Great! Good excuse for the polish to knock some sense into heads
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
- Status
The Truss version of Tories is a throwback to pre coalition: nasty and honest about it.
They don't need no education...
Schools urge parents to help plug funding gaps as costs soar
https://www.theguardian.com/educati...rents-to-help-plug-funding-gaps-as-costs-soar
Schools urge parents to help plug funding gaps as costs soar
https://www.theguardian.com/educati...rents-to-help-plug-funding-gaps-as-costs-soar
They're not honest about. Loads of rightwingers moaned at Johnson's goverment being 'socialist' bevause of furlough. Truss will get the same for the energy price intervention, even though both administrations were or look set to be as hard right as we've ever seen.
Might be wrong, but I get the feeling Truss would have preferred not to intervene at all, but has been forced to because otherwise very likely we would have had widespread social unrest. (There might still social unrest as the price cap doesnt cover other costs of living.)
Maybe honest is too strong, more like they are less able to hide the nastiness and are not pretending at all to redistribute in any way, unlike both May and Johnson.
She campaigned on no 'handouts' for energy before committing a massive U-turn on day. It showed she really is the continuity candidate, like you say only changing tack when they feel forced.
Maybe brazen is the more accurate term, given they feel they can get away with murder as long as they chuck the masses a few bones when forced to.
Capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich.
Privatised profits and nationalised losses for major companies might be a bit more accurate.
The Tory party has always been about 'conserving' what they have, they are not instinctively about helping the poor or the unfortunate, even Theresa May referred to them as the 'nasty party'. The Tories will help out when forced to do so, but it is not a natural reaction even from the so called 'one nation Tories'. supposedly to the left of the Tory party.
The problem for the major opposition, Labour or Liberal Democrat is that most people in this country have always been 'a bit' conservative at heart, even when they deny it on a stack of bibles... some say it is because of being basically an 'island race', we are wary of outsiders, of not being conquered since 1066, etc....but that is why the Tories instinctively see themselves as the 'natural' party of power, because their basic message appeals to these, at their basic level, 'me first' instincts.
The truth is whether we like/recognise it/admit it or not we all tend to put ourselves/our families first, those that don't have these instincts or fight against them and often sacrifice themselves are called 'Saints' and many are never recognised as such, not whilst they are living anyway!
A return to the true Tory vision will remain some way off, circumstances dictate that, and the honesty of the Tory party that @RedChip refers to, will not reappear for some time.
It’s cool that you recognise all of this and still vote for them. A superb reflection on your character.
A true reflection of most of the public, certainly enough to give the Tories an 85+ seat majority.... going forward the opposition ignore this at their peril!
Sadly agree and it feels like the whole thing is a continuing circle... make life harder, increase social competition, make people become more self-interested, make people believe they need to be self-invested to survive, vote tory etc.
The sad thing is Labour/Lib Dems/Any other party aren't fighting the Tories but the self-survival that conservative policies knock into people's heads. People become sceptical of any other means of governance
Ok, but you’re acknowledging why they are generally an awful party run by awful people and yet you still vote for them. I’d wager that the majority of people that vote Tory havent recognised what you have.
Any government would have had to support energy prices to preserve the economy. If anything she has not gone far enough, for example no windfall tax on the energy companies hundreds of billion pounds profit , as has just been implemented in the EU. Or nationalising the energy companies to enable only a 5% energy price increase as as happened in France.
Let's face it, the reason any Tory Prime Minister has "landed on their feet" over the last 12 years is because the media will praise their actions and a good number of idiots will lap it up.
It's not about people being as you say 'awful', it's about a view of life and how to live it. For most of my life I have truly believed myself to be a socialist, but when as they say, 'confession is good for the soul' and on examining my own conscience I realized one day that I wasn't... well not a true, or even committed socialist.
There were things I could not whole-heartedly agree with, not so much in Socialism itself, but with those purporting to represent it, and although I recognize in some ways, e.g. I have been fortunate not to have been born into abject poverty, or in a lawless, or worn torn country, but into a country where it is about differing values and ideals and whilst some opportunities are still constrained for some, for the vast majority of people there is far more choices in life than there has ever been before.
Whether it be age, or experience, or something else, over the years I began to realise that my original idea of socialism, began to dissipate, that it was a cure for all ills... if only we had a true Socialist government was in fact, simply a search for the 'holy grail'. The current holders of the socialist banners no longer think big, like the post war Labour government did. Starmer is beginning to make a fist of opposing, but events have taken it away from him again. Despite her 'dyed-in-the-wool' Tory credentials if Lis Truss can mediate and prevent the worst ravages of energy prices and inflation, she will become 'St Liz... and that's when the problems will start.'
Who knows I may even regain my faith!
Do you really have to be a saint to recognise that paying slightly higher taxes in exchange for good public services is a good thing, or to feel some empathy towards those less well off/lucky than you?
Also I think the assumption that the UK is generally Conservative is arguable at best, since left wing positions tend to be quite popular with the public. In fact, even with all the advantages they have, Tories just about scrapped into government until the big lies of Brexit.
‘A poor country with a select few very wealthy people’
Rather apt…
Last edited:
No, of course not but recognising the relationship between higher taxes and good public services and the feeling of empathy towards those less fortunate, are not the same as actually doing something about it. You will notice I referred to those fighting against and sacrifice of self as 'Saints', not those who just agree it's a good idea.
Yes, many left-wing ideas are perceived as popular with the public (as shown within polls etc.) until it comes to actually voting for them to be put in practice. Don't let's kid ourselves, a large proportion of the public are a little bit Tory in their souls, that's where the 'denial on a stack of bibles comes in'.
