next labour leader

Kaos said:
Blair was centre-right.
Click to expand...


The Blair government was the closest we have come to fascism in our modern history, there was very little centre right about it.

If you take into account the 1000's of new laws, erosion of civil liberties, anti privacy regulation used to protect us from "enemies of the state", mass public sector employment, government dependence for large parts of the population, demonisation of the wealthy, of capitalism, warmongering, huge public spending programs, and so on and so on.

You have the very definition of social nationalism.

If labour elect Corbyn, you will have a blatant fascist in charge of the party.
 
soap said:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/test

Shoukd give a rough idea even if its not perfect by any means.
Click to expand...

chart


Close to Ghandi, I'll take that. My colleague was close to Stalin.
 
11101 said:
Blair believed in using certain stripped down capitalist policies to achieve socialist aims such as big government and socialist welfare policies. He marketed it as centre right to attract middle ground voters, especially in the early days, but he was not centre right in truth.

Where you view him from largely dictates what you thought he was, though.
Click to expand...

He abandoned Clause IV, embraced Neocon foreign policy, eroded civil liberties and even had John Major claim Blair was more right wing than him.

You don't become Murdoch's goldenboy by being left of centre-right.
 
Ducklegs said:
The Blair government was the closest we have come to fascism in our modern history, there was very little centre right about it.

If you take into account the 1000's of new laws, erosion of civil liberties, anti privacy regulation used to protect us from "enemies of the state", mass public sector employment, government dependence for large parts of the population, demonisation of the wealthy, of capitalism, warmongering, huge public spending programs, and so on and so on.

You have the very definition of social nationalism.

If labour elect Corbyn, you will have a blatant fascist in charge of the party.
Click to expand...

On what planet is Corbyn a fascist?

Fascism today is buried within the idea of corporatism, something Corbyn is vehemently against. He's been called many things but the most bizarre label for him I've heard now is 'fascist'.
 
Kaos said:
On what planet is Corbyn a fascist?

Fascism today is buried within the idea of corporatism, something Corbyn is vehemently against. He's been called many things but the most bizarre label for him I've heard now is 'fascist'.
Click to expand...

By what fascism actually is:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

People tend to confuse fascism with right wing extremism, which is entirely incorrect

Corbyn, economically is entirely facist, he seeks state control of large industry, heavy regulation, social equality through state intervention and regulation and pretty much fits entirely the definition of the word.
 
Ducklegs said:
By what fascism actually is:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

People tend to confuse fascism with right wing extremism, which is entirely incorrect

Corbyn, economically is entirely facist, he seeks state control of large industry, heavy regulation, social equality through state intervention and regulation and pretty much fits entirely the definition of the word.
Click to expand...

Nice troll attempt.
 
Kaos said:
He abandoned Clause IV, embraced Neocon foreign policy, eroded civil liberties and even had John Major claim Blair was more right wing than him.

You don't become Murdoch's goldenboy by being left of centre-right.
Click to expand...

Because you, obviously looking from the left, disagree with a handful of his policies it doesn't make him right wing. He himself has always said he is centre left.
 
Ducklegs said:
If labour elect Corbyn, you will have a blatant fascist in charge of the party.
Click to expand...


Ducklegs said:
By what fascism actually is:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

People tend to confuse fascism with right wing extremism, which is entirely incorrect

Corbyn, economically is entirely facist, he seeks state control of large industry, heavy regulation, social equality through state intervention and regulation and pretty much fits entirely the definition of the word.
Click to expand...


Fascism is at its core extreme nationalism and racism, contempt for all that are different and especially those that are weak, and it is characterised by its opposition to socialism and communism....sounds like Corbyn to me.
Interesting that you use definitions from a right-libertarian website, not, like, dictionary definitions or anything.

Given that Atlee came to power so soon after WWII, do you mourn that Britian won the war just to replace German fascism with a home-grown variety?
And, isn't it tragic that FDR, Atlee, and Stalin never realised how much fascism they had in common with Hitler, leaving Churchill alone to defend the free world?
 
berbatrick said:
Fascism is at its core extreme nationalism and racism, contempt for all that are different and especially those that are weak, and it is characterised by its opposition to socialism and communism....sounds like Corbyn to me.
Interesting that you use definitions from a right-libertarian website, not, like, dictionary definitions or anything.

Given that Atlee came to power so soon after WWII, do you mourn that Britian won the war just to replace German fascism with a home-grown variety?
And, isn't it tragic that FDR, Atlee, and Stalin never realised how much fascism they had in common with Hitler, leaving Churchill alone to defend the free world?
Click to expand...

