He's not, look at his strategy of how to remain in Europe. Unless he literally only cared about sabotaging his own party (possible but you'd like to think it wasn't that) then it was a blundering, tone deaf, hopeless strategy. Either way, if he's a master strategist baddie or a blundering clown, I'm not particularly hopeful.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
He's not, look at his strategy of how to remain in Europe. Unless he literally only cared about sabotaging his own party (possible but you'd like to think it wasn't that) then it was a blundering, tone deaf, hopeless strategy. Either way, if he's a master strategist baddie or a blundering clown, I'm not particularly hopeful.
So all the things he has said so far, like his fantasy and frankly daft 5 point mission plan, his clear misunderstanding of how the EU works, that he won't be considering rejoining the EU, that he won't be spending any money on anything because the country's broke or his immigration stance and so many other things he has said - should they all be ignored? I've got no skin in the game and he's annoying me considerably.
If he were a Tory leader hopeful he'd be ridiculed by the same ardent defenders of his, yet we're led to believe a Starmer led Labour government is precisely the vehicle that would guide Britain to a much needed clean break from the last 13 years of squalor.
What, in your view, is Working Class? Cause it sure as shit isn’t what it used to be.
As an example the Tories seem to think Working Class is ‘pie n peas eating racist’…
Starmer, by contrast, is the son of a nurse and a tool maker, went to a state school (that became private during his time there) and went to Leeds University before entering the law.
To say he doesn’t know what it means is just plain daft.
Using what Starmer parents did and his education instead of his current job is imo a big fault of how British people view class
He is a knighted sir, a former lawyer and now running to be PM. Starmer is a upper class state bureaucrat.
The actual question is a difficult one to answer but impossible for Starmer as his views on class are based on cultural signifiers(Stereotypical white nuclear family). This is reflected in his policy which is to give poor kids elocution lessons rather than class power e.g better working rights. Plus Starmer right wing schtick is that he can win over not fast food delivery workers but small business owners and retired homeowners who normally vote Tory.
The guy was wanking over Thatcher a few weeks back. She was the ultimate alien queen of the petite bourgeoisie(“Nations of shopkeepers”).
Labour backs away from press reforms after Prince Harry’s phone-hacking court victory
The party has made it clear that Keir Starmer had no intention of reviving the second stage of the Leveson inquiry
The Labour party has backed away from plans to impose new controls on the press in a move likely to spark fierce controversy inside the party after Prince Harry’s landmark victory in his phone-hacking case against the Daily Mirror.
Party sources made clear on Saturday that Keir Starmer was not intending to revive a second stage of the Leveson inquiry into press standards – abandoned by the Tories in 2018 – nor would Labour oppose current Conservative plans to weaken the press regulation regime in the media bill now going through parliament.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...orms-after-prince-harry-phone-hacking-victory
The party has made it clear that Keir Starmer had no intention of reviving the second stage of the Leveson inquiry
The Labour party has backed away from plans to impose new controls on the press in a move likely to spark fierce controversy inside the party after Prince Harry’s landmark victory in his phone-hacking case against the Daily Mirror.
Party sources made clear on Saturday that Keir Starmer was not intending to revive a second stage of the Leveson inquiry into press standards – abandoned by the Tories in 2018 – nor would Labour oppose current Conservative plans to weaken the press regulation regime in the media bill now going through parliament.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...orms-after-prince-harry-phone-hacking-victory
I genuinely have no idea what the point in this Labour party is. Tories with less corruption and that’s about it?
Another of Murdoch's bitches as PM.
That’s an absolute BS argument to make - suggesting that someone’s current status invalidates their upbringing! What a crock!
Carole Vorderman for example grew up in abject poverty - you telling me she has no idea what working class is?
You’ve also given the game away with your last bit as, whilst all of the headlines suggest Starmer was ‘wanking over’ Thatcher, what he actually said was that she had a transformative impact on the country, which is simply undeniable.
Their current status is far more important than their upbringing. What type of Christmas presents Starmer got growing up isn’t as important as his yearly £86,000 salary. This seems very obvious.
