been “too disgusted to vote for Labour since 1992…what is difficult to understand is why people have chosen to become so disgusted with the party now.”
Certainly, a huge number of people have become increasingly angered by the Party’s actions and policy choices and have been indefinitely repulsed. You just have to look at the comments on this site from formerly stalwart Labour people to know that the Party has neglected swaths of its core support. The feeling of disappointment and betrayal here is palpable.
And at Liberal Conspiracy, another space that intelligently supports progressive values, there is growing antagonism toward Labour, and its contributors are ever more sceptical that Labour can be trusted or even that we remain the natural party of the Left.
I, too, feel let down at times. I wonder where the social housing is; I wonder why income tax continues to be levied on earnings below £15,000 when the gap between rich and poor is growing ever larger; I wonder why the 50p top rate was wielded only as a political tool or recessional necessity, rather than as a point of principal; I oppose spending tens of billions on renewing a nuclear programme when we should be leading the global fight against nuclear proliferation; I abhor the premise for going to war in Iraq; and the idea of carrying my identity in my back pocket makes my skin crawl.
So why do I continue to believe and to work hard to promote Labour? Why have I chosen the bluster of the blogosphere and fustiness of the party meeting as the best places in which to do this? Isn’t my continued support a leap of faith too far?
Simply, I don’t think so. I won’t give up my personal values even if I don’t always feel they are being fully upheld by the political party I support. Because while a Labour government will always need to compromise, we can’t compromise on the need for a Labour government.
And without the “amoral”, “hard-headed” pursuit of power Gary Younge so criticises, the “soft-hearted” promises we make will only ever be empty as the party of opposition.
Rather, I feel compelled to express my anger and change the party from within because, to me, Labour remains the last, best hope for those who believe in social justice, mobility and fairness. The party will never be perfect, but it has always been only vehicle we have for sharing our national proceeds justly. It is the only party that knows in its very DNA that people are the ends of our national wealth and not just the means to it.
And it is historically the only party that through its policy on Health and Education and Taxation and Welfare – though frequently too tentative and trialled too often by error over the past 12 years – has been a consistent force for progressive social change in this country.
So for self-confessed progressives, there can be no more protest at the ballot box: a vote for any other party in the next general election is a vote for a Tory government. Would our angry readers and those at Liberal Conspiracy prefer that? I somehow doubt it.
No, the only alternative for the disillusioned is to grasp the nettle and express discontentment by reshaping the Labour Party in the form they want it from within. Anything else is frankly lazy.
So yes, I am disappointed and often infuriated. I want Labour to be better. I want it to be more democratic as a party and more pluralistic, open and honest in government. I want it to look again at our national priorities and conclude that it has rejected too many of those it was created to support.
But while I understand and respect the exodus from Labour ranks, I can’t abide it. While the party has too often neglected us, I refuse in turn to neglect the party.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
I will go and have a look though, but please take into consideration any other responses from this point on is whilst I'm in extreme pain.
The extra from the the veggie patches, blanching and then freezing some for later in the year would be good to encourage and then anything spare to be sold for nominal amounts towards next years seeds and soil. I think if people start to see the real benefit to both their family and others by growing their own (where they can) it will definately give them a buzz. We're currently establishing our little crop to make sure we have a decent freezer stock, but at the same time I've started to work out ways to increase the harvest so I can share with friends and family. Really enjoying it, not so much the digging or moving about of soil and pallets, but more for what we are getting back. We had a single carrot earlier and there are at least another 30 still in the ground. We're still learning, but its amazing what we have achieved in just 3 months.
I live in a suburban area and I doubt I'll convince my neighbours that all the hard work is worthwhile in the end, but I'm going to share what we've grown with them, see what they think. Just down the road Hugh Fernly-Whitingstall has just set up a project for local people, really hope they keep it up and make the most of their new gardens. The local kids are totally different since his visit, think much more highly of him since I've seen his effect on the community there.
But so much has changed since the first half of the 20th century. Heavy industry and industrial workforces are basically a thing of the past. The majority of Britons now count themselves as aspirational middle class (mainly because they are white collar workers) and many of the old working class bases have become permanent unemployed.
I don't doubt your passion Tom, but isnt your idea of a viable classic 'working class' political force based on nostalgia these days?
ID card wise, I started to write an article for here, its my third article I've started but its kind of difficult to concentrate fully and keep up with what is going on at the same time. The kids are running riot, and I lack the necessary equipment to feed to the newborn if that makes sense, so I have to make sure the other one is getting his fair share of attention. Just been out for a walk with him, having trouble getting him settled tonight.
Glad Alan Johnson seems to have seen sense and I just hope he can follow it through the logical conclusion, it will benefit us all and we can get back to tackling the real issues effecting the country.
I am thinking of asking the people who take them, if they grow more than they need, if they would give the extra away?
I hope they would.
I agree with what you said about Guy, I think he is OK, he sometimes writes stuff that I think he might regret later. He is full of energy (some might say he is full of something else) and he is angry. I did think it adds to the debate to have people like Guy adding stuff to the site. I do wish he would sometimes be more positive and constructive with his comments.
I must admit I do sometimes spend time thinking about why he has just said x, y or z, and I kind of like that, he makes you think of the best way to respond to his so often attacks.
I do wish he would try and get an understanding of what labour/socialism (not two words I would put together these days) is about.
I did offer to send him a free veggie box and I am yet to get a reply.
Not very charitable of me I know, but i just don't like his attitude of everyone who doesn't agree with his right wing views are fools liars or morons. And his constant ostentation about his possessions and his private education for his kids. well....
On a positive note as there hasn't been a LL post on it surprisingly, three chears for Alan Johnson doing away with compulsory ID cards. Off topic, but I wanted to record it.
All I'd hope is that he can begin to understand the other side of the coin and rather than looking on some of the articles here as an attack on his family and what he has, look at it for what it is. People, just like him (although maybe on a lower income bracket) just trying to do the best for their families.
I get angry when he refers to me as a thief. No matter how down and out I have been throughout my adult life I have not resorted to stealing from the rich to feed or clothe myself, but again, there is a part of me that understands where he is coming from.
I'm not really suited to all this political stuff really, I spend far too long looking at the other sides perspective for my own good. I was even thinking about Guy's post when I was changing nappies earlier. I think I may need a hobby!
Please don't help confirm his delusions. Working people *are* wealth creators, Guy just conflates the owning and receiving with the creating.
Back to subject though, I think as time goes on people will become more cynical of the main parties and voting numbers will drop further. It isn't in the interests of the present system to change things so drastically as to effect themselves, so it is more likely that any changes will further distance people from voting.
Its a shame because I think there are some bright minds out there, it is just that their voices are drowned with this constant drive to win an election. Elections are a side issue really. Once in power, parties of all colours need to work for the benefit of the electorate and that doesn't include wasting hours debating the same issue again and again. There needs to be decisive action to get things moving and then good management to make sure things really happen.
The problem is that even with decision making being streamlined and good management following, it requires good policy and those making the policy at the moment have no real clue to what the country needs. They are tinkering round the edges and until they open their eyes and start to make policy that is for the greater good of the nation, we're pretty much in a hole.
Below is a bit of a post I did up the page. Yesterday I did sign up to do a diploma in Politics with the OU, so it felt good to start with the OU again.
Talked to my friend and yes you can make wine out of stud skins.