Atlee was a nationalist and saw Britain as 'a great power or nothing' and was pro nuclear armament. It was obviously a very different time but his government also imposed austerity. There is an interesting article the New Statesman by John Bew who is completing a biography on him. Interestingly the Labour left of his day actually tried to oust him from the party in 1939. Bew concludes that 'Corbynism is a retreat into the self-indulgent posturing that Atlee detested' and that 'Corbyn would have been his last choice'.
 
Red Dreams said:
Labour lost because they offered Tory light.

Labour needs to go back to its roots...and they will. Corbyn will be the first step.
Click to expand...

Only the Labour left believe that. Everyone else understands that Ed was perceived as too left wing, too anti business and not trusted with the nation's economy.

Of course the Tories are rubbing their hands and finishing laughing their bollocks off. Here they preside over one of the best performing economies in a recession hit Europe and have just posted a very encouraging fiscal report and along comes ol Jezza to tell everyone 'no, you are doing it all wrong actually'!

Great strategy.
 
If corbyn wins I don't think he will make it to the election if the polls tank.

Infact whoever wins now won't make it to the election if Dan jarvis or somebody else that Mondeo man or 3 series man or a class woman or wh(ichever car moniker the spin doctors are using) are more likely to vote for chucks their hat in the ring
 
Last edited:
Classical Mechanic said:
Atlee was a nationalist and saw Britain as 'a great power or nothing' and was pro nuclear armament.
Click to expand...

Interesting. All that I know of Atlee is this: he started ending the British empire (as an Indian this is the reason the 1945 election is in our textbooks) , he and his ministers set up the welfare state including the NHS, and he entered the Korean war against his own left wing.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Only the Labour left believe that. Everyone else understands that Ed was perceived as too left wing, too anti business and not trusted with the nation's economy.

Of course the Tories are rubbing their hands and finishing laughing their bollocks off. Here they preside over one of the best performing economies in a recession hit Europe and have just posted a very encouraging fiscal report and along comes ol Jezza to tell everyone 'no, you are doing it all wrong actually'!

Great strategy.
Click to expand...

False.

Unless by 'everyone else' you mean neoliberal pundits and Tories.

Here is what the country thinks:

YouGov:

Here are some reasons that different people have put forward for Labour losing the recent General Election. Which two or three do you think were the most important reasons? (Please select up to three.)

Ed Miliband was not good enough as party leader 47
Labour lost touch with its working class roots 28
Labour did not provide a clear enough alternative to the austerity policies of the coalition 27
Labour failed to admit its mistakes in the run up to the banking crisis and recession 26
Labour was not tough enough on immigration and welfare spending 26
Labour did not have a plausible policy for reducing the government’s deficit 22
Labour failed to answer the charge that a minority Labour government would be propped up by the Scottish nationalists 22
Labour failed to defend effectively the good things it did in government before 2010 18
Labour’s leadership had become stuck in the past, and failed to adjust to the modern world 10
Labour’s policies were too left-wing 7
Not sure 11
 
Crono said:
False.

Unless by 'everyone else' you mean neoliberal pundits and Tories.

Here is what the country thinks:

YouGov:

Here are some reasons that different people have put forward for Labour losing the recent General Election. Which two or three do you think were the most important reasons? (Please select up to three.)

Ed Miliband was not good enough as party leader 47
Labour lost touch with its working class roots 28
Labour did not provide a clear enough alternative to the austerity policies of the coalition 27
Labour failed to admit its mistakes in the run up to the banking crisis and recession 26
Labour was not tough enough on immigration and welfare spending 26
Labour did not have a plausible policy for reducing the government’s deficit 22
Labour failed to answer the charge that a minority Labour government would be propped up by the Scottish nationalists 22
Labour failed to defend effectively the good things it did in government before 2010 18
Labour’s leadership had become stuck in the past, and failed to adjust to the modern world 10
Labour’s policies were too left-wing 7
Not sure 11
Click to expand...

Really condescending, though I could accused of the same at times. But it is kind of a flawed poll don't you think? The first and most selected option could be inspired by one or any combinations of all other options.

Also kind of ironic a Labour supporter quoting polls after what happened in the election.
 
Ducklegs said:
The Blair government was the closest we have come to fascism in our modern history, there was very little centre right about it.

If you take into account the 1000's of new laws, erosion of civil liberties, anti privacy regulation used to protect us from "enemies of the state", mass public sector employment, government dependence for large parts of the population, demonisation of the wealthy, of capitalism, warmongering, huge public spending programs, and so on and so on.

You have the very definition of social nationalism.

If labour elect Corbyn, you will have a blatant fascist in charge of the party.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Do you write for the Daily Mail, per chance?
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Really condescending, though I could accused of the same at times. But it is kind of a flawed poll don't you think? The first and most selected option could be inspired by one or any combinations of all other options.

Also kind of ironic a Labour supporter quoting polls after what happened in the election.
Click to expand...
:lol:

What, you think the election disproved statistical surveying?

