"Strangely, too, Labour has promised it will continue the government’s policy of spending billions on shipping weapons to Ukraine, to perpetuate a war that is killing Ukrainians and Russians alike and chiefly benefits the arms industry."
The war is perpetuated by the fact that a dictator wants to conquer Ukraine, and nothing else. Ukrainians would rather like to end it tomorrow but that's a bit hard when there's a genocidal army on your lawn shelling your schools and houses.
We on the left have GOT to get over this "both sides"ism when it comes to Russia. Sometimes there really is an unwarranted invasion. Of _course_ the arms industry are the only beneficiaries; war is horrific and nobody involved in one is better off. But the idea that we'll cause _less_ suffering if we just stop helping Ukraine defend itself and give Russia carte blanche to conquer away is frakking ridiculous.
And it is deeply out of place in this article, where it jarringly detracts from an otherwise pitch-perfect analysis of the Starmer problem.
This sounds like Starmer is working with the British State to destroy the left wing labor plan. The actions of Starmer seems like an organized, plot that has its origins at a higher level even beyond corporations and the wealthy.
Labour under Starmer has merely reverted to what it has always been :a Controlled Opposition ". The ascension of Corbyn was (for the establishment) a horrific deviation from the norm. Labour actually started to produce policies that people had expected from it! Scary. Especially for the Labour aristocracy. The time servers in the PLP, the union hierarchy, the liberal media. Moreover, worse than Th e terrifying plans tto reverse decades of structural inequality, were the development of foreign policies that favoured justice over the interests of the power elite of militarism and imperialism. What would our masters in the US say? Something had to be done. And it was. The entire arsenal of weaponry available to a corrupt establishment were deployed. Treachery in the PLP (Neil Windbag Kinnock giving, according to BBC a"tub thumping speech), false claims of anti semitism, media bias of unheard of scale. . Now we are back on safe ground. Starmer is an establishment puppet. But people have seen the promised land and they now know Labour won't take them there it is finished as a credible progressive force in UK politics. As Jonathan says, more radical, direct political action is more likely than ever since Thatcher. Watch this space
Thankyou for this characteristically trenchant summary of the tragedy that has befallen the LP. I'm one of those who joined the Party when JC became Leader and the only reason I haven't yet left is that I'm in the one ward within my constituency of Cambridge that still unashamedly espouses socialist values (- Romsey). Last night, we had our monthly meeting and interestingly openly discussed the existential issues of the Party very much along the lines of your article. Thanks for your excellent summary.
Those still supporting Labour (I used to) would do well to check out the influence of Tony Blair. His institute is clearly modelled on the business lobbying organisation the WEF. It has 750 staff, offices in many countries and the explicit aim of embedding people to influence government policy. And Starmer is cosying up to him.
Nice article. Not sure if you've read any of the peer reviewed study "America is an oligarchy, not a democracy"..... It's kind of mind-blowing how many of their political decisions (no matter the party), benefit the top ten percent and how little benefit the bottom 90% (it was only 5% of all policies enacted into legislation that benefitted the bottom 90% of tax payers over a 20 year period, versus 75% for the top 10%)
This is where we are headed. The parties will fight over cultural issues but the same deregulation and tax breaks will continue until ther ereqoly is nothing left.
Thank you for this, the voter has no real choice, whether you vote Labour or Tory it will make little difference to the lives of those that are just about surviving. We desperately need change, but I can see little hope on the horizon.
A lot has been said and written about Starmer's desperate drive for power and pirouetting on all his policies to seek media approval. What hasn’t been discussed is the rise of fascist groups with a labour government in power. In the 60s and 70s the Wilson /Callahan governments with their austerity IMF driven politics provoked the largest rise of fascist groups both on the streets and in the ballot box since the Second World War. This virtually collapsed when Margaret Thatcher came to power. She knew what to do, her “ swamped by alien culture” speech was engineered specifically to regain the loyalty from the fascist right. It is true to say the Blair era didn’t provoke fascist resurgence but they weren’t austere times and he knew how to play the race card too . So the question is with a weak, vacillating Starmer government in power, pushing an austerity agenda, what will be the response from an angry and humiliated, nationalist working-class? Will it provoke a resurgence of fascist groups and fascist boots on the streets.