Spent some of today looking at electorate information and here is some of the stuff I have found:
Turnout in 1959 was 78.70%
Turnout in 1974 was 78.80%
These where the last highs, as the numbers have fallen away since these two date and the turnout in 2005 was 61.28%.
Another article said that there is less ‘tribalism’ than there used to be and that now there is a core support for each party and the rest are ‘floating’ voters.
There is also evidence to show that while labours vote has gone up and down, the Tory party vote levels out. The two parties need to be aware that for many be 20 years (can’t remember the actual date) the vote for the Libs and ‘other’ parties has increased election upon election.
Anyway some voting numbers from 2005:
Men voting 62%
Woman voting 61%
Age of voters
18 – 24 = 37%
25 – 34 = 48%
35 – 44 = 61%
45 – 54 = 64%
55 – 64 = 71%
65+ = 75%
Social class
AB = 70%
C1 = 62%
ABC1s = Managers, administrators, pros and clerical workers
C2 = 57%
DE = 54%
C2Des = skilled and unskilled workers, those on long-term benefit and retired drawing state pension.
Ethnicity
White = 62%
Ethnic minority = 47%
What an interesting day.
What is more, your 'average manual worker' contributes to your life in a way that you don't even try to comprehend. For example : I don't know where you shop - Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrisons or Waitrose - but get it into the space between your ears (scientists have told us that there is no such thing as a perfect vacuum ; I can announce that I have found it - it's in the space between Guy M's ears).
To continue (sorry about the discontinuity in the grammar), try shopping at one of the aforesaid retailers without someone (from the 'lower orders' as Adam Smith called such people) to bleep the machine and ask you to pay - no doubt with your high-powered debit card, courtesy of the money that you stuff the taxpayer for as a 'consultant.' And then tell the person doing the bleeping, 'I feel obliged to tell you that your intellect is so wanting that you are not entitled to a vote at the next general election.' Tell the same to the bloke who empties your bins.
Alex, you really need to think about the policy on this website 'for Labour minded supporters.' We have enough problems of our own, in Labour, to sort out, without wasting time on Victorian-era arguments on the likes of Guy M, Mike Thomas, Phil Mill, Tory troll, Old Holborn etc.
Contributors Bill Dewison, Simon Leonard, Mike Aistrop, Ash Cash, Alan Giles (and my apologies to the 'stalwarts' that I have omitted to name) make fine contributions - indeed, with your contacts, why don't you organise a forum with these people invited to meet Labour's current 'movers and shakers' and remind them what the Labour Party should be about?
My final thought : I now understand what Aneurin Bevan meant when he said 'Tories are vermin....'
Guy is a man of contradiction. He wants to be taxed less, and I don't really blame him on that one, but he sees it as reducing those on benefits without any investment in a structure to help them live. If they have no gainful employment, what do they do in the modern world? They can't do what people did in times of old and live off the land, there are too many laws and probably a severe lack of knowledge of how to live off the land anyway.
Then there is the belief that he is having his money stolen, but when you look at the percentage of someone's wage taken in indirect taxes, Guy seems to be much better off. If he's worried about 50% tax, I can only presume he is earning in excess of £150k a year, so why would £50 on his council tax make a huge difference to him, whilst at the other end of the scale that is a huge dent in the family budget. I don't believe he should pay more percentage wise in tax than anyone else, but at the same time I wish he would realise the plight of the lower paid in society and not just blame them for their apparent lack of education or get up and go that he is blesses with.
Then we have the environmental issues. If Guy is to be such an isolationist in his attitudes to society, what does he expect when it comes to climate change? Is it individuals who will make the difference, or as you say Mike, the collective action of society as a whole.
In answer to your question though Mike, I'm hot, I'm tired and its been on hell of a day so far. How are you today?
Having read Guys statement about manual workers I have come to the realisation that he is a bigot.
I do wonder what he thinks about solutions to the environment issues we face. It can't be solved individually it has to be collective action!
Thanks to the draconian rules for JSA it may well be that a man who is now digging the roads might well have had a decent education and been previously employed in a "decent" job that would have won the approval of jumped up little snobs like you in surburbia, twitching behind your lace curtains to see what your neighbours are up to.
As for "idiots" they are not unknown in the Tory party either - take a look at Bill cash, John Redwood, Nadine Dorries, Boris Johnson. there ARE of course some "idiots" in NuLabour, but luckilly many of them have flounced out of the cabinet "rocking the boat" or are standing down at the next election at the age of 51.
why are you anti "camp" people.
why are you anti "arty-farty" people.
and
why are you anti "little" people.
what harm have they ever done to you!
what is BNP's view on repatriation Andrew? or is that hidden in the coded "majority rights and culture" category.
who do you think that it should apply to....and how would you justify it.
Turnout in 1959 was 78.70%
Turnout in 1974 was 78.80%
These where the last highs, as the numbers have fallen away since these two date and the turnout in 2005 was 61.28%.
Another article said that there is less ‘tribalism’ than there used to be and that now there is a core support for each party and the rest are ‘floating’ voters.
There is also evidence to show that while labours vote has gone up and down, the Tory party vote levels out. The two parties need to be aware that for many be 20 years (can’t remember the actual date) the vote for the Libs and ‘other’ parties has increased election upon election.
Anyway some voting numbers from 2005:
Men voting 62%
Woman voting 61%
Age of voters
18 – 24 = 37%
25 – 34 = 48%
35 – 44 = 61%
45 – 54 = 64%
55 – 64 = 71%
65+ = 75%
Social class
AB = 70%
C1 = 62%
ABC1s = Managers, administrators, pros and clerical workers
C2 = 57%
DE = 54%
C2Des = skilled and unskilled workers, those on long-term benefit and retired drawing state pension.
Ethnicity
White = 62%
Ethnic minority = 47%
What an interesting day.
On the socialist nicking your cash, I do think that the tax policy needs to be fair and you need to be taxed in accordance with what you earn.
Not sure about the middle class waking up and are going to kick labour out. From the numbers the greater number of voters where from middle class and upwards?
As I said above there is a chance that the Libs will continue to grow support.
In Unity
MA
I suppose if you did have ordinary working class men and women, it would put off the arty-farty types like Ben Bradshaw and dear little Shaun Woodward would never have joined the party. What a tragedy that would have been for all of us. Especially Woodward's butler!
Personally I honestly would much prefer to have an unvarnished, straightforward, ethical and compassionate man or woman of average intelligence as my MP than some paramount genius to whom men and women are nothing more than ciphers on a page. I can well remember attending a lecture on Game Theory by one Herman Kahn toward the end of his life, which gentleman supposedly possessed one of the highest IQ scores ever recorded on the planet, and was appalled when I heard him blithely talking about winning a nuclear war with "acceptable losses", as far as the USA was concerned in his opinion, in the region of fifteen million or so.
(I forget the actual figure.)
Gordon Brown is no certainly no genius although he was intelligent enough to be "fast tracked" into an experimental fast stream education programme in his teens. Brown was accepted by the University of Edinburgh to study history at the age of only 16 and graduated from Edinburgh with First Class Honours MA in 1972 at the age of 21.
Academically Brown is quite clever although not very original.
You did say that you wished to be able to vote for clever people didn't you, Guy? Consider the foregoing and be careful what you wish for my friend on the off-chance that you get it.
Now get off that high horse of yours before you take a tumble and break your crown or suffer some other terrible injury!