Whatever flaw you think you've spotted in the poll certainly can't explain why the one reason you confidently thought everyone in the country agreed upon as to why Labour lost ended up as the very least popular answer of all, even though you could select up to 3 reasons. Stop talking shit.
 
Crono said:
:lol:

What, you think the election disproved statistical surveying?

Whatever flaw you think you've spotted in the poll certainly can't explain why the one reason you confidently thought everyone in the country agreed upon as to why Labour lost ended up as the very least popular answer of all, even though you could select up to 3 reasons. Stop talking shit.
Click to expand...

You and Owen Jones can go around quoting all the surveys that you want. Reality will still give you a kick up the arse in good time.
 
Cheesy said:
:lol:

Do you write for the Daily Mail, per chance?
Click to expand...

Let me guess, Hitler has more in common with Cameron than Corbyn I suppose?

Facism isn't a far right ideology. It's a far left anti capitalism ideology.

It has far more in common with socialist economic ideals than capitalist.

What gets it branded right wing is that it also promotes extreme nationalism and promotion of a single infallible leader.
 
Ducklegs said:
Let me guess, Hitler has more in common with Cameron than Corbyn I suppose?

Facism isn't a far right ideology. It's a far left anti capitalism ideology.

It has far more in common with socialist economic ideals than capitalist.

What gets it branded right wing is that it also promotes extreme nationalism and promotion of a single infallible leader.
Click to expand...

This is what came up for the definition of fascism.

an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
Click to expand...

Being a bit of a socialist, Corbyn's economic policies would undoubtedly be pretty authoritarian: presumably plenty of spending as opposed to austerity, and public services being run by the state. I don't really see much about him socially that makes him a fascist though: from what I'm aware, he's nowhere near as keen on privacy restrictions as Blair was (as you correctly mentioned in your initial post on the matter), or Cameron currently is, with his Snooper's Charter plans.

Calling Corbyn a fascist is a pretty poor way of using the term. For one, it's defined as being a right-wing system of government, and Corbyn himself is pretty far left.
 
Crono said:
False.

Unless by 'everyone else' you mean neoliberal pundits and Tories.

Here is what the country thinks:

YouGov:

Here are some reasons that different people have put forward for Labour losing the recent General Election. Which two or three do you think were the most important reasons? (Please select up to three.)

Ed Miliband was not good enough as party leader 47
Labour lost touch with its working class roots 28
Labour did not provide a clear enough alternative to the austerity policies of the coalition 27
Labour failed to admit its mistakes in the run up to the banking crisis and recession 26
Labour was not tough enough on immigration and welfare spending 26
Labour did not have a plausible policy for reducing the government’s deficit 22
Labour failed to answer the charge that a minority Labour government would be propped up by the Scottish nationalists 22
Labour failed to defend effectively the good things it did in government before 2010 18
Labour’s leadership had become stuck in the past, and failed to adjust to the modern world 10
Labour’s policies were too left-wing 7
Not sure 11
Click to expand...
I saw this poll days and didn't really think it had anything interesting about it, I'm only bothering to post about it now because you seem to have deliberately left out half of it, which in the end basically showed the Labour membership had a vastly distorted view of what went wrong compared to that of the general public and even ordinary Labour voters.
 
Ubik said:
I saw this poll days and didn't really think it had anything interesting about it, I'm only bothering to post about it now because you seem to have deliberately left out half of it, which in the end basically showed the Labour membership had a vastly distorted view of what went wrong compared to that of the general public and even ordinary Labour voters.
Click to expand...

You seem to be throwing around stupid accusations because you don't like where my arguments are coming from.

This is the poll I quoted from:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...4iec6t/TimesLabourSurvey_Results_150720_W.pdf

As you can see this was the only question on it, and the only data I've left out is the breakdown by party affiliation/gender/age and so on. The numbers correspond only to the general public, and there is no information about the Labour membership's views anywhere on it.
 
Crono said:
You seem to be throwing around stupid accusations because you don't like where my arguments are coming from.

This is the poll I quoted from:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...4iec6t/TimesLabourSurvey_Results_150720_W.pdf

As you can see this was the only question on it, and the only data I've left out is the breakdown by party affiliation/gender/age and so on. The numbers correspond only to the general public, and there is no information about the Labour membership's views anywhere on it.
Click to expand...

Was the question about Labour being anti-business not included because no-one thought it important? Or was the question just not asked?

