Forum | Labour are part of the problem when they should be the solution by Darth_Koont

Sadly, @UKLabour seem to be offering a managerial upgrade at best

That is why I’m proud to join @TheGreenParty”

He’s spot on in his thread and article.

In the section on disability….

“The bio-psychosocial model which was based on the recognition of the mindbody continuum has gained credence and has been interpreted in some policy areas in ways that are unhelpful to disabled people”

There’s a lot of policy statements that I think are ok to be fair. Im just not very warm to the greens in Norwich for selfish reasons that they want to stop the completion of the bypass which is 90% done but isn’t done for my part of the city which consequently is a rat run.

I think we need to give Starmer a chance before we write him off.

You’re going to be disappointed.

The radicals will just move to the more comfortable – but completely ineffectual – fringes. Whereas they might be better staying in the mainstream and trying to steer it in a more reformist direction should power be gained.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, change in attitudes was effected through the twin strands of electoral reform and education. The latter is harder nowadays in an environment of a prescribed curriculum and the exam passing/school league table struggle. There is less opportunity to present a progressive agenda in the classroom. Doubly so with a constant distractionary media diet. As for electoral reform, the major parties are too scared of it leading to their breaking up and/or loss of absolute power in office.

Which is a long-winded way of saying we are pretty stuffed and the best hope is for incremental change over a long time period.

In the face of the evidence, Labour and the Tories are the radicals nowadays.

Trying to shore up the failed centre-right “consensus” that has helped divide the economy, society and the country looks increasingly loony for everyone else apart from the politicians, donors, media and lobbyists who benefit from it personally and professionally.

The absence of honest, objective debate, recognition of the underlying issues and resulting alternatives is fully in their interests. And has characterised the UK’s decline over the last couple of decades.

It’s not incremental change but managed decline to protect self-interest.

People were saying the same about Johnson, another empty liar driven by personal ambition rather than values.

I’m really not sure we can afford another — especially one who is surrounded by Labour right-wingers who are dangerously authoritarian and undemocratic in their pursuit of power.

Your answer is to let the Tories carry on?

Because that’s all that would happen if people were to follow your daily digs at Starmer.

The utopia you want doesn’t and won’t exist, so the best we can do is vote for the least worst.

Evolution (hopefully) v revolution (which is actually probably necessary!)

Or we could demand an awful lot better. We’ve sleepwalked to where we are now because of the global and national challenges we’ve failed to address over decades and have brought us austerity, Brexit, wage stagnation, low productivity, growing inequality and poverty, fecked-up housing, low investment, poor public services, a traumatised NHS, personal debt and enormous government debt that hasn’t shifted the metrics but now means we can’t spend what we need. And so on and so on, not least that people already on the margins have less and less protection and security.

Let’s make that choice between “Sh1t” and “Sh1tter” when there is literally no other choice in a GE. But let’s not pretend that the choice is fit for purpose, democratically or socio-economically.

We could all look forward to the EHRC investigation into the Green Party in 2027 I suppose.

Don’t disagree with anything you’ve said there. Just HOW do we demand better? What do your regular posts attacking Starmer actually achieve? They’re not going to get rid of him any time soon, so all it can possibly do (if it’s doing anything) is push a few undecideds somewhere else.

also how do you join cause with the majority of the electorate who don’t recognise dk’s description of the uk. bits of it, yes – the extreme dystopian whole, no. a majority have a comfortable life in the uk which remains a rich nation and a very good place to be middle class. those voters reasonably want security for what they have as well as change to make the place fairer and more efficient. if you can’t form a political coalition with people who are comfortable and haven’t swallowed the dystopian guardian world view whole you will never elect a government or change a single thing. i am amazed that people like dk have no grasp of how you manufacture change in a prosperous democracy. it’s almost as if grand standing matters more than producing any change.

Pfft.

Well, you and your smeary right-wing ilk will certainly be all over that. 😀

Incredibly, not the words of a toddler.

No, they’re words made up by you just now.

You’re basically Roger Waters. But without the wonderful music back catalogue.

They are radical reactionaries, trying to maintain the cash-cow of the 1980s to 2000s.

However, that doesn’t get round the difficulty of persuading people to leap back from a situation they have been walked into and which has made the lives of the majority materially more comfortable* than 40 years ago.

* More stuff, more holidays, more credit to buy things. In exchange for which more inequality, more job insecurity, more damage to the environment.

I agree with everything you say, except I don’t feel that there is time for incremental change, when so many environmental and societal problems, nay catastrophes feel like they are right on top of us.

It’s radical change (economic, political and personal) or die as far as I can see, and the only choice is how voluntarily we do it, and consequently how violent it is. Thinking in terms of the current political arena and social balance seems blinkered to me – we have seen approaching zero meaningful response to the existential threat of climate change over the last thirty years.

We need to think of ourselves at war to change our mindset, and start pulling together and getting by frugally – consumerism and insular individualism is doomed as we continue to expand massively above the carrying capability of planet Earth (both in numbers and mean footprint).

QED

“Labour figures have reacted with dismay to Jeremy Corbyn’s insistence that Labour “won the argument” despite shedding 59 seats at the general election ”

That’s not the same as “It would be much better for the country if they were to lose the election, but win the argument.”

Not sure I fully agree. Many of Corbyn’s policies were very popular (I’ve mentioned before that members of my family voted Labour for the first time in 2017 because they wanted stuff like rail renationalisation). IMO the main issue was his personal unpopularity and an almost entirely hostile media (even the BBC). Unfortunately the right of the party have used his personal unpopularity to also deride his policy programme.

Had we had a Labour leader who was seen as a bit more ‘patriotic’ and had less cranky foreign policy views, I think they’d have done very well. I still think it’s a shame Clive Lewis didn’t get the opportunity to run for the leadership as I think he would have fitted that mould (and also having a leader from outside the big cities would have been a good move).