Labour sacks shadow transport minister who backed strikes.

I didn’t hear the end of it today, I have though heard people in my red wall area saying similar things. It’s curious that the left obsess about Starmer having a knighthood and don’t accept he wasn’t brought up in wealth.

DaisyAnne

Grany

Sat 30-Jul-22 12:02:21
Supporters of Starmer on GN you can see here that many people doubt him and have reasons to criticise him.

That's not what I 'see' Grany. It's just a collection of loud and self-righteous voices who believe they, and only they, have the word of some God. I see spite and nastiness and no attempt to work together towards the best achievable outcome because they are sure they, and only they, can achieve nirvana for all, whether "all" want their nirvana or not. I see something that seems as far away from democracy as the current far-right government does.

Exactly as you say DaisyAnne.

The furthest thing from democracy in the LP at the moment is Starmer who has consistently taken decisions that were not in the party's interests or in the interests of its members. Even Blair tolerated the left wing . He just used Alistair Campbell to control them.

One of the benefits of electoral reform would be the creation of new parties.

Both the LP and the Cons are unhealthy coalitions of people who fundamently disagree.with each other about near;y everything.

They should both split into extremes and moderates,

That way the voters could be offered a better choice and eventually the UK could become a true democracy.

So any criticism of Keir Starmer's leadership is "loud and self-righteous" "spite and nastiness" well gosh thanks, a great way to bring people together.

Blimey Varian I find myself agreeing with you ?

Quote: On forums like Gransnet, many thought Corbyn was the next great chance of socialism and wouldn't hear anything against him. Their attitude to those who queried what he was doing and what he stood for was pretty extreme.

That is really not how I remember it.

There were many, many posts who did more than query, they laughed at and insulted the previous leader.

I wish it were different, but I believe that there is no longer any chance of bringing people together, the gap is unbridgeable. The ire of the left of the party is focussed on Keir Starmer, but fundamentally he isn’t the problem, it’s the dogmatic denial that the party has to change that’s the problem. You can keep on shroud waving on the left, but the country has moved on, and the party has to as well, if not Starmer there will be another centre right leader. That’s why a split will come.

I guess Starmer was looked on as the leader that would bring the party more to the centre in the way that Kinnock did to make way for someone else to defeat the Conservatives in the future. But there isn’t time for that as the Conservatives are destroying the country. I think that was eluded to in the Beth Rigby interview. It was always going to be an uphill struggle after the Scottish vote was lost. I really am in despair at the moment.

varian

One of the benefits of electoral reform would be the creation of new parties.

Both the LP and the Cons are unhealthy coalitions of people who fundamently disagree.with each other about near;y everything.

They should both split into extremes and moderates,

That way the voters could be offered a better choice and eventually the UK could become a true democracy.

Exactly. As I have now said on several occasions on several threads.

If we are going to have coalitions we should have those we vote for, not those under cover of a single name, the better.

Ilovecheese

So any criticism of Keir Starmer's leadership is "loud and self-righteous" "spite and nastiness" well gosh thanks, a great way to bring people together.

Please don't misreport what I have said Ilovecheese. At no point did I say that any criticism ..., etc.

the better

Casdon

I wish it were different, but I believe that there is no longer any chance of bringing people together, the gap is unbridgeable. The ire of the left of the party is focussed on Keir Starmer, but fundamentally he isn’t the problem, it’s the dogmatic denial that the party has to change that’s the problem. You can keep on shroud waving on the left, but the country has moved on, and the party has to as well, if not Starmer there will be another centre right leader. That’s why a split will come.

I have a feeling you are right Casdon. I agree with this quote from Lisa Nandy: “I disliked the cults around Blair and Corbyn: one man doesn’t change things”.

There is an interview with her in the Summer Special edition of the New Statesman. The way I read it is that she sees what I have seen David Owen elsewhere call Starmer's "inexperience" as an asset. He’s not steeped in career politics. He’s come in a lot more recently, and he’s very challenging of why people hold the views they do. I think that has helped us – it’s one thing to feel the public mood, but another to turn that into a strategy. When we are together as a team, you can see how the strength of the people he has put around him makes him much more concrete.”

I also have never seen leadership as only about one person. If he can create a team that can make things happen - something we haven't had for 12 years - he could have the makings of a great leader. He will, if he becomes PM, be taking over at a time very like the post-war era when great things could, and must, be achieved.

MayBee70

So how did you feel about Corbynite Chris Williamson standing against the Labour candidate and trying to poach votes from them?

Was this addressed to me MayBee?

I’m not sure what this has to do with anything I’ve said to be honest. I’m sure you know Chris Williamson was dealt with under disciplinary procedures and thrown out of the party. The fact he chose to then stand as an independent candidate was his business. The party had ditched him.