Blair got into power because he convinced a lot of the 'silent majority'/ the 'little bit' Tories, that the country was safe in his hands, but to do that he had to jettison some 90% of socialist ideas for change, and support for the NHS was probably his biggest Socialist win, but after three elections I doubt he really convinced many, and Brown certainly didn't.
Until Labour addresses the fact that there are very few true socialists out there, they are always pushing a snowball up a mountain... and no it isn't all the fault of the rightwing press, who of course do 'play to the crowd.'
Quite right.
The New Labour project headed by the bright young Tony Blair was hugely successful primarily because he/they were able to appeal to an aspirational center ground. They were able to distance themselves to a degree from the less fashionable Old Labour.
The corrolerey to that was the popularity Boris Johnson was able to win so many votes not primarily because he was a Conservative.
But because he was able to tap into what the majority of the public were looking for. Someone different and as a result it became hugely fashionable to vote Tory.
But now we have 2 'grey' leaders.
Liz Truss who is never going to appeal to those who loved Boris.
And Starmer who is never going to become someone who would be fashionable to vote for.
Labour may well win the next election somewhat by default.
But had they a more charismatic leader, they would definitely win it by appealing to the same sector of the electorate that Blair did.
The centre ground against Truss right wing.
She did say she was the continuity candidate
They're still at it...
Kwarteng accused of bid to avoid scrutiny of £30bn tax cut package
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/18/kwasi-kwarteng-tax-cut-budget-scrutiny-chancellor
Kwarteng accused of bid to avoid scrutiny of £30bn tax cut package
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/18/kwasi-kwarteng-tax-cut-budget-scrutiny-chancellor
I think Labour will still struggle to overturn the current massive Tory majority, especially if the SNP still hold sway in Scotland. A lot depends on how bad things get with the energy rise and inflation generally, if come the next GE we are still somewhat 'in the trenches' with Energy/inflation and worse still the 'net zero' figure is moving further and further away, then the Tories may hang on. The public will judge how they are doing now, not what happened under Boris at partygate etc. and if Truss has managed to make a 'fist' of it she may well survive.
Labour needs to now, (well on Tuesday at least) to start preparing for the next GE and to come up with the 'big solutions', things that clearly address the issues of/will change the future, those that are deemed workable, and have been costed, maybe even tested to some degree.
Yes, it's a risk, to 'go early' but also the advantage is Ms Truss and her colleagues will be ankle deep in sorting out inflation/energy capping right now and that may well overwhelm them, certainly keep their noses to the grindstone! Labour needs to open another second, or even third 'front', on the future. At the moment they cannot really do anything about energy/inflation, except either barrack or support the Government, and the tendency will appear to the public as though they are 'flip-flopping' about, (like they did with Brexit). However, they could start thinking about what comes after and building ideas. It will be a long hard road and need Starmer to rule with an iron fist, brook no nonsense from anybody, every member of the party will have a part to play, it will be a bit like ETH's run to land the PL and the CL in the next three seasons!
How is this idiot allowed anywhere near government. He's hellbent on regressing Britain by decades.
Jacob Rees-Mogg’s imperial measurements consultation ‘biased’ after no option given to say no
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/18/metric-system-imperial-measures-consultation-brexit
Jacob Rees-Mogg’s imperial measurements consultation ‘biased’ after no option given to say no
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/18/metric-system-imperial-measures-consultation-brexit
I am sure that Labour has been and will continue to plan for the next election. And has been for some time.
Their policies on the energy crisis has already been copied by the Tories. And that fact is reasonably understood by many people. Liz Truss rejection of further raids on energy company excess profits is not popular with the public at all.
Liz Truss policies are and will be dominated by right wing dogma instead of what is best for the country. And she has nothing of the popularity enjoyed by Boris.
And the election results just before Boris was kicked out show the public are looking for a change.
Yes, and if the GE was next week, they would get a change, but what will be the position in two years' time? The public are by and large quite fickle. Labour needs a long 'run-up' to the next GE, something the Tories will not have, they will be too busy fighting inflation, etc. Labour will not get a better chance to get on the 'front foot' to expound in detail what it wants to do... sure the Tories and the press will take potshots at them, Tories may try to steal some of Labours clothes, but if Starmer/Labour gets the whole package right, come GE day the Labour manifesto will be "an idea whose time has come... and nothing can resist it".
They will stay quiet right until the end and win by default. Starmer will then go back on most of the few promises he makes in the last few months before the election once he's in power anyway. The justice system might get sorted out but he'll do feck all about everything else most likely. Because he's a vapid cnut.
So who would you prefer to be the leader of the Labour Party. Because I am not a huge fan of him.
But one thing I am certain of is that he will make Labour an electable party.
Totally unlike Corbyn who did the polar opposite.
Yes the public are fickle.
Nevertheless, politics is also somewhat cyclic. Eventually they get bored with one party or the other. And then you need to be in a position to in the right place at the right time and appeal to the majority with the right policies.
But I would never wright off the Tory publicity machine or advertising budget.
Why is this anything to do with Corbyn? I'd rather many other Labour party politicians led the party than Starmer. He's a slimy, vapid shit streak. Which makes him better than Liz Truss, Boris, May, Cameron but it's an exceedingly low bar.
Proof will be when he gets elected I suppose but he appears in no way equipped to handle the many crises the country is facing, and may well end up having achieved feck all after 5 years and let the Tories back in.
The reason I mentioned Corbyn was simply because he led the Labour Party prior to Starmer.
Looking at you Bojo.
I’d love for Chris Bryant to be leader, but he’s made it clear that PM isn’t in his ambitions.
- Status