This study (undertaken in 5 marginal target seats, all of which Labour lost, and talking to 5 sets of voters who all voted Labour in 2010 but switched in 2015) suggests the following. (from page 3)

As well as having a weak leader, Labour appeared to them to be anti-business and against those who were making something of their lives. Labour wanted to tax successful people more and, it was said, only cared about people at the bottom end. There was nothing wrong with Labour talking about minimum wage, food banks and zero hours (although some worried that this agenda would hit small businesses). But it was wrong that Labour talked about nothing else that affected the lives of these (now former-) Labour voters.
Click to expand...
 
bishblaize said:
Was the question about Labour being anti-business not included because no-one thought it important? Or was the question just not asked?

This study (undertaken in 5 marginal target seats, all of which Labour lost, and talking to 5 sets of voters who all voted Labour in 2010 but switched in 2015) suggests the following. (from page 3)
Click to expand...

I don't know what the polling methodology was, maybe you can find more information about it through YouGov. I would guess that the question was not put separately as "anti-business" because "too left-wing" covered "anti-business" and more.

As for that study into voters lost to the Tories, the conclusions are totally unsurprising. Greedy immigrants, benefits lifestyle, bloody unions, and this beauty:

These voters believed that the financial crash was largely caused by Labour’s over-borrowing and over-spending. Even those who recognised it was a global event and that the banks were to blame thought Labour’s overspending contributed.
Click to expand...

Of course the Labour Party should be speaking to these people but the likes of Kendall, Cooper, Burnham & Umunna think they should be humouring them that the sky is indeed orange. Democracy doesn't work by changing your ideas to fit the delusions of ignorant voters but by taking a principled position and educating and persuading voters over to your side.
 
Crono said:
You seem to be throwing around stupid accusations because you don't like where my arguments are coming from.

This is the poll I quoted from:

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...4iec6t/TimesLabourSurvey_Results_150720_W.pdf

As you can see this was the only question on it, and the only data I've left out is the breakdown by party affiliation/gender/age and so on. The numbers correspond only to the general public, and there is no information about the Labour membership's views anywhere on it.
Click to expand...
CKlE5LdWUAA6tm-.jpg

From the Times print version.

As you can see, the membership are out of line with even general Labour voters on a good number of issues from this evidence.
 
Ubik said:
CKlE5LdWUAA6tm-.jpg

From the Times print version.

As you can see, the membership are out of line with even general Labour voters on a good number of issues from this evidence.
Click to expand...
Indeed... They will vote in the leader they want not the leader that can win
Bit like the conservatives with haigue, Howard, ids.
If I remember rightly Cameron at the time was seen as quite a bold choice by the conservatives (hug a hoodie etc)... But they picked somebody they thought would be able to appeal to target voters... A lesson I think it may take labour a huge walloping in the next election to learn
 
Last edited:
Ubik said:
CKlE5LdWUAA6tm-.jpg

From the Times print version.

As you can see, the membership are out of line with even general Labour voters on a good number of issues from this evidence.
Click to expand...

Fine; though you can see I deliberately left out nothing as I was quoting from a different presentation of the same poll (strangely there are 712 more people in the sample size on mine, don't know what that's about).

All this is rather beside the point of what I was arguing with this though isn't it? The establishment wisdom echoed by @Classical Mechanic that is absolutely certain that Labour lost because they were too left-wing is based on very flimsy evidence at best.
 
Ubik said:
As you can see, the membership are out of line with even general Labour voters on a good number of issues from this evidence.
Click to expand...

All that points to is that the Tory narrative of a fiscally irresponsible New Labour worked and they were seen as unelectable.

If the election had been fought on an honest debate of left/right policies then you could draw the conclusion that the party is too left. However, Labor never challenged the rights narrative and were incompetent at positioning any of its own policies you'd call leftist. They offered austerity lite in an odd defensive campaign with a few redistribution policies thrown in, it was certainly not a left leaning campaign. It's exactly what all but Corbyn will do again, and they'll lose.

One thigs for sure, If Corbyn doesn't win now then Labour are already fighting from a losing position as they'll have pissed off a lot of voters and killed the early campaign momentum.
 
Last edited:
Alan Johnson is the latest to issue a warning about Corbyn, they really are sinking to very low levels to discredit him. It does the party no good.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-madness-over-jeremy-corbyn-says-alan-johnson

In his article, Johnson writes: “Jeremy’s ... been cheerfully disloyal to every Labour leader he’s ever served under. That’s fine so long as members understand that it’s the loyalty and discipline of the rest of us that created the NHS, the Open University.”
Click to expand...
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
Alan Johnson is the latest to issue a warning about Corbyn, they really are sinking to very low levels to discredit him. It does the party no good.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-madness-over-jeremy-corbyn-says-alan-johnson
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with what Johnson's said there. Corbyn's a rebel and has always been happy about that. The point Johnson is making is that you can't really act like that as a backbencher for 30 years and then expect to manage a shadow cabinet and party under collective responsibility. It will be chaos. Just the truth I'm afraid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.