probably been posted already but worth a repost:
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Accurate.
What exactly does 'woke' mean?
Also why is one group 'obsessed' with identity, but the call to focus on 'the working class' (there's overlap btw) isn't an obsession with identity?
I bet he cannot explain what he means. Just thrown a bunch of words around.
She's spot on
He knows exactly what he means, he's just too pussy to say it with his chest, so he hides behind buzzwords. It's nothing but a dog whistle.
Is she not a he?
She is, yes.
I always thought it meant "aware that certain things are offensive and upsetting to people, so maybe it's worth trying to change our ways" and since the opposite of that would be to say "I refuse to slightly bother myself by making the world a better place for others" the arseholes decided to make it sound like all woke folk are just childish and pompous.
I couldn’t tell you, because my understanding of woke is completely different to whatever generic meaning it has now.
I don’t even think two people have the same definition of it now.
Interesting result. It would be particularly interesting to see where Labour picked up the difference. You'd imagine a lot of the UKIP vote would have gone Tory, and with the Lib Dem vote decreasing, was it a case of Tory voters turning to Labour?
Maybe some people believe this, maybe even you believe it. But it is inaccurate. But maybe that is the point, we live in an age of spin, government lies and disinformation.
"Labour councils in England hit harder by austerity than Tory areas"
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...gland-hit-harder-by-austerity-than-tory-areas
I meant to find some stats myself, thank you.
The fact that @Maticmaker doesn't know this, genuinely I'm sure, isn't just a result of government spin, it's a result of Labour's total failure in bringing it forward. Labour used to be full of people that would have done just that at one time, press or no press.
Eh? How’s that possible?
Some nice confirmation bias in that tweet, but the whole of the council bar that one seat is still Tory.
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/folkestone/news/kcc-election-results-for-folkestone-and-hythe-246841/
Voting patterns across councils could give a more wider data set to predict a general election than one single by-election result in the North East.
Aaah I see, fair enough.
There are a multitude of statistics that show it just isnt true. Wealth inequality hasn't moved that much at all according to government indexes like GINI and disposable income of the top and bottom percentiles.
Gini is based on income not assets. Inequality in assets has massively changed and continues apace.
In the Tees Valley Mayoral election the Tory candidate won with 73% of the vote! This is the poorest area in England. I heard him on the radio yesterday and he's promising freeports for the decrepit ports up there. He also said he thinks we should turn the whole of the UK into a freeport!
I'm guessing he watched Tenet on Sky Cinema then.
Can someone explain how a person in their 20s, just out of uni, probably earning max £20,000 and being skint after rent is not the working-class but "woke metropolitan elites" if they live in a city, whereas someone maybe working a trade in a Northern town, comfortably paying off their mortgage with disposable income is the true working-class?
The fact Labour are repeating this stuff is braindead, you'll never win people round by just adopting the Tories language which is being created to undermine your own politics. Corbyn and his senior politicians were maybe deluded but give me a party with a bit of backbone ahead of this self-deprecating subservient Labour that publicly calls themselves crap in order to appear sensible.
Most of what you've outlined in bold was New Labour rhetoric in the 2000s. Patel's points-based immigration system originated in British politics as a Labour party policy. Blair listed being tough on asylum seekers as his top domestic priority on his re-election in 2001. They banged about it at every opportunity in a misguided attempt to satiate the reactionaries by outflanking the Tories to the right. Guess what, it didn't satiate the reactionaries, you can't satiate people who want unreasonable things for illogical reasons. It just emboldened them, shifted the discourse to the right to make the likes of Farage central figures in the immigration debate and alienated a generation of young voters, all whilst failing to win over the people it was targeted to impress because everyone knew the government had no ability to reduce immigration whilst we were in the EU.
What does a bit of rhetoric hurt? Labour ceding the immigration debate to the far right is one of the biggest reasons the country is in the position it is now. For about 15 years before the Brexit vote the only people consistently arguing the merits of immigration and multiculturalism were the Greens. By the time the referendum came round, after a decade of Labour shouting about controls on immigration, the argument for remaining was already lost.
EDIT: I agree Labour are thick though!
Last edited:
Sorry quoting the guardian, for me at least, doesn't mean its anymore relevant, because just like the Daily Express on the right, it has its own readship on the left to satisfy and its own 'spin' to put on things (lies, dam lies ..and statistics). Yes, of course Labour councils were hit (nominally) the hardest as they tended to be either more profligate, or had greater demand for services, either way it isn't rocket science .
The point is Labour does not even recognise the aspirations of the working class anymore, let alone do anything to attract improvements in the economic well-being of their areas. Except for a few notable Labour stalwarts (mostly of the past) the elitism of Labour leaders, (surfacing mainly in the Blair years) was to lecture their voters, pat them on the head, saying "its OK just vote for us...as you have always done", but all that changed was from intellectual liberalism, to Looney left subjects/ideology with Corbyn and Co. The Labour party's treatment of its 'red wall' voters never changed, the party never even blinked, even when it was clear former supporters were leaking to UKIP! (Nandy's still at it claiming there is no such thing as a the 'red wall')
That is why Boris's promise to 'level up' is so enticing for millions of people who have been hanging on by their finger tips for decades and have eventually lost faith in the Labour party, they wanted to hear something from their Government about doing things for their local economy. The have had scheme after scheme launched at them, some did worked reasonably well, but equally some didn't... but none of them were sustainable.
