HAHAHAHAHAHA! Liz Kendall Pathetically Insists "I AM Left Wing"

a reply to: TrueBrit


On a side issue, The Tories will implement boundary changes in this parliament. These changes will dis-advantage Labour at the next election.

The Tories wanted to do this in the last Parliament but couldn't gain the support of The Lib-Dems

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk...

As for Scotland. That's lost for Labour and maybe never to be regained.

a reply to: alldaylong

Well yes, the boundary issue would be a difficult hurdle for labour during an election cycle, but you have to understand that Corbyn could do an awful lot of good in opposition, not just as a potential leader of the country. I think it is important to realise that it is not important to elect the leader most capable of running the country at this point.

The issue here is to elect a leader who is vehemently left, to provide an actual alternative to the current leadership who it must be said, could only go further right by ethnically cleansing the bottom ten percent of earners by application of lots of shotgun ammunition.

As for Scotland, Corbyn has been well received in Scotland to be absolutely fair to him. The old guard up there know a proper Labour man when they meet one. They had no option to vote for one last time around, which is why SNP did as well as they did.

I think people are paying attention. Especially the younger folks who didn't see the point of joining a trade union or voting. Mainly because the future they were sold at school ("You can be whatever you want to be if you work hard and go to university") was patently a lie. They realised once they entered the jobs market that unless you are an exceedingly gifted individual or mummy and daddy have connections then you will probably end up doing a job you had no intention of doing. Or worse still with no job at all.

But Corbyn we have a problem.

Old fashioned British socialism which offered liberty, opportunity and equality for all probably died when Harold Wilson resigned in 1976. In the 1980s Thatchers crushed the unions and the Labour Party crushed itself by veering seriously too far to the left that it became unelectable. The collapse of the Soviet Bloc further reinforced the view that socialism was a failed system. Blair reinvented Labour as New Labour and is (to date) the only Labour leader to win 3 elections in a row. He regained the centre ground and for a while put back the smile on the face of Britain until he became Bush's poodle and involved us in the draining and unnecessary wars in Afghanistan & Iraq. This has severely tainted his legacy. Perhaps unfairly, perhaps not.

The problem Labour have is winning back power. Only around 10% of UK constituencies actually change their allegiance in a General Election. Corbyn appears far too left wing to win back the key marginals Labour need to form a government. In fact he could well be retreading the 1980s all over again and leaving Labour unelectable for a generation.

I think he is an honest and honourable man who believes in old fashioned British socialism. But it is no good being a protest party and letting Conservatism slowly suck the life out of this nation until it succumbs totally to Neo-Corporate feudalism and the end of the NHS and BBC as we once knew them

Labour need to convince the swing voters in the key marginals first with policies appealing to all. Think about how many of us are being exposed to 'propaganda' to despise the immigrants at Calais who want to come here for a better life they don't deserve. Well that is exactly how the ruling classes see the rest of us. Life is often about denying liberty, opportunity and equality to those we deem less deserving than us. The old rules of divide and conquer are back in vogue.

But if Labour reclaim the centre ground then maybe they can slowly reform the democratic system and build a fairer society once again. Otherwise we are stuck with a Government that will cut and cut and cut because they believe the only people that create wealth are those with wealth. When in fact the basic economics are that very rich people who earn 5% more don't necessarily do anything with it. Whilst the poorest in society will spend it and increase tax revenues.

Labour need to get down and "play the game" the Tories do, by appealing to the significant portion of the population to become electable as fast as possible in my opinion. Once you are in power people forget what they voted for and as long as you seem to be doing a decent job will vote for you again.

a reply to: mirageman

With respect, you could not be more wrong.

The last thing we need is a Labour party more interested in power than principles. That's been the case for too long as it is.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Based on principles alone I concede I probably am wrong.

But I look back at how the Labour party of the early 1980s were split with the formation of the SDP, and Militant Tendency on the far left History could well be repeating itself and making the party unelectable once again whilst it gazes inward at itself for a decade and a half.

It's no good Labour preaching to the converted in the stronghold towns of the North and London. The electoral system is weighted in the Conservatives favour. The longer they stay in power the worse things get for those at the lower ends of the social scale. The problem is that if you believe in a Labour Party not interested in power, but in far left wing principles, then the Callaghan government of '79 would have probably been the last Labour government in Britain.

