The General Politics Thread v2.0 (AKA the "Labour are Cunts" thread)

[David]

5 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Who are “They” in this? Because the left have been highly critical of Labour since Starmer lied and broke all of his election pledges. If you mean the journalistic world, it’s no surprise is it? 

I suppose, when referring to "they," it can be said I am alluding to the individuals populating the illustrious "All Tory's are cunts" thread. For months, it has been an incessant parade of left-leaning voices, lambasting the Tories from every conceivable angle. And quite rightly so, I might add.

However, with the Labour Party now tantalizingly close to potentially toppling Tory dominion, a peculiar phenomenon has emerged – a surge in criticism directed towards Labour and its leader, Keir Starmer. It's truly perplexing. While it is true that Labour is far from flawless, wouldn't they be a more favorable alternative to enduring another term under Tory rule?

10 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Being slightly less shit than the tories is not a reason to support Labour. Nor does it make you a Tory enabler. 

One could argue that the repercussions of withholding support from the Labour Party might, in fact, lead to the unfortunate prolongation of Conservative rule.

[Carbomb]

4 minutes ago, David said:

However, with the Labour Party now tantalizingly close to potentially toppling Tory dominion, a peculiar phenomenon has emerged – a surge in criticism directed towards Labour and its leader, Keir Starmer. It's truly perplexing. While it is true that Labour is far from flawless, wouldn't they be a more favorable alternative to enduring another term under Tory rule?

One could argue that the repercussions of withholding support from the Labour Party might, in fact, lead to the unfortunate prolongation of Conservative rule.

It's not peculiar (if, by peculiar, you mean something like "unprecedented"), nor has it just emerged. It happened back in 2017 and 2019.

[SuperBacon]

26 minutes ago, David said:

a peculiar phenomenon unfolding.

 

8 minutes ago, David said:

a peculiar phenomenon has emerged

Well, is it unfolding or has it emerged? 

I won't rest until I know.

[David]

6 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

It's not peculiar (if, by peculiar, you mean something like "unprecedented"), nor has it just emerged. It happened back in 2017 and 2019.

Allow me to pose a question, extending an invitation for all interested parties to contribute their perspectives. Given the choice, would you prefer enduring another term under Conservative governance, or would you instead opt for a shift towards Labour's rule?

[Keith Houchen]

2 minutes ago, David said:

However, with the Labour Party now tantalizingly close to potentially toppling Tory dominion, a peculiar phenomenon has emerged – a surge in criticism directed towards Labour and its leader, Keir Starmer. It's truly perplexing. While it is true that Labour is far from flawless, wouldn't they be a more favorable alternative to enduring another term under Tory rule?

Nah, the criticism has been there from the day he started breaking promises, and continues to do so. The way they’ve said they won’t repeal bills brought in by the tories shows to me they’re continuity tories. 

 

4 minutes ago, David said:

One could argue that the repercussions of withholding support from the Labour Party might, in fact, lead to the unfortunate prolongation of Conservative rule.

Those arguments show the arrogance of Labour. Why should I vote for a party so far removed from where I am politically? Because they might not be as bad as the current one? Nope. If Labour are half as shit as I think they’ll be, I’d have still voted for for it and can’t complain about being duped. No party is entitled to my vote. Just not being the party in power is no reason to vote for them. Labour have been purging the left and repeatedly telling them “If you don’t like it, start your own party”. And now they’re surprised that the people they told to do one won’t vote for them and make them out to be the bad guys in this?

By that logic, I don’t want a Labour government, but the best way to stop a Labour government is to vote conservative. I won’t be doing that, therefore that makes me enabling a labour government. So I’m doing them a favour by not voting Tory!

Lets be honest, the only people enabling the tories are Tory voters, nobody else. 
 

 

[SuperBacon]

5 minutes ago, David said:

Allow me to pose a question, extending an invitation for all interested parties to contribute their perspectives. Given the choice, would you prefer enduring another term under Conservative governance, or would you instead opt for a shift towards Labour's rule?

I'll answer you David. Yes, I would prefer this Labour government over Conservative governance, even though the current Labour Party doesn't quite align with all of my political, social and economic beliefs/ethics. 

I'm not as far left as some people on this board, but I can absolutely see why people won't vote for Labour, even life long Labour fans.

If my Grandad, for instance, was still alive, there is ZERO chance he would vote for this current iteration of the party.

