The Labour Party

I suspect partly to avoid being hammered. or drawn into yet another thread that becomes little more than left bashing from a small number of vociferous posters Eloethan.

Have you any idea how agressive your post sounds Eloethan?

Perhaps that's why moderate Labour voters are unwilling to put their heads above the parapet or perhaps they really don't feel they want to argue their principles with those who are not willing to listen.

At least daphned could acknowledge what is happening with the party, which is what this thread is sbout - rather than another rant against cuts.

X-posts Iam

Note I used the word 'unwilling' and you said 'to avoid' - it's not a case of us being afraid to, more a case of 'what's the point?'

"Plenty of LibDem/Conservative supporters are very vocal on here" No, more to the point, there are plenty of people who don't necessarily vote LibDem/Cons who find themselves posting on here purely to offset the adulation and blinkers that flourish. It is not necessary to be rabidly FOR something else to point out the blind adoration some have for Corbyn.

OK apologies for only mentioning the small number of vociferous right wingers. I'll be specific. I 'm also put off by the equally small number of vociferous posters who see Corbyn and his acolytes as the answer to the country's problems. I don't see him as a future Prime Minister, wish I could, I've tried but I just can't see him carrying the politically disaffected or those who are drawn to awful parties like Ukip with him. Consensus isn't always a dirty word.

I don't think that Eloethan's post sounds aggressive. All she's done is highlight what's actually happening in this country. Like many others, I get frustrated when people don't seem to believe that they're happening and having a negative effect. You still haven't explained why you think I was over-egging. Frankly, I see quite a few ostriches.

I think people have every right to be angry about cuts, especially as many of them aren't necessary.

Rather than slinging insults around and sticking undefinable labels on people, maybe it would be good to have a sensible discussion about economics and/or politics. I know politicians seem incapable of having such a discussion, but I would have hoped for better from here.

So....would somebody like to define what exactly is meant by 'far left'. I know it's a phrase guaranteed to put the average Daily Mail reader into a paranoid spin, but what does it mean in real, definable terms?

I'm with Iam64 on this. I really can't see Corbyn as PM (and have said so) BUT I don't accept that this government isn't having a devastating effect on some people's lives and I don't accept the label of 'far left'. It seems to me that people smear Corbyn and the alleged 'far left' to justify the status quo.

From an academic viewpoint there is no such thing. In fact labels often close down a useful discussion.

Bit early in the morning. I will come back to this.

A couple of strong coffees and I'm sure you'll be in fine form, whitewave. Look forward to it!

Im actually out to wander amongst bluebells today, so with luck will be able to pick this discussion up later.

It is interesting though. The thing is that. Really in order to define what "far left" means we have to find a middle point, and that is where the first difficulty lies.

In fact philosophically there is no such thing as far left, or far right, we can only explore the various ideological stances.

Enjoy the bluebells! I might very well go and wander among some myself.

I agree with your last sentence absolutely, which is why I'd like to discuss the whole issue.

I'd also like to know what 'traditional working class values' are and whether they're part of some nostalgic vision, which is irrelevant to today.

Well I'm a lifelong Labour supporter and card-barrier, and, I think, a Socialist. I've had my ups and downs with the party, but I'm a keen Corbynite and believe him to be right.

The case against benefit cuts has already been eloquently put, but, to me, the real scandal is the amount of in-work benefit paid to those "hard-working families" we are all so familiar with. And don't get me going on zero-hours contracts.

I'm currently looking for employment and I can't believe how poorly paid many people are. It's a disgrace that hard-working people have to top up their wages with state benefits. It really is a race to the bottom, with too many people scratching round for very little decent work.

If this is the future for our nation, our Goverment should be deeply ashamed.

This issue alone is one which offers Corbyn an opportunity to show his colours. And, given the opportunity, I think he will.

Well said gettingonabit,

I doubt Corbyn will have an opportunity to say much, he has the right wing press to silence him and the BBC is too fearful to upset this government

An honest politician isn't wanted in this country,

Good luck with your job search, gettingonabit! I know how soul destroying it can be.

"Is it just me or do other moderate left-wingers feel alarmed by the way the Labour party is being torn apart by a move to the far left and the way this is being glorified on GN?"

Mmm. I suppose it depends what you call "far left" Anya. To me this pretty much sums up left-wing politics:
"social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality."
and I think that the Labour Party have actually moved away from that in the recent past. The far left (imo) would be those groups that work outside the system of government in order to bring about their aims so, again imo, I cannot see how a party of a democratic government could be "far" although I suppose some elements within it could. Certainly, I can see "far right" elements in the current Conservative government. I do not remember - in my lifetime - a time when uncensored capitalism has been in charge of the Conservatives in the way it is now or when social conservatism seemed so on the rise so I wonder if the element of "far" entering the Labour Party are a natural response to this.

It would be interesting to know Anyawhat policies you find to be further to the left than you are comfortable with so we could discuss this as one person's "far" anything will not be another's.

If there are far right elements then there will also be far left elements....and there are.

It would be even more interesting if moderate Labour voters were to come onto this thread.

Apart from the one or two who have already commented.

I do wonder that if Ed Miliband had got into power as PM,would any Labour voters on here ( moderate or very left wing) still be calling for the sort of measures/policies that Corbyn and McDonnell espouse?

I voted Labour last time -she said venturing cautiously into the discussion. I used to be a keen Liberal then Social Democrat then Lib Dem so obviously am open-minded as to who I vote for but with a clearly centrist viewpoint. No one party's policies chime with me. Some but not all Socialist thinking is OK with me but then I also agree with some but not all Tory policy. Where does that leave this discussion? I don't know but I also don't think I'm alone which is maybe why some others are staying quiet.

I'm the same as you, Jane10, although I'm scratching my head to think of any Tory policy I support.

I bet LibDems are kicking themselves for going into coalition with the Conservatives, because I think a LibLab coalition would stand a chance in 2020 (and might have stood a chance in 2015).

I'm keeping quiet until I know how 'far left' is being defined and what exactly Corbyn is advocating which is 'far left'.

I would place Corbyn more in the Fabian type mold, or maybe the LSE of the 50-60s . Intellectual, but not as intellectual as E. Milliband. What sets him apart is his pacifism, so he would be with the Aldermaston marchers.
For real left-wingers, Some of you should have come to the LP meetings of the 70s, most people calling eachother brother this or sister that, mostly Trade Unionists. Then there were the communists, I thought of joining once but some of their principles I didn't like. and the more belligerent of that group, the Trotskyists.
A rather general outline, and maybe wrong on some points.

In my youth , I had a boyfriend who was a member of the Fabian society. Not being a political person , I asked him what this meant. His reply was (words to the effect ) someone who had socialist views whilst enjoying 'the fruits
of capitolism '.
If Corbyn is left wing , good for him - at least he's not a hypocrite like Blair. Perhaps instead of ignoring labels, we should invent some new ones.

Pacifism seems to have fallen out of favour as a doctrine, which is a shame and makes Corbyn seem a bit quaint. Personally, I find Corbyn's lack of realism about foreign policy is his weakest link.

The Fabian Society has a long history. I've been to a few meetings and their philosophy also seems a bit old-fashioned. It's more about socialism than working-class Labour. Sydney and Beatrice Webb, who were prominent in the early Fabian Society, also founded the London School of Economics and the New Statesman. The early Fabian Society had some very dodgy views about eugenics.

Is pacifism a weak link? Peace talks did better than guns in N.I. India finally became independent due to Ghandhi. Did guns solve Vietnam ? Iraq?