Labour Watch

[CEB]

Contempt is the wrong word, but a *lot* of the Monentum types on my degree that I don’t talk about much, pretty much saw the working class as an abstract concept or a blank canvas for their projections.
They also created an idealised working class that was politically fully aligned with them (which they saw as a good thing to do, because it showed they gave the working class enough credit to assume they were as bright as them) but in reality gave them licence to be scornful of anyone working class who didn’t have a liberal art student view on anything. It left them ill equipped to understand why not all working class people would vote Labour, and so baffled anger was the order of the day in 2019

[Mistadobalina]

But even here in this example Dunnem has kindly provided, Sirkier is toeing the tory line that the NHS is in itself a problem needing reform, not that the problems we're now seeing it with are years and years of underfunding.

It's about undoing the terrible Lansley reforms no?.

The thinking that 'labour agree there is a problem, therefore they are the same as the Tories ' seems really simplistic to me. They agree that the NHS needs reform - but away from how Tories have buggered it by introducing horrendous amounts of middle management through forcing competitive markets. They agree that worklessness is a problem - but are saying you fix it by providing training and effective support.

If I'm being honest, those who demand purity are generally the ones who's lives don't get that heavily affected one way or the other if the Tories or Labour win. We talk about Corbyn motivating young people - it was a pretty homogeneous bunch of city living, white university educated types. Not exclusively and apologies to anyone who loved Corbyn who doesn't fall under that category. But I'm (just about) in the age group that was behind that period and it was driven by huge numbers of a 'type' who hold a lot of the people they claim to want to advance in complete contempt.

Why do you hate educated urban white radicals so much? You need to let go of those negative feelings. We're all in this together.

I don't hate them, a lot of them are my mates! But I get very frustrated with the idea that Labour should be going into an election leading with their chin on issues they know are electorally toxic.

As an example, I don't agree with CEB on trans issues at all, but telling your front benchers to stick to a pretty generic line that resonates with vast majority of voters (women have a vagina, men have a penis), knowing you are going to be more progressive on the issue once in power, makes sense to me.

As I say, I don't particularly like Starmer and didn't vote for him as leader. But after 13 years of the Tories absolutely tanking the country, I'm absolutely gonna take some competent uninspiring managerialism for a while, and then use that as a foothold to push for something more radical once they are in power.

[Max B Gold]

Contempt is the wrong word, but a *lot* of the Monentum types on my degree that I don’t talk about much, pretty much saw the working class as an abstract concept or a blank canvas for their projections.
They also created an idealised working class that was politically fully aligned with them (which they saw as a good thing to do, because it showed they gave the working class enough credit to assume they were as bright as them) but in reality gave them licence to be scornful of anyone working class who didn’t have a liberal art student view on anything. It left them ill equipped to understand why not all working class people would vote Labour, and so baffled anger was the order of the day in 2019

They're young. They'll learn.

[Max B Gold]

It's about undoing the terrible Lansley reforms no?.

The thinking that 'labour agree there is a problem, therefore they are the same as the Tories ' seems really simplistic to me. They agree that the NHS needs reform - but away from how Tories have buggered it by introducing horrendous amounts of middle management through forcing competitive markets. They agree that worklessness is a problem - but are saying you fix it by providing training and effective support.

If I'm being honest, those who demand purity are generally the ones who's lives don't get that heavily affected one way or the other if the Tories or Labour win. We talk about Corbyn motivating young people - it was a pretty homogeneous bunch of city living, white university educated types. Not exclusively and apologies to anyone who loved Corbyn who doesn't fall under that category. But I'm (just about) in the age group that was behind that period and it was driven by huge numbers of a 'type' who hold a lot of the people they claim to want to advance in complete contempt.

Why do you hate educated urban white radicals so much? You need to let go of those negative feelings. We're all in this together.

I don't hate them, a lot of them are my mates! But I get very frustrated with the idea that Labour should be going into an election leading with their chin on issues they know are electorally toxic.