I'm not entirely sure how to get the point across to you, but I'll try. I disagree with the 50% tax bracket, I think it is unfair and counterproductive. I would like the lower paid of society to get a fairer deal, help to become wealth creators and regain some dignity in their day to day lives, but I can not get of this across to you because you just want to rant how unfair it is that you have to pay high taxes. Well sorry to burst your bubble Guy, but some of the taxes you don't percieve as high, some of the things the average person is forced to pay no matter what their pay level and a lot of the stealth taxes effect those at the bottom of the ladder a whole lot more than they effect you. It is all very well for you to sneer at those less fortunate to have an industry for them to work in, but which bit of 'there are no jobs for them to go to' do you not understand? Not everyone has the necessary skills to become self employed, not everyone has the ability to switch from one career to another, or even get a career in the first place, so what exactly do you want them to do? Oh yes, I remember - voluntary work.
Now how exactly do you want people to stump up cash they haven't got? And why haven't they got it? Is it their fault that there was no plan for what they would do when the mines, the steel works and the related industries were shut down? Is it their fault that there hasn't been any thought into what they can do for a living? You may well fit right in to a service-based economy, but many don't. Your rant above is all about you, but it doesn't answer a single problem in this country, it just assumes that I am the enenmy and launches back into the class attacks that you use everyday here on the LL.
So enlighten me Guy, what is your purpose? What do you gain by coming here day after day telling me where I am going wrong? And what makes you think you have a single clue how to sort the mess out? You have admitted several times that you don't give a monkies jockstrap about the rest of society, you have openly said it is everyone elses problem, yet you see yourself fit to lecture me about your beliefs, how you want to be taxed and that no-one ever gave you anything, you earned it all yourself. So I ask again, what is your purpose? Because it seems to me that you a singular purpose - to boost your own ego. That doesn't get anyone but you anywhere and is about as constructive to the arguements here as it would be sending Jeremy Clarkson to Afghanistan to tackle the Taliban.
How about stop electing socialist governments who spend more than they receive?
How about a government that doesn't leave my kids with billions of debt to finance?
How about a government that doesnt believe 50% tax rate (and some marginal rates abouve 100%) are "fair"
How about a government that doeswn't believe that the wealth creators are morally responsible to be forever paying for those who create nothing but live of benefits?
How about you grasp (along with your left wing bedfellows) the concept that if i work for 8 hours and earn a wage through my own work that that rewards are mine and not yours to use as you see fit.
How about you grasp the concept that those of us on the right see a reasonable level of taxation for the "greater good" as fair but that 50%, 60% etc "fair", "moral", "just" or "progressive".
How about you go get your friends in the working classes to stump the cash to pay their benefits rather than come to the middle classes over and over?
But then Labour, socialists and you don't get that do you Bill? What I earn is at your disposal because that's only "fair" and "progressive". That's why socialists are all thieves.
If you removed all the unemployed and working class voters from the electoral role, the country would no longer be a democratic country, so what is your point? Do you really believe the unemployed or working class will vote Labour at the next election after some of policies levied against them during the past decade?
Don't subsidise industries or job creation, but unless you have another solution, stop whinging about those unfortunate enough not to have a job. You can't have it both ways unless you come up with some answers Guy.
Why would anyone here give a rat's whoot about what you do with your taxes Guy? Why would anyone have the slightest interest in you fiddling your books so you can make yourself feel better? When you've stumbled from your high horse, lets just see whether the Conservative party will be dipping into your wallet over the next couple of years. Your logic makes as much sense as Alastair Darling's last budget.
What has the Labour Party ever done for you? I presume you're talking about the Labour Party of the past decade, otherwise you have a severe mental block on the history of this country. I would agree with you that the modern incarnation that is New Labour is probably not the best example of Labour values, if you read a few comments below I'm quite verbal on what I think of the current administration, but that is where our agreement ends.
I'd recommend that you read a bit of history, but it would fall on deaf ears wouldn't it? You won't accept the issues created by failed policies of a Conservative government and your wealth that you cling to so dearly, it has nothing to do with the 'thieves' that are socialist? Do you use electricity by any chance Guy? Where do you think the power comes from that enables you to post such arrogant bile? Does a middle class gentleman in a suit and tie ensure that the fires keep burning, that the national grid is repaired after a storm or could it be the man in the boiler suit on low wages? The milk you use on your breakfast cereal, the cereal itself, how do you think it gets to that nice shiny supermarket? All done by 'thieves' according to you.
The benefits culture you blame Labour for, where do you think that came from Guy? Did it suddenly appear in 1997 as the Labour Party walked into Downing Street, or did it happen back in 1983 when the Conservative government began to dismantle subsidised industries without a back up plan to what they would do with a couple of million unemployed manual workers, engineers and support staff? Yes, the coal mines were subsidised, but that is because there were too many of them. Now we have a situation where we do not have enough, so we import millions of tonnes of coal from abroad whilst the manual workers who could easily extract it from the ground here and give their families a better life end up on the dole queue because Guy, there are not enough jobs elsewhere!
I grant you that some people who are long term unemployed are there because they want to, they have adapted to a low state-paid lifestyle and they manage their family finances accordingly, but that is not to say they are the majority. There are hundreds and thousands of men and women who would gladly work hard for a living, but what type of work can they do? You argue that because they were too lazy to get a decent education, they deserve their fate, but you are as bad as the current administration who actively encourage millions of young people to take up higher education when they are plainly not suited to it. You do not need a degree in I.T. to be able to drive goods from point A to point B. You do not need a degree to pick orders in warehouses and would you really argue you need a degree to dish out fish and chips? This country needs workers, it needs people who will stack shelves, drive trucks and serve food. Otherwise Guy you'd be, well, buggered.
I should imagine by now you have skim read what I have written and are already planning a reply riddled with words like 'thief', 'my taxes' and just for good measure the odd 'steal' but what you fail to comprehend is that until you give the working people a chance to become wealth creators themselves, what choice does any government have on where to get its taxes? That has nothing to do with socialism, that has to do with poor forward planning by a Conservative government trying desperately to balance the books after Labour caused financial chaos in the late 1970s. No government is perfect, far from it, but the past 3 administrations in this country have failed the electorate and kid yourself all you wish, but if (or when) the Conservatives walk into Downing Street again, they will continue to make the same mistakes, they won't address the core issues.
Want to know how I know that Guy? Because the Conservative party is full of people just like you. They don't want to face the truth, it is far easier to hide behind tribal colours, all too easy to blame one man, who incidently is possibly the worst Prime Minister this country has ever seen. I dislike GB, but he'd have commited election suicide had he put into place what this country needs, and if Cameron attempts it he will as well. And there you have it, the core reason why things never get tackled in this country is because every government is only thinking as far as the next election. Power is so all important, messing with the figures so critical and shifting blame from the government to the people at every opportunity for that extra 5 years in office. Would I recommend you to vote for Labour? No. But I wouldn't recommend the Conservatives either, because at the moment neither have a clue what the answer is.
Like it or loathe it, believe it or dismiss it Guy but post-war Labour turned this country into an industrial powerhouse. Millions of people were wealth creators, and yes, some of the industry was subsidised but not all of the industry, so what? Are you naive enough to think that the nice wedge you've earned from the government programmes you've worked on were not subsidised? And you have the nerve to comment here that socialists are theieves! You offer no solutions except 'Vote Conservative', you offer no constructive argument except 'Vote Conservative' and when challenged you whinge and whine how the money you've earned has been taxed so heavily and how the whole of Labour are thieves. What is your big plan then Guy? How would you sort out the country? Let me guess, 'Vote Conservative'.