I agree Labour didn't bring certain matters to the fore as they might have done, but the reality was that the so called 'austerity' was inevitable, as it will be when Rishi has to repeat the dose (obviously late as possible and preferably when he becomes PM) due to Covid.
Labour for years squandered the goodwill and admittedly sometimes the understanding of their grass roots supporters, they are now paying for that profligacy and it will take a long time to get back to where they were, even if that is possible!
Labour councils tended to be harder hit because they tended to be in poorer areas. They already receive less money through council tax than richer areas and rely much more on government grants to provide local services. Even if grants were cut to a specific nationwide percentage it's obvious that the effects of those cuts would ultimately be felt more by those councils that relied the most on it.
Worst thing for labour to believe is substance-free analysis that their loss in places like hartlepool due to weasel words like “london metropolitan elite” and “woke”
Its also pretty insulting and downright erroneous to imply london labour voters arent working class. Many are renters, zero hours contracts, no where close to being on the property ladder. I have also literally never seen objective tangible evidence that labour are obsessed with wokeness or identity politics. Their policy platforms post corbyn(especially fiscal policies) have been a bit muddled but very centrist.
There’s a weird subtext to the suggestions that basically implies labour needs to be more conservative to win. Rather than going down the bernie sanders-ish route which is aggressive and effective advocacy of progressive politics to shift the overton window and win people over. By setting aside infighting, and clearly explain to people how them in leadership will improve lives.
Its also pretty insulting and downright erroneous to imply london labour voters arent working class. Many are renters, zero hours contracts, no where close to being on the property ladder. I have also literally never seen objective tangible evidence that labour are obsessed with wokeness or identity politics. Their policy platforms post corbyn(especially fiscal policies) have been a bit muddled but very centrist.
There’s a weird subtext to the suggestions that basically implies labour needs to be more conservative to win. Rather than going down the bernie sanders-ish route which is aggressive and effective advocacy of progressive politics to shift the overton window and win people over. By setting aside infighting, and clearly explain to people how them in leadership will improve lives.
No worries.
From Milliband and his bacon sandwich to Corbyn and soon even "non offensive to the elites" Starmer. Labour will be slated in the press because the press is owned by billionaires whose interest aligns with the Tories.
Point is, Labour need to work 10x harder than the Tories to gain any media traction when criticising the Tory government. Although, as an aside, the Starmer strategy of generally agreeing with the government plans but making small criticisms is such a poor approach and will never work. It is self defeating. You have to shout about it gain traction with the public and even celebrities until it can't be ignored. E.g. Rashford and school meals.
You dismiss the source but then accept Labour councils had bigger cuts. Very strange.
The point you made was that Labour councils didn't look after their areas and "took people for granted". The irony is that the central Tory government have cut the potential for people in these areas to reach their aspirations, by cutting all council budgets by 30% - 50%. Compounded by Labour council budgets being cut disproportionately. Then you claim Labour "don't recognise the aspirations of the working class anymore.
It really is a facepalm moment. Or Stockholm syndrome at best.
FYI Here is another source.
Have the poorest councils had the biggest cuts?
By Reality Check team
BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47882478
"It's broadly true that many Labour-controlled areas have faced bigger cuts than Conservative-controlled ones."
You're right. Which is why I think the wording should always be positive and not negative.
Something like local houses for local people should focus on the need for affordable housing to keep communities together, rather than "screw jonny foreigner, we're going to put you first".
Similarly even immigration should be spun positively. We're going to focus on getting the best minds from around the world to boost British science and engineering,
we're going to take a multipronged approach to reduce the number of asylum seekers by leading an international effort to resolve conflicts and create safe zones within conflicts where UN peacekeepers can guarantee the safety of refugees.
It's a different way of saying "we're going to keep them away from our shores".
Foreign aid will be directed at creating economic opportunities and providing life changing support to the poorest communities in the world instead of traditional routes where its been misused.
Etc etc.
I keep seeing this or similar statements, but is it borne out by historical patterns? Didn't Thatcher win the 'young' vote, which means the current 50 year old was always likely to lean right?
Bravo.
I’ve not seen it. Nolan’s films don’t land with me at the best of times and this one is supposed to be bad. I’ve been avoiding it.It wasn't bad it was just kind of.......bleh. Like someone promising you the best three course meal of your life, serving an amazing starter but then offering you a middling main course and finishing off with a slice of dogshit cheesecake even though you were expecting a banana split.
I've never argued with that point, it still does not excuse the treatment by Labour of their grass root supporters for years. Labour have never listened, except to what comes back from their own 'echo-chambers' and they are now reaping the world wind of this neglect.
True, Tory cuts will have mitigated against many peoples aspirations, working class or middle class, but when in power nationally (and locally in my case) Labour never even acknowledge ordinary working people aspired to anything more than the first rung on Maslow's Hierarchy.
Of course they have listened. Did you not ever listen yourself to what Corbyn was saying? Granted, the bbc usually spoke over a picture of him looking menacing, so you'd probably need to find a clean source for his true words, but he spoke constantly of the needs of many. He outlined very clearly the problems the brexity areas were facing.
The game is simply rigged towards those with money. It doesn't matter what any left leaning leader says or does, they will be tarred into irrelevance.
Those with actual power will reluctantly lend some power to labour every decade or so, as long as it's not a leftie labour, simply to keep the pretence of democracy alive.