Excellent article. I think 'we' are going to have to learn this lesson the hard way though, it's hard to see how Jeremy is going to go from the current situation.
If you read the whole thing (and the link to the actual report I posted a page or so ago), it's quite clear that many were long time Labour voters. A hell of a lot of seats that won't be won unless they're voting Labour.
Whilst I don't disagree with the analysis of how Labour has lost touch with large swathes of Northern and working class England, I've no idea what the author of the Medium piece (or Cruddas) would advocate as solutions.
So the public thought Labour wasn't 'austere' enough, wasn't sufficiently anti-immigration, wasn't sufficiently anti-Europe or anti-welfare. And the solution is? A Labour that promises to cut immigration to the tens of thousands? A Labour that promises to attack the welfare bill (without attacking pensions/working tax credits/child benefit, because the voters don't want that, even though they make up the majority of the welfare budget)? A Labour that opposes EU membership even though it is areas that are most in favour of Leaving that will be hit hardest financially by actually doing so? A Labour that promises to achieve a spending surplus by cutting public investment?
The problem the Left has in the UK is that its largest "left-wing" party has been a broad coalition between the self-interest of the working classes, socialists, and liberal social-democrats. And the first of these three groups is the party's true foundation (one need look no further than the name). But this is not, and has never been, an ardently left-wing social group. It is a group fighting for the self-interest of working people. This has often coincided with leftist policies and beliefs, but the two are not identical.
Over the last 20 years Labour has let itself drift out of touch with working people. New Labour must bear a huge amount of the blame for this.
Since the 2008 crash the working classes have felt the draw of right wing populism. Anti-immigration. Anti-welfare.
And this is the crux of the problem. A social group of people who were never traditionally left-wing have become intoxicated with right-wing populism. Labour, under New Labour, allowed itself to drift out of touch with these voters; they no longer see Labour as a party that speaks for them. Now, when Labour tries to speak to these voters they are not listening. It cannot convince them of the merits of immigration. It cannot persuade them to remain in the EU.
I honestly do not know what the solution is. I don't think there is one. Even if Labour had fought the last election on a manifesto that was very strongly anti-immigration/anti-welfare I'm note sure these voters would have believed it. I suspect it would just have been seen as another duplicitous strategy from a political elite.
And finally this line irritated me:
"Simply repeating that freedom of movement is “generally good thing” and “migration is a plus to our economy”, is patronising and paternalistic towards socially conservative voters."
OK. Really useful contribution. Simply repeating "Immigration is a valid concern" is unctuous and slavish towards socially conservative voters. Lets just ignore the facts, I guess. Tell people what they want to hear.
I feel like you're getting close to how exasperated I got last year.