I'm tempted to leave it there, but after watching you for quite a while you do tend to reply based on the beginning or the end of someone's comment, often ignoring any serious points made by the original poster because it would be inconvienient to your arguement or your own personal agenda. I figure if I put a useless paragraph right at the end it may just give you the push to read the war and peace above, but I'm not holding my breath.
I would never vote for someone like that, locally or nationally. I'd never support someone like that as my candidate and I sure as hell wouldn't pay attention to their edicts.
Fortunately most of the middle class don't want idiots representing them either, that's why we don't elect Labour MPs
Nah, we're the new voice of the Labour party. We're the revolution that New Labour pretended to be (Mandy said: "We're all Thatcherites now" before the party embarked on years of tax and squander followed by borrow and squander).
You may not like these "Right-wingers" Shamik but they say something, you at least concede that. They express an opinion about how the world is and how it ought to be.
Aside from your evident frustration at being totally unable to answer any of these heretics, what have you got? Where are your opinions? Apart from anodyne remarks about a "fair society" or being "progressive" -- descriptions to which the LibDems, UKIP or even BNP could equally lay claim -- what do you actually stand for?
The only way to reform Labour seems to be by getting elected as an MP. I hope someone can prove to me otherwise....
When politics becomes more than the sum of your objectives, when it becomes an ambitious desire it's time to go.
It is public service at the highest level and requires the most moral people. I think I will be putting myself forward again (sigh) but only to try to clean the party. However I may be prevented from doing so, we shall see. My primary objective is to settle in Barking and join the campaign against the BNP (at no financial gain to myself) and this a good start because political activists are the real substance of a political party as they work with the community when they can.
The day after I was elected as a councillor, I put my walking shoes back on and knocked on all the doors again, to let people know I was going to be there for them. When I stood down, I did so again to let them know I had kept my promises.
I think Bill you would have a lot to offer politics as you are not seeking power, the difficulty is keeping true to yourself and that is what frightens off many good people. Thus the ambitious and unwise slip in....
Socialism has never done a thing for me and never will. It doesn't represent me, my views, my interests or my goals. All socialism does is take large chunks of my wealth and give it to its core vote.
Those industries that you gon on about weren't profitable and as a result were reliant on tax payers money (back to the middle class again) to bail them out over and over.
I no more want to sudsidise someone to mine for coal than I do for someone to deliver the mail.
Socailist parties rely on the lower class, low income (or no income) socio-demographic of the population voting them in to "redistribute" wealth. Redistribution is just a fancy pc way of saying "steal".
If a Tory government comes in I hope that will raise the mimimum threshold for tax significantly to take a large % of the lwoer paid out of tax. I hope they remove the benefits culture that Labour has fostered and I hope they move to reduce the tax I pay. None of that involves me taking anyone elses money does it?
This socialist government is not my government and I have 0% loyalty to it. I shall do everything in my power to minimise my contribution to the state whilst Labour are in power and I hope many others do the same and cripple this government of thieves and liars as much as possible.
Fair play in your mind of course means taking from those who are succesfull to give to those who have failed.
But the proof is who the mainstay of your core vote is? The working class, low skilled, low educated, low waged, on benefits socio-demographic for whom voting for a party that intends to give them money taken from the better off is the natural thing to do.
What possible use was there laying out figures for MP professions? What "FACTS" does it provide? That a few socialists in parliament had professional careeers? Break down the voting patterns by socio-demographic group then come have a chat. The lower classes, lower income supporters of Labour get to steal middle class income through the ballot box.
As I said, I'm now into "creative" tax returns and whereas all my life I have believed in fairly paying tax I now would give 100% support to anyone who fiddles their tax bill to ensure that the socialists in power don't get to steal yet more money.
You say the Tories "looked after their interest, their friends, the landowners and the rich", fair enough, I'm one of them and I'll support the Tories, because Labour and socialism has never done a thing for me and never will. The middle classes are waking up to Labour and will kick them out at the next election.
I do not consider myself disillusioned, I am however very worried and critical. I am critical because the Labour Party has been part of my life for many years and will continue to be. The problems facing the party have been summarised well, with the introduction of the political unelites. Of the Ministers and MP's I have met I have yet to see any evidence of them being either liberal or elite. They seemed pretty average to me.
The reason I personally remain loyal (and it came close as I would have quit the party had Becket become speaker as I do not tolerate rewarded political corruption in any form)is due to Brown's management in the economy. I was gutted when he left the Treasury, the biggest most singular error of his political life. He made the mistake many MP's and Minister's make, he put his own needs before his country. If it works - don't fix it.
Now of course they are beginning to push policy, but the window of opportunity has passed, I doubt there are many people in the UK who have yet to decide on who they are going to vote for. The blanked out expenses will be the last straw for many. I wonder what would happen if everyone in the country blanked out thier tax forms....
You cannot behave in a sleazy manner and attempt to cover it up in such a clumsy and insulting manner, the people will not forget it. It says so much about the contempt the political class or unelites have for the General Public who have given these people so much. For a Labour Government to behave in such a manner is unforgivable.
During the General Election I shall work my heart out for the Labour Party, but I shall not do so as an unthinking zombie or political sycophant.
I agree with you Alan, after the General Election defeat we can begin to renew our party and bring it back away from the Right and to the centre/left. None of the policies that Labour has brought into the statute books that are Right Wing have won over middle England.
The middle class vote has gradually declined through natural desire of change.
Our core vote would have stayed the distance until after say five-ten years when the middle class get fed up with the next administration, with the expenses though we have lost many of our core voters that would have sustained us in opposition.
However in conclusion (my own personal) I do believe the Labour Party can return to it's rightful place as the best option for Social Justice...but we need to sort out and stand up to our PLP.
I agree that working people do need to be represented, whatever the class they think they belong, and I think the socialist party are a party that you might find interesting and active locally.
Please check the web site and see what you think.
As far as you becoming a member, that is your choice, you pay what you can afford, and you do seem like somebody who could enrich the movement.
Your call, but have a look.
Thing is though, it depends how you define working class. For the most part I don't really recognise the middle class label, they all still work for a living, so they are by definition still working class, just better paid than other working class people (if that makes sense). This whole pandering to 'middle England' thing is getting very tiresome, it is about time this country was run for the entire population rather than seperated into nice neat political boxes.
In answer to your question though, its like I said, I really don't think I could be a member of a political party that would accept someone like me as a member. That goes for all the political parties. I was once asked to be Liberal Democrat candidate and when I mentioned my aversion to joining a party if they'd happily accept me I was met with a look of confusion and reassured that I would be making a difference. My wife said that to become part of politics led to corruption, and the gent (no word of a lie) said there was no corruption, but why not join in because it was £13k a year to begin with and you didn't have to do anything for it! Is that irony or something else? Can't make up my mind.
Why not join the Socialist Party?
Do you think that there might be a move back to the start of the circle and working people begin to build their own party again (and not the Labour Party)?
In Unity
MA
Immigration is the most obvious and incendiary issue but it actually obscures a whole range of areas where the Party is completely adrift from its base.
Working class voters tend to be socially conservative because they can not afford the luxury of right-on social engineering that impacts hard on working class communities.
