This Once Great Movement Of Ours

[Blair]

THIGMOO has a big problem that a lot of the senior people use to work for senior MPs who indulged in this sort of behaviour- just look at all the men who worked for Brown.

The strange thing is how Tony’s office mostly seem to have left politics or went to the private sector

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The left was more accurate about The Briefcases than they will ever know.

Though - and this is exactly as cliché demands, I suppose - for entirely the wrong set of reasons. The problem with such people has never been their attempts to come across as professional...

[Wiswylfen]

The left was more accurate about The Briefcases than they will ever know.

Though - and this is exactly as cliché demands, I suppose - for entirely the wrong set of reasons. The problem with such people has never been their attempts to come across as professional...

I do think that they could do with rather less--I've been to Conference twice (neither time as a delegate: we only send one, us being so miserly that for twenty years straight we sent a railwayman so that we didn't have to pay for train tickets) with nothing but my normal clothes and it hasn't done me any harm--and the left with rather more.

[TheTide]

the very worst aspects of The Thick Of It and The West Wing.

On the latter, putting aside the negative aspects, I will say that the second season finale (specifically, the final few minutes, whenever the great Dire Straits song starts) is one of the greatest television series moments ever IMO.

[CumbrianLefty]

I see the party has finally brought itself down to American/Conservative levels of begging for money: the poorly-cropped bar chart is bad enough, but saying that 'the Tories have a serious shot of clinging on to five more years in power' is on a whole other level.

You do wonder which oddball sociopaths are pouring money into the Tories right now, though.

[Wiswylfen]

An easy and obvious win. Much as I am minded to let tourists and absurdly wealthy idiots waste their money for as long as we must tolerate their presence, that is conditional on (a) that being taxed and (b) not having these eyesores about the place. I won't go as far as to say it's a 'national embarrassment' (some of us have dodgy vape shops, actually) but having visited London many times throughout the year on my ALRs my experience is that would be worth it as a beautification project alone. I suppose the above question has been answered though.

Anyway I hear we've been talking with Burundi.

[JimJamUK]

An easy and obvious win. Much as I am minded to let tourists and absurdly wealthy idiots waste their money for as long as we must tolerate their presence, that is conditional on (a) that being taxed and (b) not having these eyesores about the place. I won't go as far as to say it's a 'national embarrassment' (some of us have dodgy vape shops, actually) but having visited London many times throughout the year on my ALRs my experience is that would be worth it as a beautification project alone. I suppose the above question has been answered though.

If nothing else, it’s a relatively easy step towards reviving major high streets. It’s one thing tolerating a certain type of shop if the premise would otherwise be left empty, but where possible shopping areas should have stores that actually attract people to the area and are productive, job creating businesses. In the Oxford Street case cited above, it’s blatantly obvious what is happening and it’s totally unnecessary to allow these ‘shops’ to continue.

[CumbrianLefty]

An easy and correct win yes, dealing with absentee landlords on the high street next?

[Blair]

Has this been one of the most ordinary THIGMOO years since what 2002?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1740780473130139663?t=fwQux51e3mkpAIMCBOVc...

Tempted to make one of those ironic "i stan mother" vids for Gray.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Sue Gray is an Andy Burnham mole confirmed

[CumbrianLefty]

In other news, it appears that Jon Cruddas has a(nother) book to flog.

[Wiswylfen]

Talk of the 'ethical and spiritual concerns of Labour's early founders' is irrelevant, and if anything I welcome a lack of similarity to George Lansbury. Setting aside whether or not he has a 'theoretical understanding', by which I presume he really means the lack of some Anthony Giddens figure, a more relevant question is if one is needed and what one is worth. I would also dare say that the current programme is and will be more effective at winning over working-class support Labour may or may not have lost than his own ideas ever could have been.

I suppose I have some sympathy: I did like him once, before the Darren Rodwell spat and leaks and everything after, and he is retiring with essentially everything he worked for destroyed. The whole 'Blue Labour' project stands in ruins. What remains of it except Paul Embery and George Owers tweeting in increasingly deranged tones about transgender people, utterly indistinguishable from the carcass of Living Marxism (except, perhaps, for when Paul Embery tweets 'maybe the IDF shouldn't have shot hostages waving a white flag' to his newfound followers' dismay)?

[Blair]

In other news, it appears that Jon Cruddas has a(nother) book to flog.

I was going to ask what his beef is with SKS abut I recall he has done this sort of intervention with every labour leader going back a while…

[EastAnglianLefty]

Talk of the 'ethical and spiritual concerns of Labour's early founders' is irrelevant, and if anything I welcome a lack of similarity to George Lansbury. Setting aside whether or not he has a 'theoretical understanding', by which I presume he really means the lack of some Anthony Giddens figure, a more relevant question is if one is needed and what one is worth. I would also dare say that the current programme is and will be more effective at winning over working-class support Labour may or may not have lost than his own ideas ever could have been.