I am a great believer in that your vote has to be earned, and I completely respect where people like Keith and Carbomb are coming from when they say that this Labour party does not represent their views. It doesn't particularly represent mine either.

I also think that Keir Starmer is a fucking plank (as well as being a dirty gooner bastard*) and not someone I would naturally look to to lead a government. 

However I am willing to accept that he is the best current option under the way this country is run and the way we elect governance.

I wish there was a better way, but I'm quite fond of my children and am probably too old to learn a skill that would get me a visa to live in Cuba so here we are.

There you go.

 

 

*yes yes, so was Jeremy but he gets a pass from me obviously. 

[Keith Houchen]

13 minutes ago, David said:

Given the choice, would you prefer enduring another term under Conservative governance, or would you instead opt for a shift towards Labour's rule?

I would prefer to be scammed out of £75 than be scammed out of £100, so yes, I’d prefer labours rule. Although I do think the word “Shift” will be doing a disservice, I don’t think there will be much, if any, difference. 

[Carbomb]

5 minutes ago, David said:

Allow me to pose a question, extending an invitation for all interested parties to contribute their perspectives. Given the choice, would you prefer enduring another term under Conservative governance, or would you instead opt for a shift towards Labour's rule?

Did you ever ask that question of those who screwed Corbyn? 

Because, for me, those people gave their answer with their actions, and it now has the consequence that I am genuinely torn on whether or not I should support a political party that considers me and people like me to be a greater threat than Tories, despite years of our showing solidarity and holding out noses for that fucking spiv, Blair.

I haven't decided what my direction will be, and that is a direct result of their actions. I hate the Tories with all my being, but it is now a genuine issue for me to consider if supporting Starmer is merely just perpetuating a cycle of Blairite/New Labour -> Tory -> Blairite/New Labour -> Tory, while the socialists are taken for granted then gaslit when they get fucked over, yet again.

Until the "centrists" or so-called "soft left" of the party stop dodging that question and finally fucking answer why they couldn't show us the same solidarity, I'm not going to be held hostage by that question any more. 

You call it what you like - but that is a genuine and existential question for me; it is neither trivial not frivolous. Labour under Starmer and its supporters have shown no attempt to reconcile with the left of the party, and have just continued to lambast us as though WE were the problem, as though OUR politics were behind the last Labour government to get voted out and blamed for this country's ills.

[David]

14 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Those arguments show the arrogance of Labour. Why should I vote for a party so far removed from where I am politically? Because they might not be as bad as the current one? Nope. If Labour are half as shit as I think they’ll be, I’d have still voted for for it and can’t complain about being duped. No party is entitled to my vote. Just not being the party in power is no reason to vote for them. Labour have been purging the left and repeatedly telling them “If you don’t like it, start your own party”. And now they’re surprised that the people they told to do one won’t vote for them and make them out to be the bad guys in this?

Let me put it to you this way: It's about recognizing that the Tories find themselves in a precarious position, perhaps the most uncertainty they've faced in quite a while. However, regrettably, the anti-Tory forces seem willing to fail to seize the opportunity to dislodge them from power. Now, I am well aware that Labour is far from flawless, and nobody is claiming otherwise. But for heaven's sake, one must acknowledge that they undoubtedly present a superior alternative to the Tories, don't they?

17 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

By that logic, I don’t want a Labour government, but the best way to stop a Labour government is to vote conservative. I won’t be doing that, therefore that makes me enabling a labour government. So I’m doing them a favour by not voting Tory!

Lets be honest, the only people enabling the tories are Tory voters, nobody else. 

It is an undeniable fact that in all likelihood, we are left with two probable outcomes: a Labour government or a Tory government. We must acknowledge the flaws within our system, no doubt about it. However, when we distill it to the choice between Labour and Tory, there appears to be only one viable option, doesn't there? Even considering the current iteration of the Labour party.

[David]

4 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

Did you ever ask that question of those who screwed Corbyn? 

Because, for me, those people gave their answer with their actions, and it now has the consequence that I am genuinely torn on whether or not I should support a political party that considers me and people like me to be a greater threat than Tories, despite years of our showing solidarity and holding out noses for that fucking spiv, Blair.

I haven't decided what my direction will be, and that is a direct result of their actions. I hate the Tories with all my being, but it is now a genuine issue for me to consider if supporting Starmer is merely just perpetuating a cycle of Blairite/New Labour -> Tory -> Blairite/New Labour -> Tory, while the socialists are taken for granted then gaslit when they get fucked over, yet again.