I would hazard a guess that what was once your core vote tends to support the following:
1) economic socialism
2) patriotism
3) local community
4) strong law and order
5) Marriage and family life
6) Anti-immigration
7) majority rights and culture
and what do your right-on activists believe in?
1) capitalism
2) internationalism
3) individualism
4) bleeding heart non-judgmentalism
5) life style choice
6) immigration
7) multiculturalism
Plainly, as can be seen by many of the comments to this post, your core supports ser seethingly angry at the direction the Labour elite has taken.
To me this is a far worse split than the Tories over Europe. Europe is a single issue, and it was quirky in the sense that it was largely solved by demographic factors. (Those now in their 50s and 60s are most enthusiastic about Europe, whereas the younger generations are increasingly Eurosceptic. As the pro-Europeans start to age and leave the scene, the Tory wounds on the issue start to heal.)
I can't see how Labour can resolve its own severe internal contradictions. Lets forget about the issue of immigration for a moment and look again at my first list - you'll find every single one of those policies are BNP policies. And they are in tune with a very large chuck of your voters.
In some cases you could say the Tory party are also thieves, because their policies robbed thousands of working people of a living because of some sick grudge of a sick woman and her supporters.
Guy you must remember the Tory party heritage, how they looked after their interest, their friends, the landowners and the rich.
If it was not for the mass movement and collective action of our fathers, you, I or Bill would not have the vote; there would be no welfare system or NHS. On that evidence I would not say socialist ideas are based on robbery, no doubt you will!
Let’s talk about another thing that you have talked about and I think you have a general interest, the environment, how would you tackle it as a individual or through a collective that might include some socialists. Unlike some MPs socialist would be doing it because it is right and not that it is simply a vote winner. (I am making veggie boxes out of old pallets if you want one for free, no charge, just a socialist being compassionate).
You could also say that if we had a better wage structure in this country the growing gap between rich and poor would start to reduce and maybe the ‘surplus value’ could be used for wage increases instead of pay share holders.
Again a few facts below about MPs:
The 2005 age split 18 - 29 = 3, 30 - 39 = 89, 40 - 49 = 191, 50 - 59 = 249, 60 - 69 = 100 & 70+ 14.
In 2005 the average age per party -
Labour - 52.2, under 40 = 10%, 41 - 59 = 71%, 60+ = 19%
Tory - 49.3, under 40 = 17%, 41 - 59 = 65%, 60+ = 18%
Lib - 46.0, under 40 = 31%, 41 - 59 = 60%, 60+ = 10%
Other - 50.8, under 40 = 13%, 41 - 59 = 70%, 60+ = 10%
What about occupations in 2005 - (in brackets numbers in 1987)
The house - Professionals - 242 (262), Business - 118 (161), miscellaneous - 217 (133), Manual Worker - 38 (73)
Labour - Professionals - 141, Business - 25, miscellaneous - 154, Manual Worker - 35
Tory - Professionals - 76, Business - 75, miscellaneous - 45, Manual Worker - 2
Libs - Professionals - 25, Business - 18, miscellaneous - 18, Manual Worker - 1
(Key - The Pros = Barrister, Solicitor, Doctor, Civil service/local govt, Teachers: University/college, Teacher: school.
Miscellaneous = White Collar, Politician/Political organiser, Publisher/Journalist)
So Guy, looking at the FACTS, the middle class is taking from the middle class. The working class have very little to do with it.
Not only that, the biggest increase is in the number of the political elite, not business, manual workers or the pros. What does that tell you!
In Unity
MA
The premise that I base my initial comments on is perfectly simple. The Labour Party was born out of a need for the working people of Great Britain to have a voice. If you see your back up plan as emigrating and living under the Great God that is Obama, then you are in effect turning your back on Labour values and beliefs. Obama may be very good for America, but in case you haven't noticed, this is England.
I don't for one minute listen to the rubbish coming from media circles. I've worked there and listened to their daily self-congratulating bial and I find it about as convincing as I do GB's speeches. You may not share my cynasism, but you will soon be sharing my reality. Far removed from the scrawling on the internet and even further away from Westminister, the core vote of the Labour Party will decide the fate of those who went to city where the streets are apparently paved with gold.
London is not the centre of the Labour Party, Lancashire and Yorkshire is the centre of Labour and unfortunately it is something that the Labour Party have forgotten. Please understand me Gabe, I care little for what happens in Westminister or Fleet Street because that is not where change will happen, the changes are already happening throughout the country and if you travelled about a bit you would hear loud and clear the voices of the furious. They make me sound like an apologist!
It was bad enough with a sheet metal worker as speaker.
Of course, I do accept that under the Tories we wouldn't need any maternity hospitals - because the Tories would eat all the babeeez.
Believe me, I empathise. But I don't share your blanket cynicism. On the surface, it’s maybe because I've done bits of work in and around Westminster, and in PR, and seen firsthand huge discrepancies that frequently exist between media coverage and reality.
Alongside Obama, one of my real political idols is Tony Benn. In much of Tony Benn's (and Obama) writing, interviews etc. he dismisses cynicism towards politics and democracy. What I would say to you and anyone else sitting on the sidelines feeling furious is to get your views heard.
Anyway... Advantage Andy Murray...
The political class is looking after itself, friends family, family members, college chums. Same old same old. Nothing will change until we change and start to demand more. The storm around the expense's issue seems to have passed and the outcome will be what?
An increase in the voting in this country would be a good thing, yet while possible representatives are selected and placed by the Party and not the local party, it will always be a struggle. The political class will not let go of power easly. They are already removing the manual workers in the house, so how can they represent the population that is below middle class status (facts below).
Anyway, some facts below.
The 2005 age split 18 - 29 = 3, 30 - 39 = 89, 40 - 49 = 191, 50 - 59 = 249, 60 - 69 = 100 & 70+ 14.
In 2005 the average age per party -
Labour - 52.2, under 40 = 10%, 41 - 59 = 71%, 60+ = 19%
Tory - 49.3, under 40 = 17%, 41 - 59 = 65%, 60+ = 18%
Lib - 46.0, under 40 = 31%, 41 - 59 = 60%, 60+ = 10%
Other - 50.8, under 40 = 13%, 41 - 59 = 70%, 60+ = 10%
What about occupations in 2005 - (in brackets numbers in 1987)
The house - Professionals - 242 (262), Business - 118 (161), miscellaneous - 217 (133), Manual Worker - 38 (73)
Labour - Professionals - 141, Business - 25, miscellaneous - 154, Manual Worker - 35
Tory - Professionals - 76, Business - 75, miscellaneous - 45, Manual Worker - 2
Libs - Professionals - 25, Business - 18, miscellaneous - 18, Manual Worker - 1
(Key - The Pros = Barrister, Solicitor, Doctor, Civil service/local govt, Teachers: University/college, Teacher: school.
Miscellaneous = White Collar, Politician/Political organiser, Publisher/Journalist)
Alex - IMHO you should be getting Bill to do some posts for Labour List.
From my short time on this site I have learned that there are many former Labour supporters who view the site but choose not to comment. They see Labour being ripped to shreds by both Conservative minds and Labour minds, yet they sit by and do nothing. Have you considered why?
If you read through all the articles on this site, you will notice that occassionally a new name crops up, a name you haven't seen comment before and they are furious about the subject matter. They are the former Labour voters, they are the support that Labour has lost and for good reason, those of a Labour mind do not necessarily recognise the current administration as a Labour government.