'Polly Toynbee made a similar case. “Lack of boldness”, she argued, is the price Starmer must pay to win, before he changes tack in power. Or as she wrote: “Without doubt [Starmer and Reeves] will do, as [Blair’s] New Labour did, far more than they dare promise while tip-toeing towards the finishing line'
Toynbee is fooling herself if she believes that bucket of crap.
Blair is hardly an exemplar to try to convince the Left of the party who left the party in droves.
Corbyn lead the party with the largest membership in Europe. To borrow from Joni Mitchell's "Woodstock" we were half a million strong.
Starmer's ripped up the grass roots and replaced it with corporate horse shit.
There is more chance of My team, Birmingham City winning the Premier League and FA Cup double in the next 3 years than Starmer introducing a fraction of Corbyn's policies.
Where is there any chance of economic democracy under Starmer?
No chance of renationalisation. Just more PPI semi-privatisation. That ended well, didn't it? 🙄
We've seen what Starmer thinks of democracy in candidate selection, with his drop down parachuting in of Starmtroopers (sorry couldn't resist)
Remember when constituents could select their own candidates?
Sorry to veer way off topic, needed to get that off my chest.
Any road, Jonathan has already covered the issue on following the money and covered it well.
You were doing fine until this part:
"Strangely, too, Labour has promised it will continue the government’s policy of spending billions on shipping weapons to Ukraine, to perpetuate a war that is killing Ukrainians and Russians alike and chiefly benefits the arms industry."
The war is perpetuated by the fact that a dictator wants to conquer Ukraine, and nothing else. Ukrainians would rather like to end it tomorrow but that's a bit hard when there's a genocidal army on your lawn shelling your schools and houses.
We on the left have GOT to get over this "both sides"ism when it comes to Russia. Sometimes there really is an unwarranted invasion. Of _course_ the arms industry are the only beneficiaries; war is horrific and nobody involved in one is better off. But the idea that we'll cause _less_ suffering if we just stop helping Ukraine defend itself and give Russia carte blanche to conquer away is frakking ridiculous.
And it is deeply out of place in this article, where it jarringly detracts from an otherwise pitch-perfect analysis of the Starmer problem.
Labour is Conservative, Conservative is Labour. I am voting Green Party just for a change.
From way down in the Antipodes I enjoy your UK centric commentaries, as usual. Spoilt only by the ‘climate catastrophe’ references, again as usual.
Talk about "Mirror Images" you can see the US in the reflection!
This sounds like Starmer is working with the British State to destroy the left wing labor plan. The actions of Starmer seems like an organized, plot that has its origins at a higher level even beyond corporations and the wealthy.
Labour under Starmer has merely reverted to what it has always been :a Controlled Opposition ". The ascension of Corbyn was (for the establishment) a horrific deviation from the norm. Labour actually started to produce policies that people had expected from it! Scary. Especially for the Labour aristocracy. The time servers in the PLP, the union hierarchy, the liberal media. Moreover, worse than Th e terrifying plans tto reverse decades of structural inequality, were the development of foreign policies that favoured justice over the interests of the power elite of militarism and imperialism. What would our masters in the US say? Something had to be done. And it was. The entire arsenal of weaponry available to a corrupt establishment were deployed. Treachery in the PLP (Neil Windbag Kinnock giving, according to BBC a"tub thumping speech), false claims of anti semitism, media bias of unheard of scale. . Now we are back on safe ground. Starmer is an establishment puppet. But people have seen the promised land and they now know Labour won't take them there it is finished as a credible progressive force in UK politics. As Jonathan says, more radical, direct political action is more likely than ever since Thatcher. Watch this space
Sir Kid Starver QC... Putting the national back in socialism...