To me he epitomises the far left of the party, the people that Keir is up against. And when people criticise Keir for throwing people out I’m just pointing out that Corbyn did so when people broke the rules.

Except I am criticising Starmer for not throwing people out. I wish he had taken such decisive action against those officials who worked against the party from within, rather than rewarding them.

We each got to get rid of this government. They’re destroying everything. I don’t care who did what in the Labour Party any more. I’m sick of living in a country controlled by such evil people. I’ve just had enough of them.

Audrey White

4 days after I challenged Starmer to his face about lying to party members, I receive this letter from Labour HQ terminating my membership. Shameless & vindictive. A party rotten to the core, that can’t tolerate being held to account by a 71 year old. Even Stalin might’ve blushed

Actually Grany Stalin would have had you shot. I'm not as politically active as you are and I don't know much about the internal politics of the LP so I wonder if you can help me to understand something. Can you tell me what the left wing of the LP has achieved in the last 40 years? I understand that those on the left consider New Labour under Blair were "red Tories" or words to that effect and the many good things that happened under that leadership are now completely discredited because of the War in Iraq, so I'm not thinking about that period. Just anything really that has benefitted society and the lot of the "working man and woman", just changed things for the better?

Grany

Audrey White

4 days after I challenged Starmer to his face about lying to party members, I receive this letter from Labour HQ terminating my membership. Shameless & vindictive. A party rotten to the core, that can’t tolerate being held to account by a 71 year old. Even Stalin might’ve blushed

Grany I’m sure you know that Audrey White is a militant, she also left Labour when Tony Blair was the leader. Can you explain what the fact that she is 71 has to do with anything?

foxie48

Actually Grany Stalin would have had you shot. I'm not as politically active as you are and I don't know much about the internal politics of the LP so I wonder if you can help me to understand something. Can you tell me what the left wing of the LP has achieved in the last 40 years? I understand that those on the left consider New Labour under Blair were "red Tories" or words to that effect and the many good things that happened under that leadership are now completely discredited because of the War in Iraq, so I'm not thinking about that period. Just anything really that has benefitted society and the lot of the "working man and woman", just changed things for the better?

With the level of this debate, I imagine you could now see an argument about whether Blair et al were "Red Tories" or Blue Labour". It is all quite inane.

DaisyAnne

foxie48

Actually Grany Stalin would have had you shot. I'm not as politically active as you are and I don't know much about the internal politics of the LP so I wonder if you can help me to understand something. Can you tell me what the left wing of the LP has achieved in the last 40 years? I understand that those on the left consider New Labour under Blair were "red Tories" or words to that effect and the many good things that happened under that leadership are now completely discredited because of the War in Iraq, so I'm not thinking about that period. Just anything really that has benefitted society and the lot of the "working man and woman", just changed things for the better?

With the level of this debate, I imagine you could now see an argument about whether Blair et al were "Red Tories" or Blue Labour". It is all quite inane.

The biggest achievement of the left wing of the LP was getting the Tories to shift to the left and pretend they cared abut the NHS. Something they never wanted and never supported, but which they knew would lose them votes so they pretended they did.

I think, in the old "broad-church" conservative party, large numbers did care about the NHS. The New Conservatives/Tories/Far-right, call them what you will, have thrown most of those representing these people out and moved the Party towards the extreme right. They were able to do all this as a reaction to the possibility of a far-left government. The Labour party of recent years has achieved nothing by the sort of vituperation we see on this thread.

Some people's perception of history is distorted. The Tories never wanted an NHS keepournhspublic.com/the-conservatives-never-were-the-party-of-the-nhs-and-history-proves-it/
As for today's Tories and the NHS. They make all the right noises whilst representing and supporting the companies waiting to get their hands on certain services. Like Jeremy Hunt for example who managed to give contracts to private companies who had already failed in providing care. www.opendemocracy.net/en/jeremy-hunt-tory-leadership-boris-johnson-nhs-junior-doctors/

You can call them left wing or right wing Tories neither of them care about the NHS but they all pretend they do because it's a vote winner.

Glorianny if you go back to the 1940's it would also be true to say that Doctors didn't want the NHS but that certainly wouldn't be true of the doctors today, a lot of things change in 70 years. Surely the debate is more about how to fund the NHS adequately and what might or might not be a better model? When the NHS was set up it was generally thought that funding would decrease as the population became healthier, what was not anticipated was the huge increase in treatments, the growth in life expectancy and the ever increasing expectations of what can and should be treated. tbh I don't understand how the left of the LP got "the Tories to shift to the left and pretend they cared abut the NHS."