I was given the benefits of books as a child, lots of books. I had access to numerous libraries, both at school and locally. I was a petulant child for the most part, but fascinated by history, in particular the history of politics and spent my time reading about all the different political philosophies from the ancients to modern times, at least until it was time to cause more mayhem. The Labour Party, its formation and the true grit of it's founding fathers shone through. The people who backed the Party had little wealth, but lots of belief and Labour went from zero to hero in less than two decades.
Now look at the Labour Party of the past decade through the same eyes. Millionairres who sit in the House of Commons and say "So what!", so-called working class people who have worked their way to government who do shady property deals and claim for toilet seats on their expenses, and then we have Kingpin, the man with a conscience who doesn't know how to use it. Can you not see that they have abandoned the values you believe in? Can you not see how they have cast aside everything for wealth and power? They have become what the traditional Labour voter despised about the Conservative party.
Please bear in mind that Labour minded does not mean Labour supporter because here you have Labour minded people by the hundred just waiting for the real Labour to return and support them, fight for what they believe in and give the country a fighting chance. They won't vote Conservative or Liberal Democrat, but they will stay at home and completely ignore the next General Election, and they do it for the good of the Labour Party, not to destroy it. Until we get true Labour minded politicians back in the Labour fold it would be reasonable to expect Labour to be consigned to opposition for the forseeable future, or if GB gets his way on everything, expect to see the Party consigned to the dustbin and a new party for the working man grabbing the doused torch and relighting it for the working people of this country.
And for the record, come the next GE if GB is still at the helm of the Labour Party, I'll vote, but I won't be held responsible for what I write on my ballot paper.
Just where do the taxation receipts ceom from Bill?
If you removed all the unemployed and working class votesr from the electoral roll would Labour ever be elected again?
As for all those "traditional" industries that went to the wall in the 1980s, if they weren'y profitable why the hell should the rest of us pay to subsidise them?
Labour governments spend lots and lots of money that did belong to other people, then they tax a bit more to spend a bit more. As Ed Balls said when told the UK is more heavily taxed than most other EU countries "so?".
Socialism is theft from the well-off to fund the less-well off, it's legitimised theft, nothing more. Socialism believes it's right to go into my pay packet and take an ever increasing amount out before I ever get to see it. If this isn't theft please put a word to it?
Sorry Bill, but you and your supporters have no moral right to take large chunks of my money to fund your core vote. As I've said, this is not my PM and government and I've already started getting "creative" with my taxable expenses and I'm not in the slightest bit guilty about it.
Listening to Gordon Brown today, it seems to be a rehash of the same old 'New Deal' type policies with no overall socialist vision. And they are still going on with the anitworking-class Welfare Reform Bill.
Also, just postponing the privatisation of Royal Mail is not good enough. It must be cancelled and a plan to renationalise the railway system put into place.
You may well have had a charmed existance in the 1980's and the early part of the '90's but for many it was hell. Its all well and good to look at those who are long termed unemployed and sneer at them, but the policies of the Conservative government left those people out to dry. They had been trained to do a job that was then swept out from underneath them and the training they were offered to get them back to work? Office skills! Word processing, databases and spreadsheets. They were miners and steel workers, not adminstration assistance! They wanted jobs in industry where they could use thier skills and they were failed by a morally corrupt government. You can't take a hammer or pick from a chap one day, shove him in front of the computer the next day and expect him to thrive.
These people I talk about are not thieves, they are not bad people, but they were socialists. They wanted to work hard for the money they got, keep more of it for themselves and look after their families. How is that any different from what you want in life Guy? Does that make you a thief as well then?
You may despise the current government for what you percieve as wrongdoings, them taking too much tax from you or failing you with policies, but that doesn't give you the right to call anyone who is a socialist in this country a thief!
Wasn't really sure about Tony Blair as a leader, but he seemed to be universally liked by everyone I spoke to and as far as I was concerned, if he could do the job and be liked at the same time by the majority, he was the right person for the job.
Not really sure how Conservative minds saw the 1997 election that brought the Labour Party into power, but to me and many like me it was bringing an end to an era of lies, deceit and sleaze. The Labour Party promised it had learned from the mistakes of the late-70s and it offered a unified response to things like Europe where it wouldn't make policy blindly, it would go to the people and ask them what they wanted. The Labour Party offered a good solid election campaign, and compare that to the negative Conservative campaign of 'New Labour, New Danger', it was like a school boy complaining to teacher because the bigger girl had threatened to steal his sweets. I didn't agree wholeheartedly with the '97 manifesto, but I thought it was quite sensible for the most part and offered a lot more than the Conservative could at that point.
2001, still keeping my fingers crossed that those original election pledges of '97 would come through and by 2005 I began to see the Labour Party totally differently. The introduction of the tax credit system for one, it just seemed such a bizarre idea to take money from me, then make me fill a form out and go cap in hand to claim it back. Where was the referendum on Europe? And why, when the 2005 manifesto offered a sensible partial ban on smoking did it turn into a full public ban that involved stupid stickers being enforced on every shopkeeper? I mean come on, yes I smoke, but when I go to buy clothes I don't light a cigarette whilst I make a decision, and neither does anyone else with half a brain cell.
This is the bit where I suspect I'll part ways with the majority, but what I wanted from this New Labour was to reverse what the Conservatives did. Renationalise our water supply and make sure it stayed a sensible price. Renationalise power grids, railway tracks and maybe, just maybe, stop importing hundreds of tonnes of coal and start some of the old boys digging the stuff out of the ground here. I wanted to see wealth creation, not for the few, but for the many. Proper investment in the things I think the Conservative party neglected and to give the working people of this country some hope, some dignity and a fair chance in life. And I wanted a cast iron guarantee that politicians would do their jobs, not become involved in the sleazy antics that I witnessed in politics from an early age.
What I wished for, what I wanted and what I got were entirely different things. I hear a lot of squawking about how Labour is the best choice for the working people of this country, but I don't see a lot of evidence. What I do see is families worse off than they have ever been and having to rely on state handouts just to pay the bills. What I see is the local pubs and clubs that used to be the centre of communities, somewhere to gather and enjoy the company of others, gone and demolished. And what I hear is a group of whiners, whingers and generally those with their own self-interests telling me how I should be bringing up my children, what I should eat, what I should drink and all the while trying to make me feel guilty for trying my best to look after those closest to me. It no longer seems good enough that I accept members of society as equals, that my wife and I work together hand in hand, no, now I must feel guilty if I smile and enjoy life because someone else has a worse life somewhere else in the world. And worst of all to me is that I see policies that make me physically sick with the red rose stamped on them! They are not Labour policies, they do not originate from Labour values, so where are they coming from and why are they using the name Labour when they quite obviously are not.
One of the reasons I like the LL is that finally there is a Labour minded website where I see the passion of the Labour minded without a lot of the rhetoric, lies and spin coming from the central offices of Labour. I see Labour minded individuals who have some similar opinions to me and are not blinded by tribal warfare and although it may not be happening everyday, there are some real ideas here and some sensible answers to very complicated problems. I'm not naive enough to think I can make a difference to the policies of this country as I don't think I could be a member of a political party that would have someone like me as a member in the first instance, but I'd like to think that over 100 years of political struggle hasn't been wasted for a few bottles of champagne and a short stint in the limelight.