Until the "centrists" or so-called "soft left" of the party stop dodging that question and finally fucking answer why they couldn't show us the same solidarity, I'm not going to be held hostage by that question any more. 

You call it what you like - but that is a genuine and existential question for me; it is neither trivial not frivolous. Labour under Starmer and its supporters have shown no attempt to reconcile with the left of the party, and have just continued to lambast us as though WE were the problem, as though OUR politics were behind the last Labour government to get voted out and blamed for this country's ills.

Well, let's face it, those who sabotaged Corbyn's leadership were mostly leaning towards the center-right. I wasn't surprised that they went down that road. They believed Corbyn to be widely unelectable, and wanted him replaced.

But now, just when we have a golden opportunity to remove the Tories from power, some sections of the left seem to be busy shooting themselves in the foot. I always assumed the left of the party had more strategic acumen than that. We need the Tories out as a matter of urgency in my opinion.

And frankly, we can't expect the cycle of Blairite and New Labour dominance followed by Tory rule to break anytime soon. The sad truth is that the British public as a whole is not inclined towards socialism. We had a perfect chance for that under Corbyn's leadership, but it failed.

At this stage, it's simply a matter of deciding which of the two viable winners is more palatable to us.

[Keith Houchen]

3 minutes ago, David said:

Let me put it to you this way: It's about recognizing that the Tories find themselves in a precarious position, perhaps the most uncertainty they've faced in quite a while. However, regrettably, the anti-Tory forces seem willing to fail to seize the opportunity to dislodge them from power. Now, I am well aware that Labour is far from flawless, and nobody is claiming otherwise. But for heaven's sake, one must acknowledge that they undoubtedly present a superior alternative to the Tories, don't they?

I do understand where this comes from, I totally do. But to me it reeks of “Blue team boo, Red team yay”. That’s fine for sport, where you (hopefully) don’t care how shit your side play or what tactics they use, as long as they win. But using that in politics is absolutely shite. I’ve said before that Labour could enact every bill and repeal nothing of the last 13 years and it would be fine with sections of the party, because they are in power (not office, power). 
 

I won’t vote for a party that doesn’t reflect my views. But it’s worth considering something @Dead Mike said that made me think about this. I’m a voter and Starmer isn’t beholden to me, he’s beholden to his party members and party donors. If they’re happy with him and his direction, that’s what counts. Not what I think about him. 
 

And conversely, hating the tories and wanting them out doesn’t make me beholden to the best option available to do so. If tories hadn’t lurched further to the right and took the UKIP vote, maybe UKIP would be the opposition. Should I vote for them just because I want the tories out in this ridiculous scenario I made up in my stupid head?

[David]

2 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

I do understand where this comes from, I totally do. But to me it reeks of “Blue team boo, Red team yay”. That’s fine for sport, where you (hopefully) don’t care how shit your side play or what tactics they use, as long as they win. But using that in politics is absolutely shite.

It is an absolute load of rubbish, you won't catch me disagreeing on that front. However, whether we like it or not, this is the sorry state of affairs we currently find ourselves in.

It ultimately boils down to just how fervently people desire to see the Tories ousted from power. 

[Lion_of_the_Midlands]

There is a fundamental difference between between the various factions on the right and the various factions on the left. The factions on the right are mostly made up of toffs and old money. They are used to giving orders and been in charge, so they paper over their differences to make sure that they win. The factions on the left are made up of people who protest. They don't care about winning, they care about getting their message heard, but most importantly of all they care about drowning out the message of all the other groups on the left. It would be Judean People's Front v People's Front Of Judea if there wasn't so much anti semitism in the Labour Party. The left have watched the Tories burn this country to the ground since 2010 and at every election since then they have worried about who gets to be King/Queen/None Gender Specific Ruler of the ashes rather than get together and rebuild the country. So let's all looks forward to 5 more years of Tory rule while the never ending bickering of the left, and the never ending bickering of Houchen. See you lads.  

[Keith Houchen]

Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos. 

[David]

14 minutes ago, Lion_of_the_Midlands said:

The factions on the right are mostly made up of toffs and old money.

And the middle classes, some would say. Although the middle classes wouldn't consider themselves to be "right wing," but by the reckoning of most of those on the left they probably are.

Which then constitutes a sizeable percentage of the population.