Britain can be a strange place where people argue what makes someone working class isn’t their current job but the former jobs of their parents.
She went to Cambridge and has a net worth of apparently £18 million. Jim working class Ratcliff -
This is a bad understanding of class. It’s a cultural and nostalgic view of class. Carole Vorderman hasn’t been poor since maybe the 80’s. So yes it’s likely the woman who was in Tory HQ during the 2010 election has very little idea about working class people.
“Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism."
Last edited:
Their current status is far more important than their upbringing. What type of Christmas presents Starmer got growing up isn’t as important as his yearly £86,000 salary. This seems very obvious.
Britain can be a strange place where people argue what makes someone working class isn’t their current job but the former jobs of their parents.
She went to Cambridge and has a net worth of apparently £18 million. Jim working class Ratcliff -
This is a bad understanding of class. It’s a cultural and nostalgic view of class. Carole Vorderman hasn’t been poor since maybe the 80’s. So yes it’s likely the woman who was in Tory HQ during the 2010 election has very little idea about working class people.
“Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism."
I’m sorry but that’s just laughable! To say that someone’s upbringing doesn’t have an impact on their knowledge of situations is asinine at best and pig ignorant at worst. Yes people who grew up in abject poverty who are now worth millions CAN be snobbish pricks, but in their minds they have far more awareness of the realities of ‘working class life’ than a Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees-Mogg ever could.
All you need to do is look at Vorderman’s activism recently to see how people can make mistakes and shouldn’t be tarred by binary mentality.
I suppose by your logic the upbringing of the homeless, or those with severe mental health issues isn’t as important to their present situation as the fact that ‘they’re just feckless workshy layabouts’?
All we are is the sum of our actions so rendering upbringing / formative memories (hint: there’s a reason childhood is called your formative years) as being irrelevant simply turns people into 2D caricatures of themselves.
We are just going to go around in circles so my last post on this - Someone upbringing can have a impact but their actual current status/job is far more important. You say Starmer knows what the working class is(despite the video evidence saying otherwise)because he is the son of a nurse and a tool maker(Keir being the obvious example)
But when it’s pointed to you that Starmer current £80,000+ salary job is more important it’s suddenly laughable. Your using my argument for Kier mum and dad but not him. Like wtf.
I haven’t mentioned the homeless or mentally ill people. So I’m sure whats going on here but you seem to see someone class position as a form of DNA that is handed down from people parents or a medical condition. Imo class is the social relations to the capitalist mode of production.
Once a Tory always a Tory. Look if every time a rich person does something in their class interests(Like supporting austerity) you see it as a mistake but view some mild philanthropy as learned knowledge from when they were in nappies then this conversation isn’t going anywhere.
Exactly which is why Starmer actions when on £86,000 a year is far more telling than the actions of his mum as a nurse in the 60’s. If your argument is Jim Ratcliff view of the world is more informed by his childhood in a Lancashire council house than the decades he’s lived as Britain richest man then well I’ve got nothing.
Last edited:
With those bold parts you’re clearly not being a good faith contributor.
Vorderman is actively campaigning for tactical voting to get every possible Tory out of their seats. People are allowed to have room to grow and change their mind and opinions - it’s actually the mark of a mature person that you don’t live continuously by the same binary mindset.
Nice get out!
From David Cameron Tory Party to Kier Starmer Labour is hardly a mind blowing shift(Says more about the current Labour Party than anything else).
Going from Richard Whiteley to Nick Hewer was probably a better leap.
In my opinion Starmer is working class his children won't be though.
If you grew up on a council estate to parents with modest means you can talk with authority on knowing what the working class experience is regardless of your current income and wealth level.
The question you have to answer here is what do you call yourself left wing for?
If it isn't to spread the opportunities of making a decent life for yourself then what do you want?
If social mobility is a good thing, then that only happens if someone like Starmer takes their opportunity and makes it to PM. Otherwise its David Cameron or Boris Johnson or the likes of JRM.