We have netbooks.
Oh - good shot! More strawberries vicar?
It’s a bit rich asking for our support now that the middle classes have deserted you. Where were you when we need your support?
If Brown does win next year(and I still don't believe that is possible) he will take it as an endorsement of his crytpto-Tory policies and ministers, just as Blair did in 2001 and 2005.
For people on the Left, who are concerned about the enviroment the Green party makes much more sense.
Sadly, though Labour is a broad church and all that, you only have to read the ullage that spills from Alistair Campbell
and Tom "Mr. Morality" Harris when they appear on Labour List to realise just how far to the right Labour has been allowed to drift.
Reading the reactionary rubbish those two come out with, and knowing that most of the cabinet hold similar views, puts me completely off Labour - and I supported them from the mid 60s right through top just a couple of years ago.
The problem is, as ever, that the Tories would be 'worse' from a left-of-centre perspective. However, that doesn't mean that it is unreasonable to feel frustrated by the direction NL have taken. They have done plenty of things which have been worthwhile and which will endure - but there could have been so much more. Labour should never get to the stage when it tries to appeal to people who do not have any social democratic sympathies at all - it would be a bit like the Tories trying to appeal directly to me which is something of a waste of time.
I believe in something called the 'electoral cycle' which means that governments generally do not retain power for four terms, and I think that is largely what is happening now. The problem is that this cycle is somewhat out of kilter meaning that there has rarely been a competitive election in recent years.
I loved John O’Farells book, Things can Only Get Better.
He talks of his moral high ground and punitive levels of tax that he and his ‘progressive’ friends supported. And how the level at which these punitive taxes should apply steadily rose over the years to always be about £10k a year more than they happened to be earning at the time. That’s Socialism for you, ‘Other people’s money’.
It is weird to have all these Right-wingers commenting ad infinitum on LL, hijacking threads and pedalling the same stuff, over and over and over again.
They've become parodies of themselves; you almost know what they're gonna say before they say it!
Fell free to do this Alex, but New Labour does not have to be in power for this process to happen.
"Clotted Cheeser Cameron continues his falling out with Euro centre right: http://tinyurl.com/chrispLOL208 #labour #labourdoorstep #Tehran"
From Chris Paul tweeting.
Two weeks after Habitat get a pasting for hijacking Iran tweets, now Labour think it's a good idea.
Are they brainless, or just really really nasty?
I have to ask, did you get caught up in the whole New Labour fanfare back in 1997, or where you genuinely just as oppose back then, despite all the euphoria?
We're a generally soft right of centre bunch who'd like our government to be as unintrusive as possible and financially competant.
Socialism is not "progressive", "fair", "moral" or "just"
Socialism is the political movement of the have-nots making theft democratically legitimate.
Labour represent a percentage of the population who having little or no finances and often not being taxpayers, feel free to elect a government to take money from those who do have finance and who do pay tax.
Just because you believe a 50% tax rate is "a point of principal", doesn't mean that those paying it agree with you. My point of principle is that no one should be taxed more than he gets to keep himself. It is a point of principle shared by a great many others in my class.
You wonder why I might say this is not my government, not my PM and I feel no loyalty to it or reason to subscribe to and adhere to its rulings? You wonder why I now feel free to become "creative" with my tax returns?
I have become sick to death with the assumption from people on the left that have the moral high ground because they support significant redistribution of wealth. To those of us who have worked for the "wealth" this redistribution is theft, excessively rewarding the less able and work-shy for not contributing as much as those who have worked hard.
Socialism is nothing more than a movement pushing for the priviledge through theft of the lower-classes seeking to steal from the better off classes.
So stop assuming you have the moral high ground, you don't and never have had.
Perhaps they're all "TORIEZ", but I think that they are sensible people who are in absolute despair at the current state of the NHS. My father certainly is, and he's (was) a Labour voting consultant.
Last time they "renovated" his hospital, they painted round the filing cabinets. I think that tells you all you need to know about modern Britain's attitude to all things involving labour with a small "l". Get it done quickly, cheaply, preferably with foreign labour, and hope nobody notices, whilst funding huge overpaid and wasteful quangoes that serve no purpose whatsoever.
Keir Hardie is undoubtedly turning in his grave.
The big problem is Brown he has no ideas nothing to offer if people tell him what to do he is fine, he moans about what the Tories are doing and then drops this years spending review I wonder why..
Problem solved. Religion has no place in the judicial system of this (or any other) country.
A call to arms requires something to believe in, something to get behind and it is not enough to simply be tribal and say that red is the colour. Telling someone who believes in Labour values to vote for a Party that displays few, if any, of those values is futile - you may as well ask them to vote Conservative. The core supporters and the floating voters who are sympathetic to Labour values will not support the current policy arrangement, I mean look at the last fortnight. GB tells us he will listen, then proceeds to get Ben Bradshaw to announce yet another tax, this time targeted at our telephone lines. Convieniently ignoring that there will always be a percentage of people who will not embrace the internet, the government now want to hoard £6 per year from every other household to renew cables and lines that should be responsibility of the commercial enterprises that use them. Rather than force the companies to reinvest profits into their own firms, it is always easier to get the taxpayer to foot the bill.
You ask for those who believe in Labour ideals to grasp the nettle. To grasp a nettle firmly doesn't hurt, there is no pain, you have to be decisive and just get on with it, but to support the Labour Party in its current form? No matter how decisive or how determined you are to just get on with it, it will bring pain and hurt because it would endorse what has been done in the past 2 to 3 years. It is supporting the abolition of the 10p tax, it would be supporting the ban of smoking that has undoubtedly ruined business after business whilst offering no real results in the reduction of smoking, it would be lending yourself to the people who have blatantly and unashamedly stolen taxpayer's money to fund their own lifestyle and it would give the elitish idiots who hold themselves in such high esteem the impression that they are 'doing the right thing'. The Great and Good is over, it should have been over since 1984, but Labour politicians have reinvented it, rebranded it and reshaped it, masking it with a thin veneer of old Labour rhetoric and in recent times, thumping a religious fist of 'Do as I say, not as I do'.
No Alex, what is needed is a good old fashioned spring clean, even if that means a spell in opposition. What is needed, and I would add desperately, is the removal of those without morals from the Labour Party and for each and every person who remains to be made to study the history of the Party. Sit them down, go through the hard fought struggle to form the Party in the first place, the 20 years in opposition whilst they found their feet and the incredibly hard job of turning what was once the one-time industrial powerhouse of the world from it's war-torn, battered and bruised state, back into an industrial nation with good homes, good food and employment for the masses.
Once they have read the history and seen some of the enormous achievements made by the Labour Party in the past, then give them a 2 hour film made up entirely of previously loyal Labour supporters and the reasons why they no longer support the Labour Party in its current form. Instruct them to take notes, to learn lessons and to forget any thoughts of branding the Conservative party as 'Hooray Henries', but to come up with sound, reasoned policies that meet the needs of the people, not the needs of the government. If needs be, recommend them to wear wristbands with WWCD (What Would Clement Do) because surely that is more inspiring and makes more sense than getting behind a carbon copy of Tony Blair or another Gordon Brown.
Good ideas, common sense and a new breed of politicians for the Labour Party that actually understand what Labour is about will help rebuild the Party, but insisting the Labour minded should ignore the shambles that is the current government and endorse GB for another 5 years is not only irresponsible but it is, I'm sorry to say, plain foolish.