The Unions need to step up their game.
Thankyou for this characteristically trenchant summary of the tragedy that has befallen the LP. I'm one of those who joined the Party when JC became Leader and the only reason I haven't yet left is that I'm in the one ward within my constituency of Cambridge that still unashamedly espouses socialist values (- Romsey). Last night, we had our monthly meeting and interestingly openly discussed the existential issues of the Party very much along the lines of your article. Thanks for your excellent summary.
Those still supporting Labour (I used to) would do well to check out the influence of Tony Blair. His institute is clearly modelled on the business lobbying organisation the WEF. It has 750 staff, offices in many countries and the explicit aim of embedding people to influence government policy. And Starmer is cosying up to him.
Nice article. Not sure if you've read any of the peer reviewed study "America is an oligarchy, not a democracy"..... It's kind of mind-blowing how many of their political decisions (no matter the party), benefit the top ten percent and how little benefit the bottom 90% (it was only 5% of all policies enacted into legislation that benefitted the bottom 90% of tax payers over a 20 year period, versus 75% for the top 10%)
This is where we are headed. The parties will fight over cultural issues but the same deregulation and tax breaks will continue until ther ereqoly is nothing left.
https://act.represent.us/sign/usa-oligarchy-research-explained
Excellent , valuable summary, right between the eyes. Great stuff. We really are circling the drain.
Thanks for the Driscoll interview. It became a a double feature with a Call Jonathan Pie episode. Let's hope that sense sells.
Thank you for this, the voter has no real choice, whether you vote Labour or Tory it will make little difference to the lives of those that are just about surviving. We desperately need change, but I can see little hope on the horizon.
A lot has been said and written about Starmer's desperate drive for power and pirouetting on all his policies to seek media approval. What hasn’t been discussed is the rise of fascist groups with a labour government in power. In the 60s and 70s the Wilson /Callahan governments with their austerity IMF driven politics provoked the largest rise of fascist groups both on the streets and in the ballot box since the Second World War. This virtually collapsed when Margaret Thatcher came to power. She knew what to do, her “ swamped by alien culture” speech was engineered specifically to regain the loyalty from the fascist right. It is true to say the Blair era didn’t provoke fascist resurgence but they weren’t austere times and he knew how to play the race card too . So the question is with a weak, vacillating Starmer government in power, pushing an austerity agenda, what will be the response from an angry and humiliated, nationalist working-class? Will it provoke a resurgence of fascist groups and fascist boots on the streets.
Will it be out of the frying pan into the fire.
Superb article.
'Polly Toynbee made a similar case. “Lack of boldness”, she argued, is the price Starmer must pay to win, before he changes tack in power. Or as she wrote: “Without doubt [Starmer and Reeves] will do, as [Blair’s] New Labour did, far more than they dare promise while tip-toeing towards the finishing line'
Toynbee is fooling herself if she believes that bucket of crap.
Blair is hardly an exemplar to try to convince the Left of the party who left the party in droves.
Corbyn lead the party with the largest membership in Europe. To borrow from Joni Mitchell's "Woodstock" we were half a million strong.
Starmer's ripped up the grass roots and replaced it with corporate horse shit.
There is more chance of My team, Birmingham City winning the Premier League and FA Cup double in the next 3 years than Starmer introducing a fraction of Corbyn's policies.
Where is there any chance of economic democracy under Starmer?
No chance of renationalisation. Just more PPI semi-privatisation. That ended well, didn't it? 🙄
We've seen what Starmer thinks of democracy in candidate selection, with his drop down parachuting in of Starmtroopers (sorry couldn't resist)
Remember when constituents could select their own candidates?
Sorry to veer way off topic, needed to get that off my chest.
Any road, Jonathan has already covered the issue on following the money and covered it well.