I suppose I have some sympathy: I did like him once, before the Darren Rodwell spat and leaks and everything after, and he is retiring with essentially everything he worked for destroyed. The whole 'Blue Labour' project stands in ruins. What remains of it except Paul Embery and George Owers tweeting in increasingly deranged tones about transgender people, utterly indistinguishable from the carcass of Living Marxism (except, perhaps, for when Paul Embery tweets 'maybe the IDF shouldn't have shot hostages waving a white flag' to his newfound followers' dismay)?

Though it's mostly been destroyed because everybody asking "OK, what does that actually mean, in practice?" was viewed as a threat, because it turned out there wasn't an answer.

[Wiswylfen]

Talk of the 'ethical and spiritual concerns of Labour's early founders' is irrelevant, and if anything I welcome a lack of similarity to George Lansbury. Setting aside whether or not he has a 'theoretical understanding', by which I presume he really means the lack of some Anthony Giddens figure, a more relevant question is if one is needed and what one is worth. I would also dare say that the current programme is and will be more effective at winning over working-class support Labour may or may not have lost than his own ideas ever could have been.

I suppose I have some sympathy: I did like him once, before the Darren Rodwell spat and leaks and everything after, and he is retiring with essentially everything he worked for destroyed. The whole 'Blue Labour' project stands in ruins. What remains of it except Paul Embery and George Owers tweeting in increasingly deranged tones about transgender people, utterly indistinguishable from the carcass of Living Marxism (except, perhaps, for when Paul Embery tweets 'maybe the IDF shouldn't have shot hostages waving a white flag' to his newfound followers' dismay)?

Though it's mostly been destroyed because everybody asking "OK, what does that actually mean, in practice?" was viewed as a threat, because it turned out there wasn't an answer.

There was: babbling on about 'Tory socialism'; and when that fails, do everything you can to appeal to the most disturbed sorts of Twitter right-wingers. Kind of like how the Continuity Continuity SDP's 'communitarian social democracy' is just saying whatever's popular with that demographic, rewriting (or just ignoring) policy as necessary.

[TheTide]

Speaking of George Lansbury, someone apparently claimed recently that Labour was only ever a socialist party for four years of its existence (2015-2019). Corbyn wasn't even the most 'socialist' or 'left-wing' leader the party has ever had. Taking Hardie, early MacDonald, Lansbury and Foot into account, it wouldn't be entirely absurd to leave him out of the top three on that particular score.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh that sounds like the usual proprietary attitude a certain type of Hard/Far Left loser takes towards such things. Tedious people and always wrong.

[JimJamUK]

Speaking of George Lansbury, someone apparently claimed recently that Labour was only ever a socialist party for four years of its existence (2015-2019). Corbyn wasn't even the most 'socialist' or 'left-wing' leader the party has ever had. Taking Hardie, early MacDonald, Lansbury and Foot into account, it wouldn't be entirely absurd to leave him out of the top three on that particular score.

The definition of left wing/socialist for a lot of people these days seems to be more about Israel or culture wars than tax, spend and government intervention in the economy.

[JimJamUK]

I suppose I have some sympathy: I did like him once, before the Darren Rodwell spat and leaks and everything after, and he is retiring with essentially everything he worked for destroyed. The whole 'Blue Labour' project stands in ruins. What remains of it except Paul Embery and George Owers tweeting in increasingly deranged tones about transgender people, utterly indistinguishable from the carcass of Living Marxism (except, perhaps, for when Paul Embery tweets 'maybe the IDF shouldn't have shot hostages waving a white flag' to his newfound followers' dismay)?

Blue Labour could have had a positive contribution to the party if they’d went out and spoke to ordinary Labour voters, but instead it became dominated by weirdo academics and the Extremely Online. And even if they’d got the right policies and language, they’d still have needed either substantial trade union support or a long-term plan to actually get those normie Labour voters to get involved with the party, as anything remotely Workerist would face strong opposition from the middle class liberals who dominate debate and membership in parties like Labour these days. In the end, we’ve gotten a Remain voting, London lawyer dragging the party back to something approaching the old right.

[Blair]

I mean the thing I always found weird about Blue Labour is that the party already has a relatively conservative message on law & order and on immigration; even the 2017 & 2019 manifesto on these issues was 'recruit more prison officers', 'recruit more bobbies' and keep the immigration system broadly the same as it was (with some exceptions & reforms around charges/salary thresholds) and avoided any sort of liberal reforms around things like sentencing, drug laws or so on.

The reaction by hyper online (often US) leftists when they find this out is often a sign of the extent of just how different the party is; I guess its similar to when UK politicians find out how our comrades in France talk about religion & specifically Islam. 

I remember there being a discussion on here a while back about the fact that Labour is not a progressive party, nor a left-liberal party; it is a democratic socialist party founded by the Labour Movement.

What always worried me about Blue Labour was that the above basically meant that I suspected they they had something else in their sights; either they wanted to go further (or backwards) on cultural issues or they wanted to just try and pretend that waving the England flag and talking about 'identity' at seminars could be a substitute for actual policy solutions.

I don't actually know for example what their policy on taxation was?