As an example, I don't agree with CEB on trans issues at all, but telling your front benchers to stick to a pretty generic line that resonates with vast majority of voters (women have a vagina, men have a penis), knowing you are going to be more progressive on the issue once in power, makes sense to me.

As I say, I don't particularly like Starmer and didn't vote for him as leader. But after 13 years of the Tories absolutely tanking the country, I'm absolutely gonna take some competent uninspiring managerialism for a while, and then use that as a foothold to push for something more radical once they are in power.

I note your eg is an identity based issue which tells me all I need to know.

Accepting uninspiring managerialism is defeatism. Have you never dared to dream?

[Max Fowler]

I get very frustrated with the idea that Labour should be going into an election leading with their chin on issues they know are electorally toxic.

As an example, I don't agree with CEB on trans issues at all, but telling your front benchers to stick to a pretty generic line that resonates with vast majority of voters (women have a vagina, men have a penis), knowing you are going to be more progressive on the issue once in power, makes sense to me.

As I say, I don't particularly like Starmer and didn't vote for him as leader. But after 13 years of the Tories absolutely tanking the country, I'm absolutely gonna take some competent uninspiring managerialism for a while, and then use that as a foothold to push for something more radical once they are in power.

I admire your confidence that he's going to rip up his pledges once in power but I just don't see it. We will have some tinkering around the edges but the fundamentals won't change. Then after 1 term, 2 terms if we're lucky, people will fancy a change, the tories will come back in and so the cycle will repeat.

These 'electorally toxic' subjects - wealth taxes, renationalisation etc - have to be addressed.

[CEB]

Your hypocrisy is astounding. On one hand you want a level playing field for all. Very admirable. But then you become an active collaborator in Ted Robbins’ Machiavellian plotting to get his niece on the telly.

[E10EU]

Accepting uninspiring managerialism is defeatism. Have you never dared to dream?

I think the 'daring to dream' is a key thing.
Corbyn showed people that a better life is possible, for the many, not the few. But then all hell broke loose, including at the 'progressive' Guardian. Can't possibly allow ordinary people wanting a fairer distribution of wealth.
Starmer who is a disciple of Blair, then went all guns blazing to kill off any notion that things could change for the many, not the few.
Telling us how he kisses Tories, his obsession with the Union flag, his failure to support workers' rights to decent pay, etc etc. His horrenduous and unjustifyable demonisation of Corbyn is to pull the public back into line, the line where politics is all about benefitting the wealthy. Don't dare to dream - it will even get you expelled from the Labour party.

[ComeOnYouOs]

If Keir Hardy was alive now, he'd be expelled from Starmers Labour party.
They are a slightly milder Tory party, well to the right of where Labour should be

[Proposition Joe]

It's about undoing the terrible Lansley reforms no?.

The thinking that 'labour agree there is a problem, therefore they are the same as the Tories ' seems really simplistic to me. They agree that the NHS needs reform - but away from how Tories have buggered it by introducing horrendous amounts of middle management through forcing competitive markets. They agree that worklessness is a problem - but are saying you fix it by providing training and effective support.

If I'm being honest, those who demand purity are generally the ones who's lives don't get that heavily affected one way or the other if the Tories or Labour win. We talk about Corbyn motivating young people - it was a pretty homogeneous bunch of city living, white university educated types. Not exclusively and apologies to anyone who loved Corbyn who doesn't fall under that category. But I'm (just about) in the age group that was behind that period and it was driven by huge numbers of a 'type' who hold a lot of the people they claim to want to advance in complete contempt.

Why do you hate educated urban white radicals so much? You need to let go of those negative feelings. We're all in this together.

I don't hate them, a lot of them are my mates! But I get very frustrated with the idea that Labour should be going into an election leading with their chin on issues they know are electorally toxic.