Many things have changed since then. There has been a further shift to the Tories by the share owning electorate of previously state owned enterprises and those who bought their own council houses. These policies were perceived as good by those that benefited and it helps keep a chunk of those key marginal votes.

People are selfish and become even more selfish in times of hardship. The Tories like hardship. They win elections based on it. They know that deep down whilst we hate those a lot more wealthy than us that people really despise those of a lower social standing claiming benefits and living an easy life without working hard. Whatever 'working hard' really means.

I admire your stance but I would prefer that Labour appeals to a broader spectrum of voters at this moment in time. Otherwise I see it becoming a perpetual protest party and possibly even fading into obscurity as the Liberal Party did a century or so ago.

Respect as always MM

None of the problems of this country will ever be solved by a politician, as good as Corbyn is as far as his voting record and ideological conscientiousness; he's just a product in the politics of hope that we've been repackaged and sold repeatedly for generations while living standards have consistently gone down.

The system is utterly broken, corrupt and rotten beyond repair, it's not going to change from the inside no matter how well intentioned the players are.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: TrueBrit



People are selfish and become even more selfish in times of hardship. The Tories like hardship. They win elections based on it. They know that deep down whilst we hate those a lot more wealthy than us that people really despise those of a lower social standing claiming benefits and living an easy life without working hard. Whatever 'working hard' really means.

I disagree. People are more selfless in times of hardship.

I don't think the Tories "like" hardship and I don't think people "hate" the wealthy - after all, the top 1% of UK earners put in 30% of income tax - that pays for education and a bit of the NHS.

The Tories just offer a different vision that resonates with the population more than Labour's vision. No one likes austerity, but the fact is that the UK needs to live within its means. High tax and high spend politics don't work and people don't want them.

The worry is that a leftist Labour Party won't appeal to enough voters for it to ever get in power, therefore all their warm policies about will mean sod-all. People may dislike Blair, but New Labour was electable and (apart from war) did some good things while in power. New Labour was electable because it shifted from the left to the centre-left and removed the destructive loony-left.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The last thing we need is a Labour party more interested in power than principles. That's been the case for too long as it is.

Exactly , it's about democracy , choice and a party true to its beliefs.

Mr Corbyn has once again shown the difference he offers in that he actually answered an important question with a concise answer when asked about David Cameron's EU referendum campaign , the others ... not so.

Asked whether he would share a platform with David Cameron as part of the campaign to stay in, Mr Corbyn simply replied: “No.”

The other candidates for the leadership of the party were less clear about whether they would appear with Mr Cameron.
www.independent.co.uk... 9402.html

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: TrueBrit

Based on principles alone I concede I probably am wrong.

But I look back at how the Labour party of the early 1980s were split with the formation of the SDP, and Militant Tendency on the far left History could well be repeating itself and making the party unelectable once again whilst it gazes inward at itself for a decade and a half.

They are unelectable now, and would be with a centrist leader! Why? Because the only people who have ever had an interest in voting Labour, ARE leftists! There is this bizarre misconception among media and scholars whose interests run to the political, that elections are decided by this amorphous group of people who have no particular persuasion, and vote on a whim, or according to whoever makes the most pleasant noises... its bunkum.

Left leaning voters have not been voting for YEARS because they have been given no voice. Years and years and years. That is why there was low turn out last time around, and why things were such a bloody mess the time before! No one wanted to vote for a half assed Labour party, and everyone was sick of the Red Tory angle. Hence, virtually sod all votes for them in either election!

It's no good Labour preaching to the converted in the stronghold towns of the North and London. The electoral system is weighted in the Conservatives favour. The longer they stay in power the worse things get for those at the lower ends of the social scale. The problem is that if you believe in a Labour Party not interested in power, but in far left wing principles, then the Callaghan government of '79 would have probably been the last Labour government in Britain.

Thats the thing, these are not far left principles, just firmly leftist principles, as they bloody well ought to be in a Party of, and for the people. There never should have been a right slide, and the ideology of the party should NEVER have played second fiddle to its popularity.

Many things have changed since then. There has been a further shift to the Tories by the share owning electorate of previously state owned enterprises and those who bought their own council houses. These policies were perceived as good by those that benefited and it helps keep a chunk of those key marginal votes.

