The sign of a man who is terrified of some of his own MPs.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
The sign of a man who is terrified of some of his own MPs.
Agree but tbh thats the most hopeful answer, the alternative is that Starmer is just transphobic(Which wouldn't be that surprising given his politics).
I do wonder whether our resident centrists believe in these kind of positions personally.
The hard left constantly do the Tories leg work by convincing enough people there "isn't any difference " between the two parties to the point of assuring, perpetually, Conservative administrations.
Socialism really isn't deciding an imperfect Labour party might as well be in opposition forever. Failure to recognise achievements of past Labour govts, driving apathy towards change by the whole 'they're all the same' narrative and sitting back and somehow thinking 13 years of Tory rule isn't on you.
"There's no real alternative". Peddling this may well be a paid role funded by Tory HQ. It's hilarious to see people pedal these lines thinking they're doing anything other than keeping them in power.
If you can't tell the difference between an imperfect Labour govt and Tory rule then at least acknowledge the privilege that you have and get out of the way and give working folk a break.
Socialism really isn't deciding an imperfect Labour party might as well be in opposition forever. Failure to recognise achievements of past Labour govts, driving apathy towards change by the whole 'they're all the same' narrative and sitting back and somehow thinking 13 years of Tory rule isn't on you.
"There's no real alternative". Peddling this may well be a paid role funded by Tory HQ. It's hilarious to see people pedal these lines thinking they're doing anything other than keeping them in power.
If you can't tell the difference between an imperfect Labour govt and Tory rule then at least acknowledge the privilege that you have and get out of the way and give working folk a break.
Last edited:
Labour are doing a pretty bad job of convincing they've got anything to offer to be honest.
I'm not hard left, but I won't be voting for them based on their remarks on immigration and trans rights. They don't want inclusion, then feck em.
Define the hard left? Anyone not wanting to criminalise refugees or asylum seekers? Anyone criticising the Rwanda policy?
It would help if "isn't much difference" wasn't literally the current Labour leaderships strategy. They can't have their cake and eat it.
Some tell us it is a clever strategy to look similar to the Tories to win votes. Now you are saying there is a significant difference. Which one is it?
Which is fine. Its your right. There's nothing wrong with not voting Labour or voting Tory.
What gets me are people who claim to hate the Tory govt yet will rather see them continuing in office because the Labour Party are imperfect.
Vote who you want to vote for but the time for recognising the the above has always indirectly hugely increased the likelihood of a Conservative administration has long passed.
"I'm left wing but I work to keep the Tories in power by driving political apathy that most benefits them" really isn't called out enough.
There are too many who think they're on the left who are far too comfortable helping the Tories stay in power who really need to stop getting a free pass
"No real difference . Why bother voting? They're all the same" quickly turns into pretend outrage at inhumane policies implemented by a party they couldn't be less interested in voting out.
Hate the Tories, yet hate seeing them out of office more. You can tell the people for whom politics is a theoretical game to play online as opposed to those to actually suffer with the Tories in power.
Modern 'socialism' for far too many, particularly in the modern age, is the full time dedication to convince enough people that voting the Tories out of office is an endeavour not worth undertaking.
Ironic really
Last edited:
Labour should be the alternative to the Tories, not the warm up act. The amount of cnuty things Starmer has said and done, in the name of his Labour Party, is the reason why I won't be voting for them at the next election. Referring to people who are uncomfortable with the direction of the Labour Party since Starmer came to power 'hard left' is just nonsense.
I've said it before, but it's the people who think this guy is going to become a friend of the working class if/when he becomes PM that are deluded. He's shown you who he is. Believe him.
I've said it before, but it's the people who think this guy is going to become a friend of the working class if/when he becomes PM that are deluded. He's shown you who he is. Believe him.
Well, you have just increased the chance for the Tories to win the next election.
The horrid hard left goes all the way up to one right step away from scuffing up a Tory jackboot. Look carefully at that slither between, and you might just find a Kier Starmer hole shaped hole where you may insert your ballot paper.
People have their default parties they've supported historically and will generally just vote for them come election time. If a voter doesn't like how their party is behaving etc then they probably just won't vote in the next election rather than switch to voting something else. This massively benefits the Tories in an FPTP system.
The only time you get people switching en masse is when there is either a charismatic leader fronting the party who appeals to people who don't pay any attention to politics. Or when there are issues (single issues like Brexit for example) that they care about so much that they will change their vote to a party that has a realistic chance of implementing the changes they want.
Kier Starmer isn't offering either of those so will be entirely reliant on default Tory voters not turning up at the polls out of apathy.
