Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 11:20 am  

Wire Yed wrote:

The cakes will be sold at pride, it's a multi coloured cake too, it may end up resembling a rainbow

Maybe so - but they won't be wedding cakes; marriage is only for god-fearing opposite sex couples.

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 11:47 am  

“we are a political party, not a fan club.”

“we are a political party, not a fan club.”

[Bullseye]

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:34 pm  

vbfg wrote: “we are a political party, not a fan club.” That's an interesting read. I've seen my union have the same issues in the past. It used to frustrate me when extremists who see everything in black and white take over. It ends up turning people off and those that are doing the shouting end up doing far more harm than good.

vbfg wrote: “we are a political party, not a fan club.” That's an interesting read. I've seen my union have the same issues in the past. It used to frustrate me when extremists who see everything in black and white take over. It ends up turning people off and those that are doing the shouting end up doing far more harm than good.

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:32 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

That's an interesting read.

I've seen my union have the same issues in the past. It used to frustrate me when extremists who see everything in black and white take over. It ends up turning people off and those that are doing the shouting end up doing far more harm than good.

I also read it. I'll be honest, I'm now deeply suspect when I read accounts of people being abused, MPs receiving threats and intimidation. There have been too many cases where the reports are demonstrably untrue, going as far back as the leadership campaign itself. It's a very easy thing to set up an anonymous social media account and start sending abusive messages to your own "side" purporting to be from supporters of your enemy. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that there are feisty meetings up and down the land in the Labour Party at present. Yet it's also true - as any policeman will tell you - that no two people's accounts of the same events are ever the same. A similar account written by one of those red-T-shirted Momentum types would probably read that they saw people in the meeting denouncing them and their work, and being hostile and abusive to them, making them feel unwelcome in their own Party. It's a bit of a conundrum, and I'm not sure there's a solution.

For me, the problem the right of the party have is that they have a good riff on why holding power is important, but they are offering almost nothing on what they would do with power. On the very rare occasions when someone from Progress offers a policy opinion, it is either frighteningly Thatcherite (more cutting of benefits, more "crackdowns" on this that or the other), or it's warm and apolitical "identity politics" of the sort which has a cross-spectrum acceptance from Cameroonian Tories through LibDems.

The Right of the party (which is some 80% of the PLP, in truth) would do better to start to lay out some hard policies which they can compare with both the Tories' and Corbyn's. Instead, all I've heard now for 9 months is that Corbyn is unelectable, and should go. Fine. But who would replace him, and - more importantly - what would they stand for? Not vacuous warm words about helping the working class, but actual concrete policies that I can think about and weigh up. Corbyn's got loads - nationalising railways and power, increased Keynesian public spending, higher taxes on rich individuals and institutions etc. He also has some foreign policy obsessions and ideas which I don't always share, but I'm mature enough to know I'm never going to find a political party which subscribes to all my personal views! So what do Progress/Blairites/PLP have to offer, other than a clear and transparent desire for "electability"? What would they actually do?

Until they start to answer that question, they won't shift many Corbyn supporters.

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 7:10 pm  

Roy Haggerty wrote:

I also read it. I'll be honest, I'm now deeply suspect when I read accounts of people being abused, MPs receiving threats and intimidation. There have been too many cases where the reports are demonstrably untrue, going as far back as the leadership campaign itself. It's a very easy thing to set up an anonymous social media account and start sending abusive messages to your own "side" purporting to be from supporters of your enemy. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that there are feisty meetings up and down the land in the Labour Party at present. Yet it's also true - as any policeman will tell you - that no two people's accounts of the same events are ever the same. A similar account written by one of those red-T-shirted Momentum types would probably read that they saw people in the meeting denouncing them and their work, and being hostile and abusive to them, making them feel unwelcome in their own Party. It's a bit of a conundrum, and I'm not sure there's a solution.