So having opened up society and spread the opportunities away from the privileged few we want what to happen? For the working class people to fail so they can stay in their place because if they succeed we hate on them for making it and deny their background makes any difference.
In which case, if there is no difference and background counts for nothing, then what drives the desire to change things in the first place?
If it isn't to spread the opportunities of making a decent life for yourself then what do you want?
If social mobility is a good thing, then that only happens if someone like Starmer takes their opportunity and makes it to PM. Otherwise its David Cameron or Boris Johnson or the likes of JRM.
So having opened up society and spread the opportunities away from the privileged few we want what to happen? For the working class people to fail so they can stay in their place because if they succeed we hate on them for making it and deny their background makes any difference.
In which case, if there is no difference and background counts for nothing, then what drives the desire to change things in the first place?
Thought that guy was delusional about what an average income is. Just because he earns a tonne of money doesn't mean he didn't have a working class upbringing if he did...
I remember reading an article saying the guys dad was a mechanic. Which if going by the logic in this thread means the £80,000 a year question time man is working class and has the authority to talk about working class issues. But his kids won’t be working class.
Tbf you’ve got me. I do care about policies.
Also I wasn’t arguing Corbyn was working class. In the posts you quote I used his MP salary as a example of why he wasn’t working class(I’m making the same point with Starmer).
Last edited:
So Jez can't talk about working class issues because he is on more than the QT audience guy and came from a middleclass family?
Two strikes against on the sweet square working class scale.
If you never had to bathe in a tin bath in front of a coal fire or had to go outside to the toilet for a crap in winter like me then you are middleclass I recon.
Two strikes against on the sweet square working class scale.
If you never had to bathe in a tin bath in front of a coal fire or had to go outside to the toilet for a crap in winter like me then you are middleclass I recon.
As a little kid I'm not sure I minded the bath or the cold too much, it was the spiders in the bog that terrified me.
Unless I’ve missed it I don’t think I’ve said anyone can’t talk about any issues. What I’ve said is someone on say £70,000+ can’t be working class(again if you read the post quoted I use Corbyn income as a reason why he isn’t working class)and probably doesn’t understand the struggles of the poor.
Although tbf Corbyn did tend to vists protests and food banks rather than Rupert Murdoch parties.
Last edited:
Via Fred Talbot.
My mum was terrified of spiders so she would send me and my brothers in to pick them up for her. It was the dark coal cellar that frightened me most.
You implied he couldn't talk with any extra authority because his upbringing doesn't count compared to his salary. I'd say he was ill informed so should be ignored on that basis. He probably does know more about growing up working class than the son of an accountant like Corbyn or Cameron.
Cool so I didn’t say he couldn’t talk on the subject and for the millionth time I’ve never said his upbringing doesn’t count just that his current class position is more important.
As for the part in bold I’ll let the video evidence speak for itself.
Last edited:
So funny reading people writing about their political 'credentials'. Yes, I also grew up in a Coronation Street row of terraced houses and ,yes, actually did have a tin bath in front of a coal fire. We also hade an outside bog, bloody freezing in the winter. We did become 'posh' when I was 6 or 7 and moved to a semi with an inside toilet. It was also a Council house or Social housing as it's called now. I was one of six kids. We all have done well, three went to Grammar school including myself and two to University but not me (it was the 60's man). At no time did we feel like rioting, thieving or abusing people from wealthy backgrounds because we were brought up to respect everyone. It's difficult to have a narrative about any particular politician. Thatcher is hated amongst Labour voters, and some Tories, for her bad handling of the miners strike. The Coal industry was on it's last legs anyway when the dispute happened and imagine it now in this Green World and Global Warming. Oh , and as for Food Banks, they started at the back end of the Tory Government in the 1990's and continued to grow throughout the eleven years of the Blair/Brown era. My own politcal views are, none. They are all a bunch of chancers looking for an easy ride on £72k p.a. and more. There are a few that actually believe in making life better for all people, but not many. There are several clowns operating in Westminster. Diane Abbott sends her kids to private school whilst criticising others for doing that. Jacob Rees-Mogg is in a time warp, Starmer is an automoton reading scripts from his advisers. Rishi is like a Geography Teacher, no Charisma. Still, it could be worse, we could have Biden or Trump FFS.