Even if Labour do managed to win off the back of Tory fatigue, they are going to have to do something radical or hope the economy booms to retain power the following election once the apathy has subsided. If they lose that one then we're back to another decade or two of Tory rule. Rendering anything they might achieve pointless as it will be quickly undone.
Yeah trying to make me feel guilty for voting with my conscience and regarding issues I think are important won't work. Instead of constantly blaming the people turned away by their attitudes how about holding the party responsible?
Seemingly my point was instantly proven, not one of the centrist lot above have bothered to comment on the issues raised or their personal views. All they have is the same diversionary scare tactic about the hard left and getting the Tories out. May as well just have a copy and paste template at this point.
In the abscene of any criticism it seems less like you think it's a lesser evil and more that you actually side with the daily mail like tropes expressed. Which is fine if that's your politics feel free to own it.
In the abscene of any criticism it seems less like you think it's a lesser evil and more that you actually side with the daily mail like tropes expressed. Which is fine if that's your politics feel free to own it.
What an insane post.
The political choice in this country is basically:
Tory
Slightly less Tory, in order to appeal to Tory voters
But somehow it's the left who are at fault, because we think maybe Labour should do better than "slightly less Tory"
Criticism of a political party or figure because you dislike them or their policies either individually or collectively is always legitimate.
My point is many on the left focuses primarily on encouraging apathy. "There's no difference. Tories in disguise". An apathy that attacks directly the motivation people may have to vote the Tories out of office.
They know encouraging people to be dissuaded from voting against the Tories due to 'they're all the same, why bother voting?' apathy had always been directly beneficial to it Conservative party. The biggest headscrather is why everyone buys their denials that this is what they do.
There came a point where, though it wouldn't be admitted, a Tory govt is seen by many on the vocal far-left as the lesser of two evils.
My point is many on the left focuses primarily on encouraging apathy. "There's no difference. Tories in disguise". An apathy that attacks directly the motivation people may have to vote the Tories out of office.
They know encouraging people to be dissuaded from voting against the Tories due to 'they're all the same, why bother voting?' apathy had always been directly beneficial to it Conservative party. The biggest headscrather is why everyone buys their denials that this is what they do.
There came a point where, though it wouldn't be admitted, a Tory govt is seen by many on the vocal far-left as the lesser of two evils.
Last edited:
You must remember to frame everything as 'revenge for what they did for Jeremy', then it ALL becomes clear
I mean in the most reductive, mathematical sense it will be sort of slightly true that if you're in a seat where Labour can win in the next election and you choose to vote for a different party then you will contribute to Tories getting elected instead. But if you were to vote for say the Greens, or even the Communists or whatever the left wing protest parties call themselves these days you haven't actually wasted your vote. You've effectively voted against the current political system and to shift the Overton window left.
A vote for the Greens will also result in their receiving more party funding from the state as they will likely exceed the threshold for where that applies. A Green vote also inherently signals strength of feeling on the climate which is itself critical to our survival. The climate isn't actually a "left" issue, whatever Murdoch and co want to peddle to you, it's an "I don't want my children to burn to death" issue. Think of it as voting for war, plenty of hard left and hard right governments and everything in between have gone to war.
And in terms of protest actual "hard left" parties, if you want to know what value they have, just look at the protests in France about the retirement age and how the "France Unbowed" MPs have got the brutal French riot police running scared because they're actually able to stick up for the protesters in parliament and give balance to the debate. There is no voice of protesters in Parliament in this country, just various shapes and sizes of apologist for the police, for repression, for the erosion of human rights. Just because the "hard left" can only get elected in this country when the Labour party establishment aren't looking, and even then they're under the thumb of the party whips to a greater or lesser degree, it doesn't mean that's the only way it can be. With PR where the actual spectrum of opinion is represented in Parliament, that's what functioning democracy looks like. Yes, including the fascists, the Communists, the centrists, everybody that you love, hate or are utterly indifferent to.
On the one hand, it's imperative the Tories don't win the next election because they will continue to destroy our democracy and make the country ever poorer and more extremist. But on the other, the restoration of our democracy by Labour by current appearance will be minimal. If you don't want to vote for that does it make you complicit with the Tories? Of course not, both are valid points of view and for both views it's important they are represented.
One thing that even the most narrow minded Starmer fans have to admit, each time the Tories get elected it gets ever clearer how incompetent, cruel, corrupt and malicious they are. You might think with Boris and Truss they hit rock bottom and now's the time to strike, but trust me it can get worse. They're still corrupt, incompetent and evil and that ain't gonna change just because Rishi knows how to fill a piggy bank. He himself isn't all that bright and he's clearly the pick of the bunch.