But this site is dedicated to the Labour party, a party where duplicity, deceit, and a contempt for the British electorate constitute core values, so don't expect them to be bothered by staggering contradictions.
Apparently private property is enslaving you! Be done with it, and be a true libertarian!
The amusing thing is that none of these grand philosophical debates have any impact on the modern Labour party, who are a shallow, crass bunch of liars and cheats who have managed to con the working class into thinking they are looking out for them, when in reality they are only looking after themselves and their nouveau-riche cronies.
Despicable.
Oh dear, sadly naive and deluded.
Just like Labour voters.
I guess it is a case of being on the inside pissing out...
But I agree with your post. We do not need to replace Trident, we do not need ID cards (or the national database). We do need more housing. We don't need Royal Mail privatisation (a Railtrack solution would be much better, and then get Mandy's hands off the company).
But when you look at the reforms we have had, you realise that they could not have been done under any other party. As an example, take Health. With the Foundation Trust programme Labour is decentralising control. It is giving control to local people. The Tories do not like this because it will mean that they will not be able to impose privatisation from the centre (their proposals are a quango called the NHS Board which will impose private service providers on hospitals). Under Labour we will see Foundation Trusts in other areas too: probation services and social care are two areas that are likely to be next. With Foundation Trusts local communities elect the governing board, which are usually non-political.
That is real local power, and a vast improvement on the previous model. The Tories attack Labour for centralising, and yet the opposite is true. So why isn't the Labour Party saying this?
I have to confess that I find myself in the uncomfortable situation of saying "I'm not sure" - I simply see little difference between the current labour party and the tories.
I cannot vote for the party until it scraps its ID card plans.
You have as much chance of reshaping the Party from within as the citizens of Tehran have in overturning the Ayatollas.
Do not despair about the forthcoming electoral defeat for Labour. When the current tyrants are gone the honourable Party faithful like yourself can rebuild the Hiroshima-afermath wrought by New Labour.
This ad hominem attack is all you can muster because you lack the energy and resolve to counter these so-called tirades with actual arguments. I can't believe anyone with strong opinions would be so apathetic.
Brown still has more "vision" to deliver,.........
See BBC news today.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8123723.stm
Brown to unveil policy 'vision'
Gordon Brown is to unveil his long awaited "vision" for the future in a package of plans seen as amounting to an early Labour election manifesto
Of course in the Islamic, Jewish, and Catholic cases there is nothing to stop the parties resorting to the civil courts except their own religious belief.
No government should constrain religious belief.
The UK really does need something analogous to, as as wide-ranging, as the US "First Amendment".
I think Gary Younge may just have a point. Wasn't it Labour tribalism that allowed such wretched individuals to persuade everyone that Labour values should be sacrificed at the altar of electoral success?
The party is now run by a traitor who cares more about EU Constitution than the Labour party. Peter Mandelson is the poison that must be cleansed from the party, and it is he who pulls the strings that control Gordon Brown.
His plan is to keep Brown "in power" until the autumn, by which time there will have been a referendum in Ireland. Hopefully the Irish will be cajoled and bribed into changing their minds (quite how this is legal for a specific Treaty affecting third parties that has already ratified in many other countries is a legal question doubtless to be resolved by the European Supreme Court and no prizes for guessing what their conclusions are on any given issue -- clue: pro-EU). With Gordon Brown's talent for popularity the party will be even lower in the polls by autumn. And here's the most amazing thing. Mandelson has already conceded that there may be a change of leadership in the autumn. The audacity is breathtaking.
Labour's brain transplant severed any connections with the body of the party in order for Blair to start illegal wars, for Mandy to flounce around in yachts and generally enjoy the trappings of wealth and power and for Brown to pursue fruitless ambitions of being a person he was never cut out to be. With the body now rejecting the unwelcome transplant, who returns to government in the nick of time to save Gordon Brown? None other than the Prince of Darkness.
And now the alien brain's final insult is to allow the body of the party to be slain at the polls, in order for the Lisbon Treaty to be set in stone, a betrayal of the country, a betrayal of the party's 2005 manifesto on which it was elected to power and a betrayal of the party.
Are LabourList people going to the Fabian boat party thing? I haven’t booked a ticket yet.
I can't believe that, despite the spectacular British weather, Glastonbury and Wimbledon, there are still Tory activists spending hours/days glued to the LabourList comments section, posting sixth-form-politics-style tirades against the basic fundamentals and principles of the Labour movement and socialism in general. I think people think that by doing this, they're destroying Downing Street and bringing down the Labour movement forever... I feel like the best thing anyone could do, really, is list the mass and range of alternative activities that we be more worthwhile, notable, significant, constructive, beneficial etc., not only in life generally, but also in terms of political activism and academic discussion.
It’s a gross abuse of the word Libertarian, Libertarians are all about high levels of economic and personal freedom. Socialism is all about the state telling you what to do and taking your money to do it. I don’t care if a small group have got together to use the term, it just means a couple of hundred of people are all simultaneously wrong.
Its like calling someone and tolerant bigot, it simply does not make the slightest sense, at all. He is either a libertarian, or socialist he cannot be both anymore than my light switch can be on as well as off.
I suppose I should not be surprised, the left constantly mislabels beliefs. Take that vilified version of socialism, national socialism, which suddenly became ‘far right wing’ the moment it became clear they were bad people.
David, they are mutually exclusive, you cannot be both. I think you mean you’re a Liberal (in the modern American sense).
A core belief of libertarians is very small governments and property rights, a core belief of socialists is big government and limited property rights.
Alex, the day you realize that the best way to help the poor and the rich, and everyone in between is to allow wealth creation to take place is the day you stop being a socialist. I used to think like you as a young man, I was convinced my beliefs made total sense. And that it was simply unjust and unfair to allow such inequality.
But eventually it dawned on me that there was no finite lump of wealth to divide, only the means for constant wealth renewal and creation. And, even if there was such a lump, government would be the last person you want to do it.
The very first book that changed my political outlook was (this is a heavily revised later version): http://www.amazon.co.uk/Economics-Economist-Books/dp/1861976062/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246267345&sr=8-3
I hope you keep an open mind, I hope it is not too long until you join us and stop being part of the problem and start becoming part of the solution.
Whilst I admire your loyalty to Labour, I think you should take a deep breath and figure out if they deserve your loyalty.
Personally I think that there are many in the Labour party who have a strong moral sense of what the Labour party should be about. Ignoring wars and Brown's lies, I think that there is a deep seated problem with Labour.
The central issue, is that Labour seems to have not the first clue on how to deliver on its vision. Labour seems to lack the most basic management skills to get the job done.
Neither Gordon or Tony have tackled the countries underlying issues - instead they have frittered around the edges. Take a look at this article:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3722968/immigration-facts-and-figures.thtml
When will people stop defending the Labour party - its original principles may be admirable, but the current political party is beyond repair and will never be forgiven for what they have done to this country.
Perhaps it's time for a new left of centre party...
I'm a socialist and a libertarian. I don't see Labour as the party of either any more. For me the Green Party is now the largest party giving a voice to both these things. Also my distrust and dislike of the Tories has become less than my disillusionment with Labour, so while your quote above would have worked for me in the past, it no longer works for me. And I think there are many people in the same position. I will never vote Tory; but I also am not going to give Labour my vote simply to stop a Tory government.