I think your faith in him is mightily misplaced - which is a shame for the UK to miss such an opportunity to try to at least put some things right.
You've got one chance, if he gets it wrong, which I can't see how he won't - and you're back to where you are for another ten/fifteen years of a repeat of what's been happening.
We shall see - happy Christmas.
Remaining in Europe is certain, remaining in the EU is impossible now (ask Paul the Wolf); the 'milk has been spilled' with Brexit, there is no going back, no returning it to the bottle...but some attempt to 'mop-up' and to signal to the EU we would like to do business in whatever way we can, is a reasonable position for Starmer to take at this stage, especially as polls seem to suggest some people are regretting they voted for Brexit.
Starmer knows a majority of the red wall voters were Brexiteers, at least they voted for leaving; if a significant number of these are now regretting that decision and the Tories 'leveling up' policy is on its way to Rwanda, then it makes perfect sense for him to give a nod towards the EU and recapture these precious votes.
However, with all that's going on now and with whats to come, I cannot see Starmer making a bid to re-entry the EU (or any other party for that matter) a priority, but he will try to do business on whatever level he can.
That's what I mean by him not understanding how the EU works. And how him and the country have been brainwashed into thinking there's some kind of menu you can pick from.
He was awful as Corbyn's Brexit secretary from 2016 onwards. I suspect deliberately placed there by Corbyn as a rookie MP and understanding zilch about the EU. His double referendum nonsense and only agreeing to to deal if the UK had the same benefits inside or outside the EU. He still doesn't understand. The Uk is outside the SM and the Customs Union. He doesn't understand what that means.
The Uk are not getting back in any time soon, but they're wasting ten or fifteen years before starting to edge back to what will be inevitable, eventually. He wants the highest sustainable growth in the G7. How is this possible? It's going to get much worse when the grace periods end.
Him not understanding, and his position as Corbyn's Brexit secretary was perhaps a case of Starmer using the old Nelson 'blind eye' to the telescope tactic.
You are quite right the UK will not be getting back into the EU soon, or indeed for the forseeable future, and alternatives will have to be found to try to improve the economy.
The world position in terms of politics and economics will change widely in the coming half century. New alliances are being formed, China, and if Russia can get out from under Putin's grave mistake of invading Ukraine, both will form a future power block, based on, or linked to, other interests in the middle east and southern hemisphere and the changes which are being touted at the moment. This emergence of a counterbalance to the west, will challenge the liberal politics of the Western Democracies and the influence of the 'mighty dollar'.
Add to that climate change pressures and emerging technologies such as AI, etc. the world will be a different place and the heavyweight consuming countries in mainland Europe will have to pay a high price.
Hence being a small collection of islands, to the north west of mainland Europe, and avoiding the worst of rising sea levels, might not be a bad place to be in 2050!!
All countries do most of their trade with the countries nearest to them. The Pacific CPTTP is a white elephant, there's no trade deal with the USA - if there was it would be for the benefit of the USA, not the UK.
It will become more obvious in the next few years.
Being on low altitude islands with rising sea levels is not going to be an advantage. Of course the UK is moving to the Pacific, is it not?
All countries trade with the countries nearest to them. The Pacific CPTTP is a white elephant, there's no trade deal with the USA - if there was it would be for the benefit of the USA, not the UK.
It will become more obvious in the next few years.
Being on low altitude islands with rising sea levels is not going to be an advantage. Of course the UK is moving to the Pacific, is it not?
There is no talking you around is there Paul? I think you might just have swiped that telescope from Starmer, but are looking through the wrong end
.All the best, off to the match!
There is no talking you around is there Paul? I think you might just have swiped that telescope from Starmer, but are looking through the wrong end
All the best, off to the match!
I can't deal with Starmer's flights of fancy. He needs to get back to the real world. All the best!
He was the shadow Brexit Minister or whatever it was called...you don't have to cast your mind back that long to remember his 2nd referendum ploy.