[Wiswylfen]

Speaking of George Lansbury, someone apparently claimed recently that Labour was only ever a socialist party for four years of its existence (2015-2019). Corbyn wasn't even the most 'socialist' or 'left-wing' leader the party has ever had. Taking Hardie, early MacDonald, Lansbury and Foot into account, it wouldn't be entirely absurd to leave him out of the top three on that particular score.

The definition of left wing/socialist for a lot of people these days seems to be more about Israel or culture wars than tax, spend and government intervention in the economy.

I suppose you could argue there's always been a bit of that: disarmament has always been a significant issue. But that's still something that's actually relevant rather than a foreign conflict. As for 'culture wars', even now, not so much? The (retired) public-sector professionals who live in Muswell Hill or wherever would like to think trans rights is a left/right issue, but support is basically unanimous among young members and the only people who get mad about it are right-wingers (in the general, non-Labour sense) who have been instructed to care about the current thing and deranged lunatics half of whom cried on Twitter over the murderer of a newborn child getting a prison sentence.

I suppose I have some sympathy: I did like him once, before the Darren Rodwell spat and leaks and everything after, and he is retiring with essentially everything he worked for destroyed. The whole 'Blue Labour' project stands in ruins. What remains of it except Paul Embery and George Owers tweeting in increasingly deranged tones about transgender people, utterly indistinguishable from the carcass of Living Marxism (except, perhaps, for when Paul Embery tweets 'maybe the IDF shouldn't have shot hostages waving a white flag' to his newfound followers' dismay)?

Blue Labour could have had a positive contribution to the party if they’d went out and spoke to ordinary Labour voters, but instead it became dominated by weirdo academics and the Extremely Online. And even if they’d got the right policies and language, they’d still have needed either substantial trade union support or a long-term plan to actually get those normie Labour voters to get involved with the party, as anything remotely Workerist would face strong opposition from the middle class liberals who dominate debate and membership in parties like Labour these days. In the end, we’ve gotten a Remain voting, London lawyer dragging the party back to something approaching the old right.

Well, it was that from the start. The name itself is a good indicator of that. A lot less of the party is 'middle-class liberal' than you might think. To use where I am as an example: Newcastle East, yes, absolutely, and returning to the above the number of aforementioned lunatics is very funny in an awful way; Tynemouth, yes, largely, though not completely; but in North Tyneside (which should really have returned to being named Wallsend) between the two the party is still very working-class. Same story in a lot of post-industrial, working-class areas.

Lawyer living in London though he may be, remember that Starmer's background is in the southern English working class. Even Emily Thornberry, much misunderstood by dim, easily-triggered right-wingers, went through some really horrible times for which she got awful abuse.

[Wiswylfen]

I mean the thing I always found weird about Blue Labour is that the party already has a relatively conservative message on law & order and on immigration; even the 2017 & 2019 manifesto on these issues was 'recruit more prison officers', 'recruit more bobbies' and keep the immigration system broadly the same as it was (with some exceptions & reforms around charges/salary thresholds) and avoided any sort of liberal reforms around things like sentencing, drug laws or so on.

The reaction by hyper online (often US) leftists when they find this out is often a sign of the extent of just how different the party is; I guess its similar to when UK politicians find out how our comrades in France talk about religion & specifically Islam.  

I remember there being a discussion on here a while back about the fact that Labour is not a progressive party, nor a left-liberal party; it is a democratic socialist party founded by the Labour Movement.

What always worried me about Blue Labour was that the above basically meant that I suspected they they had something else in their sights; either they wanted to go further (or backwards) on cultural issues or they wanted to just try and pretend that waving the England flag and talking about 'identity' at seminars could be a substitute for actual policy solutions.

I don't actually know for example what their policy on taxation was?

Of course Labour is a left-Liberal party. For all the talk of the Blue Labour types, Tory involvement was minimal; we are a party rooted in Liberalism. From which for me personally has emerged an affinity with those right-Liberals in the Conservative Party who care not for the party's aristocratic and one-nation (I use that term in its real sense) guff.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don't actually know for example what their policy on taxation was?

Yes, one of the big problems with the whole project was just that it was (is?) extremely, extremely woolly. There is actually some merit in noting that, in certain respects, social democracy is in part now a conservative concept (a heritage, inheritance and tradition to defend and build upon etc) and that, as such, there may be mileage in legacy socialist parties making this part of their appeal, but 'Blue Labour' never took much interest in that idea, preferring what often sounded like boozy post-research seminar waffle.

[Wiswylfen]

I don't actually know for example what their policy on taxation was?

Yes, one of the big problems with the whole project was just that it was (is?) extremely, extremely woolly. There is actually some merit in noting that, in certain respects, social democracy is in part now a conservative concept (a heritage, inheritance and tradition to defend and build upon etc) and that, as such, there may be mileage in legacy socialist parties making this part of there appeal, but 'Blue Labour' never took much interest in that idea, preferring what often sounded like boozy post-research seminar waffle.

I'm not sure about describing that as conservative, particularly in an English context.