As an example, I don't agree with CEB on trans issues at all, but telling your front benchers to stick to a pretty generic line that resonates with vast majority of voters (women have a vagina, men have a penis), knowing you are going to be more progressive on the issue once in power, makes sense to me.

As I say, I don't particularly like Starmer and didn't vote for him as leader. But after 13 years of the Tories absolutely tanking the country, I'm absolutely gonna take some competent uninspiring managerialism for a while, and then use that as a foothold to push for something more radical once they are in power.

Don't want to derail the thread onto *that other topic* but is it a fact that such a generic line resonates with "the vast majority of voters"? I thought polling was pretty consistent that most voters aren't really bothered? What his beloved focus groups say might be another matter.

Also wary of straying into whataboutism but I really don't see why KS gets such a free pass for being fundamentally dishonest apart from 'pragmatism'. What evidence does anyone have that he's suddenly going to pivot into being more progressive? His record as DPP doesn't suggest as much, not does the alacrity in which he dumped every single one of his leadership election pledges. The current government are - rightly - castigated for being full of sh*t and lying about everything and that's bad, whereas KS saying something and then doing something different is 'grown up' and 'doing what's necessary'.

[Max Fowler]

I don't mind Sirkier lying. It's just there's not a shred of evidence to suggest it is lying.

[Admin]

We talk about Corbyn motivating young people - it was a pretty homogeneous bunch of city living, white university educated types. Not exclusively and apologies to anyone who loved Corbyn who doesn't fall under that category. But I'm (just about) in the age group that was behind that period and it was driven by huge numbers of a 'type' who hold a lot of the people they claim to want to advance in complete contempt.

That seems a really simplistic, and wrong, assessment to me.

I'd have thought the amount of well-attended rallies he appeared at in deprived cities in the run-up to the 17 election dispelled this myth.

[CEB]

Do we have any data as to the make-up and attendance of those rallies? (Again, not being facetious, I get that it’s not quite as cut & dry as “only middle class university types supported”, but I don’t feel like a myth was dispelled)

[Max B Gold]

We talk about Corbyn motivating young people - it was a pretty homogeneous bunch of city living, white university educated types. Not exclusively and apologies to anyone who loved Corbyn who doesn't fall under that category. But I'm (just about) in the age group that was behind that period and it was driven by huge numbers of a 'type' who hold a lot of the people they claim to want to advance in complete contempt.

That seems a really simplistic, and wrong, assessment to me.

I'd have thought the amount of well-attended rallies he appeared at in deprived cities in the run-up to the 17 election dispelled this myth.

I went to one of those.

The Wakes played Bella Ciao it was the best bit. Oh how us oldies sung along, some like me in the original Italian, whilst the Young Corbanistas waved there arms in the air and mimed along to the tune of their overly repetitive anthem "Oh Jeremy Corbyn". Great days.

I was hoping we could go on to sing the Socialist Alphabet but it didn't happen. But here it is anyways

[Max B Gold]

Do we have any data as to the make-up and attendance of those rallies? (Again, not being facetious, I get that it’s not quite as cut & dry as “only middle class university types supported”, but I don’t feel like a myth was dispelled)

The one I attended in Glesca Toon was a load of old lefty Trots, local Stalinists, students types, freaks, a ragbag of malcontents and a fair smattering of normal people. A diverse crowd age wise.

My son, not then a trendy Oxbridge PhD type and a firm Jez supporter, was there too. He voted for Keith Stalin in the coup that outed Jez, believing sirketh the liar would stand by his pledges. Strangely he still has faith in Sirkeith. We don't talk much about politics these days.

I mumbled something about Thermidor and that's a load of bollix. You see, I'm older and I've seen it all before. I've personally experienced the dirty tricks that the one true custodians of the Labour Party (defenders of capital and purveyors of sensible social reform) get up to. HTH.

[timothy]

I have only recently started looking at the Labour Watch thread. Is it supposed to be a satire on clapped out old lefties talking amongst
themselves about things that the rest of the world couldn't give a toss about? Or is is supposed to be serious? Either way it is hilarious so well
done to all of you and much more of the same please.