A vote for the Greens will also result in their receiving more party funding from the state as they will likely exceed the threshold for where that applies. A Green vote also inherently signals strength of feeling on the climate which is itself critical to our survival. The climate isn't actually a "left" issue, whatever Murdoch and co want to peddle to you, it's an "I don't want my children to burn to death" issue. Think of it as voting for war, plenty of hard left and hard right governments and everything in between have gone to war.
And in terms of protest actual "hard left" parties, if you want to know what value they have, just look at the protests in France about the retirement age and how the "France Unbowed" MPs have got the brutal French riot police running scared because they're actually able to stick up for the protesters in parliament and give balance to the debate. There is no voice of protesters in Parliament in this country, just various shapes and sizes of apologist for the police, for repression, for the erosion of human rights. Just because the "hard left" can only get elected in this country when the Labour party establishment aren't looking, and even then they're under the thumb of the party whips to a greater or lesser degree, it doesn't mean that's the only way it can be. With PR where the actual spectrum of opinion is represented in Parliament, that's what functioning democracy looks like. Yes, including the fascists, the Communists, the centrists, everybody that you love, hate or are utterly indifferent to.
On the one hand, it's imperative the Tories don't win the next election because they will continue to destroy our democracy and make the country ever poorer and more extremist. But on the other, the restoration of our democracy by Labour by current appearance will be minimal. If you don't want to vote for that does it make you complicit with the Tories? Of course not, both are valid points of view and for both views it's important they are represented.
One thing that even the most narrow minded Starmer fans have to admit, each time the Tories get elected it gets ever clearer how incompetent, cruel, corrupt and malicious they are. You might think with Boris and Truss they hit rock bottom and now's the time to strike, but trust me it can get worse. They're still corrupt, incompetent and evil and that ain't gonna change just because Rishi knows how to fill a piggy bank. He himself isn't all that bright and he's clearly the pick of the bunch.
Agh, got it!
I quite like Starmer to be honest. At least he seems to have strong integrity, which is more than can be said for current lot in power.
Apparently being able to self-ID on your marriage, birth and death certificates is enough to lose an election.
You're talking about an amorphous left blob here. I would consider myself left of centre, and I'm not encouraging apathy, I'm stating that there are issues that are important to me or I think are the morally right thing to vote for, and Labour do not represent my views on those issues. As a result I will take my vote to a party that represents them as closely as possible at the election.
I expressed this upthread and the response I got was that I'm increasing the chances of a Tory win at the election. If you want to talk about encouraging apathy, that's it right there. Instead of extolling the virtues of the Labour party the response is basically accusing people of handing the Tories power. It's patronising.
Promoting the status quo of only two parties being electable is about as apathy inducing as it gets, especially when you feel that neither of them speak for you.
Labour seem convinced that they'll gain more votes from the Tories than they'll lose from their base by their current approach, that's their choice. If it doesn't work they only have themselves to blame.
Last edited:
Look the far left is deeply unpopular and can't win elections, also if labour doesn't win the next general election it's the fault of the far left!
What engenders political apathy is an environment where anyone who has any level of support for progressive politics of the left has no viable voting option with any chance of forming a Government. It is not the fault of the "vocal far-left" (and I'll ignore this loaded term used) that Labour have chosen this path where they are, undeniably, on many issues very close to the Conservative lines. You also state that criticism of political parties and figures is always acceptable. How is anyone to conduct such criticism of Labour right now without falling foul of your accusation of encouraging apathy?
I found his speech in Stoke yesterday fecking hilarious. He doesn't think a neighbour smoking weed in their garden is 'low level' crime. I am genuinely struggling to think of a lower-level crime. Pathetic stuff. He's dreadful. I'll never be voting for Labour again with this guy in charge. What a plonker.
I used to think this, or like this, until I practically observed that the “far left” will often swallow their pride and vote for a shitty centrist alternative when push comes to shove, whereas shitty centrists will never actually abide by the spirit of “compromise” they insist on others. They are often huge hypocrites who live far more by the idea that if it isn’t exactly what they are comfortable with (basically the prevailing orthodoxy of the last 40 years) they don’t have to vote for it - righteously declaring both sides as bad as each other, (their confected version of ‘all the same’) - far more so than the people they project that accusations of “ideological purity” towards.
You can’t have your own red lines in political compromise, and then criticise others for having theirs. Unless you think of yourself as essentially better than them. Worthy of being able to pick and chose when those worthless people below you should just toe the line.