Ah yes, those who bought their council houses, reducing the amount of social housing available despite the fact that the population was growing, forcing future governments to pay private landlords to house them in overpriced, low quality housing? Great idea that... fantastic...

People are selfish and become even more selfish in times of hardship. The Tories like hardship. They win elections based on it. They know that deep down whilst we hate those a lot more wealthy than us that people really despise those of a lower social standing claiming benefits and living an easy life without working hard. Whatever 'working hard' really means.

No... with respect, not everyone is selfish. The working poor are some of the most generous people on the face of this planet. We share what we have around, to make sure that everyone has enough, or at least, that is how it works in my neck of the woods. We look after each other, because no other bastard is going to do it for us, despite the fact that it is the working poor, not the filthy rich, who generate the majority of the productivity in businesses, simply by putting our backs into it. And so that we are clear on this point, a huge percentage of the people who take some sort of benefit from the system are employed, which is a travesty, because being employed to any degree what so ever, should mean that a person is paid enough to live on, free of government aid.

Because workers have no bloody rights in this country any more, employed or not, people are still having to apply for benefits that the nation allegedly cannot afford, despite the fact that the very department handling things like taxation in this country is:

a) Being run out of buildings owned by a private company, which happens to be one of the biggest tax dodgers in the country.
b) Being scammed by that company to the tune of hundreds of percent for everything from copier paper to office hardware, because of a poorly written exclusive supply contract, for which someone out there is surely getting a backhander.
c) Is therefore loosing billions a year, and not being investigated or indeed corrected, because although sorting that mess out could render the relatively tiny amount paid in benefit totally insignificant, it is expedient for those in power to leave things as they are, and rely on secrecy and a lack of awareness to keep that under wraps, while victimising benefits claimants, only a tiny, really stupidly small number of whom, are in any way fraudulent, or indeed lazy.

I admire your stance but I would prefer that Labour appeals to a broader spectrum of voters at this moment in time. Otherwise I see it becoming a perpetual protest party and possibly even fading into obscurity as the Liberal Party did a century or so ago.

Respect as always MM

I can see where you are coming from, and it is a valid position to take, but you must accept that there has been no protest party with a voice since... Christ, since before I was even BORN! We NEED one! If we cannot have governance by those who have the right idea about society, we at least need that party of opposition to be RABID and UNFLINCHING in its critique of the power party, so that no error goes unrecognised, so that no deliberate scam goes unheard of, so that the Conservatives have the feeling, quite rightly, that if they even fart in the wrong direction, the public will know of it, and be shown in no uncertain terms the nature of Conservative perfidy.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
Thats the thing, these are not far left principles, just firmly leftist principles, as they bloody well ought to be in a Party of, and for the people. There never should have been a right slide, and the ideology of the party should NEVER have played second fiddle to its popularity.

Two things.

1. Just what are the principles of the left? Rather, what should the Labour principles be?
2. For a political party to have any reasonable support and have any chance of being electable, then needs to have a broad constituency. If Labour becomes a niche left wing party then it dies.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Sorry mate I was rambling a bit last night because I'd been on the p^^^ with an old mate who I've known since before we went to school. Ever since he joined the forces he has become an ardent Tory supporter and definitely has a "look after No.1 first" attitude. Politics is the one thing we totally disagree about and it turned into a bit of a heated debate with me and few other pals.

I came home and saw your thread and just let rip without really thinking too much into what I was writing. Especially about people being selfish. I had one person in mind whilst writing that. Even though he is still my mate and always will be.

I don't actually think my views are that far apart from yours. I think the main difference is that I want Labour to become an electable opposition party ASAP. Whilst you have a slightly different view. So I commend you for a very thorough response to someone who'd had few jars.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
It's a disgrace the the way Corbyn has been treated by the party. People want a purge of anyone connected to the blairites. The blairites were the reason labour failed in the last election.

Whole-hearted supporter of Corbyn here. Not quite sure I agree with your above statement though. I didn't vote Labour last election (haven't since Blair's first term, pee'd it away on the Greens). In all honesty I think Milliband was just too "weird" to vote for - especially for your average voter/white van "person", he came across really badly in the media - I might have voted for his brother.

I'd love our politics not to be about personality, sadly...