[Max B Gold]

I have only recently started looking at the Labour Watch thread. Is it supposed to be a satire on clapped out old lefties talking amongst
themselves about things that the rest of the world couldn't give a toss about? Or is is supposed to be serious? Either way it is hilarious so well
done to all of you and much more of the same please.

You seem unsure. Let me help. In an otherwise binary world it is strangely a mixture of all of the things you have identified but you failed to identify the all important snark driven posts like the one you have just posted

Do you have any non snark thoughts on this important political issue?

[timothy]

I have only recently started looking at the Labour Watch thread. Is it supposed to be a satire on clapped out old lefties talking amongst
themselves about things that the rest of the world couldn't give a toss about? Or is is supposed to be serious? Either way it is hilarious so well
done to all of you and much more of the same please.

You seem unsure. Let me help. In an otherwise binary world it is strangely a mixture of all of the things you have identified but you failed to identify the all important snark driven posts like the one you have just posted

Do you have any non snark thoughts on this important political issue?

It was a serious question is it a satire or are you lot serious?

[Max Fowler]

Stick to making the eggy rolls timothy and leave the political debate to us old clapped out lefties, thank you.

[tuffers#1]

I have only recently started looking at the Labour Watch thread. Is it supposed to be a satire on clapped out old lefties talking amongst
themselves about things that the rest of the world couldn't give a toss about? Or is is supposed to be serious? Either way it is hilarious so well
done to all of you and much more of the same please.

You seem unsure. Let me help. In an otherwise binary world it is strangely a mixture of all of the things you have identified but you failed to identify the all important snark driven posts like the one you have just posted

Do you have any non snark thoughts on this important political issue?

It was a serious question is it a satire or are you lot serious?

Neither, just a bunch of middle aged has beens who are bored , but not bored enough to discuss the real satire of British politics which of course is the T@ries taking the P155 out of these Emasculated has beens .

[timothy]

Stick to making the eggy rolls timothy and leave the political debate to us old clapped out lefties, thank you.

Fair enough

[tuffers#1]

Stick to making the eggy rolls timothy and leave the political debate to us old clapped out lefties, thank you.

Fair enough

Just to show. how bored & emasculated they are
I called them out here to show if they could be stirred into discussion.

They're Cowardice shines through

viewtopic.php?t=424&start=6525

[Max B Gold]

Stick to making the eggy rolls timothy and leave the political debate to us old clapped out lefties, thank you.

Fair enough

Just to show. how bored & emasculated they are
I called them out here to show if they could be stirred into discussion.

They're Cowardice shines through

viewtopic.php?t=424&start=6525

You won be happy with that. Half of us have got PTSD dealing with your posts.

*their*

[tuffers#1]

Fair enough

Just to show. how bored & emasculated they are
I called them out here to show if they could be stirred into discussion.

They're Cowardice shines through

viewtopic.php?t=424&start=6525

You won be happy with that. Half of us have got PTSD dealing with your posts.

*their*

Stop posting 5h!te put some real effort in & you wont feel like a resident of Mariupol . I Always win Moxy

[Max B Gold]

Just to show. how bored & emasculated they are
I called them out here to show if they could be stirred into discussion.

They're Cowardice shines through

viewtopic.php?t=424&start=6525

You won be happy with that. Half of us have got PTSD dealing with your posts.

*their*

Stop posting 5h!te put some real effort in & you wont feel like a resident of Mariupol . I Always win Moxy

Here's a deal for you. I'll stop if you do.

[tuffers#1]

You won be happy with that. Half of us have got PTSD dealing with your posts.

*their*

Stop posting 5h!te put some real effort in & you wont feel like a resident of Mariupol . I Always win Moxy

Here's a deal for you. I'll stop if you do.

Heres a counter offer .

I win you lose