For me, the problem the right of the party have is that they have a good riff on why holding power is important, but they are offering almost nothing on what they would do with power. On the very rare occasions when someone from Progress offers a policy opinion, it is either frighteningly Thatcherite (more cutting of benefits, more "crackdowns" on this that or the other), or it's warm and apolitical "identity politics" of the sort which has a cross-spectrum acceptance from Cameroonian Tories through LibDems.

The Right of the party (which is some 80% of the PLP, in truth) would do better to start to lay out some hard policies which they can compare with both the Tories' and Corbyn's. Instead, all I've heard now for 9 months is that Corbyn is unelectable, and should go. Fine. But who would replace him, and - more importantly - what would they stand for? Not vacuous warm words about helping the working class, but actual concrete policies that I can think about and weigh up. Corbyn's got loads - nationalising railways and power, increased Keynesian public spending, higher taxes on rich individuals and institutions etc. He also has some foreign policy obsessions and ideas which I don't always share, but I'm mature enough to know I'm never going to find a political party which subscribes to all my personal views! So what do Progress/Blairites/PLP have to offer, other than a clear and transparent desire for "electability"? What would they actually do?

Until they start to answer that question, they won't shift many Corbyn supporters.

This.

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Fri Jul 08, 2016 7:19 pm  

Surely the policy's of the party are led by the leader ?

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:36 pm  

The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.

The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world.

[tb]

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Sun Jul 10, 2016 2:10 pm  

vbfg wrote: The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world. If you don't understand the nature of power and the state - or refuse to - you risk ending up like Syria: voluntarist romanticism without power or the ability to make any changes (even if you do get into government). Unfortunately, Syriza are a model for much of the 'new' left around Momentum - despite their failure to actually achieve anything in Greece.

vbfg wrote: The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world. If you don't understand the nature of power and the state - or refuse to - you risk ending up like Syria: voluntarist romanticism without power or the ability to make any changes (even if you do get into government). Unfortunately, Syriza are a model for much of the 'new' left around Momentum - despite their failure to actually achieve anything in Greece.

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Sun Jul 10, 2016 3:37 pm  

vbfg wrote: The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world. I have no idea what Lansman is talking about there. It's the dribblings of a student who isn't as clever as he thinks he is. But then, on the other hand, I remember waiting with decent anticipation for the outcome of the Cruddas Policy Review. Then it emerged and I searched and searched for anything concrete beyond meaningless touchstone words : "diversity", "devolution", "partnership", and all the rest of that cock. Hardly a policy to be seen. So we essentially now have one side who have policies but apparently don't feel the need to win power in order to implement them, while the other side very much wants to win power, but hasn't a bloody clue what it will do if it does. Pretty depressing, overall. And I STILL can't believe they chose Eagle as the opposition. Is she the only Labour MP who comes across worse on telly?

vbfg wrote: The Chair of Momentum: https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/7 ... 2766027777 "Democracy gives power to people, “Winning” is the small bit that matters to political elites who want to keep power themselves" That's one of the most depressing things I've ever read. It's all my fears in one statement - the broader party ceases to believe in power as the only viable instrument of change. It's a fantasy world. I have no idea what Lansman is talking about there. It's the dribblings of a student who isn't as clever as he thinks he is. But then, on the other hand, I remember waiting with decent anticipation for the outcome of the Cruddas Policy Review. Then it emerged and I searched and searched for anything concrete beyond meaningless touchstone words : "diversity", "devolution", "partnership", and all the rest of that cock. Hardly a policy to be seen. So we essentially now have one side who have policies but apparently don't feel the need to win power in order to implement them, while the other side very much wants to win power, but hasn't a bloody clue what it will do if it does. Pretty depressing, overall. And I STILL can't believe they chose Eagle as the opposition. Is she the only Labour MP who comes across worse on telly?

Re: Will Labour Ever Learn? : Sun Jul 10, 2016 5:33 pm  

Eagle sure as hell isn't getting my vote. Neither is Corbyn.

I'm not going to help fund its slow death and accelerating irrelevance either.

That tweet is the future and I'm done.