Political parties have to win voters. It is not the voters fault if they fail to. Both Clinton & Corbyn failed to do this. You either blame the voters or the politicians. But not one in one instance and one in another. Starmer & his team have calculated that they can win without the left. If that works, then what ‘the left’ choose to do with their vote is irrelevant, surely? So why do you care?
It’s also an odd choice to accuse the left of creating apathy, when it’s actually one of the key tenets of Labour’s current strategy, as a lower turn out and much greater apathy amongst voters will benefit them.
The smell of weed under your window is a pathetically NIMBY little England attitude to what constitutes ‘crime’… We’re in a world where even Joe fecking Biden is legalising weed, letting people out of prison and supporting Trans rights, and the ‘progressive’ party in England are still trying to appeal to people whose views on the World haven’t updated in 50 years. How far away from brining back hanging are we?
Last edited:
Not to point fingers, but I can kind of understand their argument. The alienation of Blair/Brown, the selection [and then tolerance] of Corbyn, the terrible stance over brexit, all set the stage for somebody like Starmer to take control. The country is both to the right, and fairly authoritarian. That's just the reality.
Hell people still lambast the peacock woman (forgot her name, short with short hair and a good speaker) over her wheelchairs comments when in reality she's one of the best realistic MP's on the left that we have suitable to govern. Hell, Margaret Beckett gets enough abuse for not being left or woke enough.
So it seems according to some posts I've read in this thread.
Lots of people who couldn't stomach voting for Corbyn continually get accused of letting the Tories in. Not saying it's right, but it's standard currency. You are of course right to vote your conscience, as is anyone.
The maths of it in our FPTP system doesn't allow it to be any other way. Labour's chances of winning require them to turn a shedload of Tory majority seats into Labour majority seats, and the only way they can do that, is get those Tory voters to switch.
Which would make you think it would be sensible for the leadership to back changing the system away from FPTP to help them move the country forward. But that isn't happening.
I think they should too, but I personally think it best done as part much bigger programme of constitutional reform. I hope it is something Labour comes around to, but I can understand why it might not be in the manifesto this time given everything else.
Exactly. We could be having a serious conversation about drugs but we're doing this. It's not just embarrassing, it's letting people down. A politician should be there to challenge people's opinions, raise the level of debate and convince them. What we're seeing from Starmer is pathetic. I know a lot of believers will ignore his I'll-say-anything-for-power approach because the ends justify the means, but mark my words, there won't be a sudden shift once they're in, the re-election campaign begins on day one. Once you start trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator, you'll never come back.
It's not fundamentally the "billionaire controlled media" it's the structural realities of FPTP that make it hard for 3rd parties.
Hopefully when they get in next they are successful enough to push for this in their second term then. But I have my doubts.
You are just making up what the "far left" is now. I doubt you could even define or poi t out who the far left are other than people you disagree with.
You've still not answered my post in reply to you above which demonstrates there is very little difference between the 2 parties in their current guise.
The smell of cannabis is not a severe crime that needs tackling as a priority when we have serious crimes taking place and very few police officers. Been burgled lately? You'll find very little help from the Police. Resources are stretched!
Starmer got elected because he appealed to the left wing of the party and they took him at his word. They now don't believe a word he says because he's shown his true colours. The NEC are deselecting left wing candidates all over the country, often without any input whatsoever from local members. They did it just yesterday in Leicester, in fact. Like Mockney said, he's gambling on winning without needing the support of the left. No doubt he will also blame the left if it all goes tits up.
If Labour’s polling declines to the extent that they are unable to win an outright majority, and they merely become the largest party needing other parties (namely the Lib Dems) to prop them up, I’ll be delighted.
I’m still adamant that a Labour led coalition would be far better than a Labour majority government (which in turn is of course better than any form of Tory / Tory led government). If the Lib Dems hold the balance of power, they can insist on a switch to a form proportional representation (supported by the overwhelming majority of Labour party members), and closer integration with the EU even potentially rejoining the single marker (also supported by the overwhelming majority of Labour party members and an easier sell following Sunak’s Northern Ireland Brexit Windsor Framework’s deal). If Labour played hard ball there, the Lib Dems could set their party leadership against their membership to help drive those conditions through.
I’m still adamant that a Labour led coalition would be far better than a Labour majority government (which in turn is of course better than any form of Tory / Tory led government). If the Lib Dems hold the balance of power, they can insist on a switch to a form proportional representation (supported by the overwhelming majority of Labour party members), and closer integration with the EU even potentially rejoining the single marker (also supported by the overwhelming majority of Labour party members and an easier sell following Sunak’s Northern Ireland Brexit Windsor Framework’s deal). If Labour played hard ball there, the Lib Dems could set their party leadership against their membership to help drive those conditions through.
Last edited: