McCluskey really wants to ensure Labour will never be electable !

He has warned Starmer - run the Labour Party as I say or I will cut more than the 10% I am cutting now.

Good to see Starmer so strong.

Well Labour was meant for the working class Starmer has ditched the 10 socialist pledges he promised to deliver on. Remarked on, Is Starmer Labour?

Starmers Labour is electable. McCluskeys Labour obviously wasn’t. Do the working classes want the Conservatives to rule in perpetuity?

Grany

Well Labour was meant for the working class Starmer has ditched the 10 socialist pledges he promised to deliver on. Remarked on, Is Starmer Labour?

Whose labour are you talking about?

McCluskey’s?

Or a broader more inclusive type of labour which has a chance to bring everyone together once everyone stops living in the past.

Grany

Well Labour was meant for the working class Starmer has ditched the 10 socialist pledges he promised to deliver on. Remarked on, Is Starmer Labour?

It's negativity like this which will hamstring the possibility of a Labour victory next time. It's the old ideological battle isn't it? Would you like a Labour government to be elected and do good or would you prefer political purity that leaves Labour unelectable despite the clusterf*ck over which Mr Johnson presides. Of course, theoretically, your purity of political purpose may eventually encourage 'the workers' to 'rise up' against their cruel masters. Or it may not. In which case goodbye rule of law and many other things which we hold dear. But at least you'll be ideologically pure as the driven snow. Good luck with that.

At least we know where on of GN members have been recently ...

I despair.

Grany

Well Labour was meant for the working class Starmer has ditched the 10 socialist pledges he promised to deliver on. Remarked on, Is Starmer Labour?

Well, why did the 'working class' in my constituency and the next, both in areas of high deprivation, and solidly Labour for ever and a day, elect tories in Dec 2019?

Corbyn didn't actually appeal to the working class.

MaizieD Well, why did the 'working class' in my constituency and the next, both in areas of high deprivation, and solidly Labour for ever and a day, elect tories in Dec 2019?
I think we all realise that the vote was largely to do with Brexit. The problem being that Starmer was against Brexit and those people have long memories.
nahsma Of course, theoretically, your purity of political purpose may eventually encourage 'the workers' to 'rise up' against their cruel masters. Or it may not. In which case goodbye rule of law and many other things which we hold dear. But at least you'll be ideologically pure as the driven snow. Good luck with that
Surely not the old potato that workers' rights involve the breakdown of society. It's been the cry of the ruling classes from time immemorial and it has never happened. A more equal and just society gives more people a stake in that society so they become more not less law abiding.
As far as McCluskey goes he is answerable to his members, if they want their money to go to Starmer they can tell him that. Pity Grandad 194? has gone he warned this would happen- he'd be able to say "Told you so!"

Yes, told you so- and then - disastrous, nasty, horrible, Tories, get in again. Hurrah -

and we will say 'told you so'

and then ?!?

biba70 the alternative is that a Starmer government will tinker a bit, like Blair did and introduce only changes which will only be reveresed by the next Tory government. So exactly the same position will be reached.

trisher

MaizieD Well, why did the 'working class' in my constituency and the next, both in areas of high deprivation, and solidly Labour for ever and a day, elect tories in Dec 2019?
I think we all realise that the vote was largely to do with Brexit. The problem being that Starmer was against Brexit and those people have long memories.
nahsma Of course, theoretically, your purity of political purpose may eventually encourage 'the workers' to 'rise up' against their cruel masters. Or it may not. In which case goodbye rule of law and many other things which we hold dear. But at least you'll be ideologically pure as the driven snow. Good luck with that
Surely not the old potato that workers' rights involve the breakdown of society. It's been the cry of the ruling classes from time immemorial and it has never happened. A more equal and just society gives more people a stake in that society so they become more not less law abiding.
As far as McCluskey goes he is answerable to his members, if they want their money to go to Starmer they can tell him that. Pity Grandad 194? has gone he warned this would happen- he'd be able to say "Told you so!"

I’m not clear why we should regret the lessening of McCluskey’s power. He is a dinosaur, who doesn’t seem to have an understanding of democracy.

The working class struggle argument is nothing to do with the the ruling class and everything to do with Marxist philosophy.

The working class northern vote was all about wanting change from what they see as years of neglect by the Labour Party. They felt taken for granted in their vote. Yes, it also involved brexit, but that was about clever propaganda on the vote leaves part. That ship will sale once next January is upon us.

Johnson has a huge task to try to hold onto those votes, because to pacify the working class of the red wall, will mean policies that go against the Tory philosophy particularly the right of the party.

It is obvious that for labour to win, many on the left will have to hold their noses when voting as it is patently obvious that a centre left Labour Party is that which is most likely to appeal to the country at large, and however much those on the left want it, a Corbyn style government will, for whatever reason never be given the opportunity to form a government.

It is all about compromise.

Indeed.

MazieD nahsma I refer you to trisher I agree, No change

Whitewavemark2 but what is the point of compromise if things improve for one or two Parliaments (maybe 10 years) but then become much worse because nothing has really been changed and the innovations are simply destroyed. Blair's legacy is gone- Women's Refuges closed, Sure Start destroyed, more poverty nd homelessness than ever before. Centre left hasn't exactly changed things has it?

Johnson’s speech yesterday(?) was in large part directed at the W/C.

Johnson’s problem is delivering. He doesn’t does he?

Those, like McCluskey, live in the past. Today's working class are not uneducated downtrodden serfs, they are capable of thinking for themselves and don't want a far left elite telling them what they should do and think.

I speak as someone who grew up in a Labour supporting household but I no longer recognise the party I grew up trusting to look out for the ordinary man in the street.

I'm afraid I find the 'it's all down to Brexit' explanation, for the loss of solid Labour seats, too facile. Dislike of Corbyn, anti Labour media, blaming Labour councils for cuts in services and not recognising that the cuts were a result of tory policy all contributed too, IMO

I really think it's time that the left wing recognised that 'socialist policies' alone don't impress.

trisher

Whitewavemark2 but what is the point of compromise if things improve for one or two Parliaments (maybe 10 years) but then become much worse because nothing has really been changed and the innovations are simply destroyed. Blair's legacy is gone- Women's Refuges closed, Sure Start destroyed, more poverty nd homelessness than ever before. Centre left hasn't exactly changed things has it?

How on earth can you blame Labour for the Tories undoing all the good labour did. That doesn’t make any sense.

Supposing a left wing government came into power? How would anything it did not be reversed when the Tories came to power?

The point, Trisher- is that the extreme left, will never be electable- so will never be able to change anything.

At the end of the day, the First Past The Post system is at fault here. Most other countries in Europe have some form of proportional representation- and the 'Left' and the 'Right' are represented by several parties, In France and Italy, the Communist Party is still very much alive and totally separate. As it should be here imho.

But, in the meantime- the public will not elect a Party which is led by the extreme left, and is manipulated by the main unions- for sure. How many changes will be achieved by allowing Tories in again?

Whitewavemark2
The working class struggle argument is nothing to do with the the ruling class and everything to do with Marxist philosophy
I'm glad somebody understood where I was coming from

The children who were in many cases helped (actually on aome cases I would say rescued) by the early intervention of sure start etc are now adults in our society. If Starmer wins which is more likely than corbyn, he would build on the work done with those families. Or we could just leave them to the likes of Johnsons government. I wonder which would improve their lives more.

If a centre left party is assumed to be more electable, doesn't the fact that the unions will give less money and therefore have less influence, improve the chances of Labour winning an election, not diminish the chances?

I am not sure that trying to take over Tory territory is always an election winner either. A couple of elections ago, when Labour were saying that they wanted austerity at least as much and possibly more than the Conservatives, they didn't win then either.

When Rachel Reeves was saying that Labour was no longer the party for unemployed people, that did not lead to a Labour win.

The mugs stating that they were tough on immigration did not lead to a win.

New Labour sometimes seemed almost to want to hide the improvements that they introduced, they should have been far more vocal about the improvements that things like Sure Start made to peoples lives, and that improving the lives of everybody is a good thing for the country as a whole.

I really object to the terminology which has become accepted as the norm. I am not, nor have I ever been far-left although I do know people who are. It is one of the ways that the Tories have succesfully colonised the middle ground of propaganda by appearing to change but still pursuing far right policies. They have pushed the Labour Party into joining the debate on their terms, speaking of Marxism and far left policies and insinuating that this would somehow make Britain like Russia. The fact is that the policies which the LP supports are neither far left nor Marxist they are simply socialist policies and all McCluskey is asking is that Starmer sticks to those policies. If Starmer refuses to do so why should he have the money and support of the Unions who are involved in the everyday battle to maintain the rights of their members (and therefore all workers' rights)? It would be betraying those people to give the money to him.