Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[lionking]

How is sticking with Corbyn "ideological purity"?

Really? He's an unreconstructed socialist. Traditional Labour ideology is socialism. This equals unelectability.

People who stick with Corbyn are happy to accept an impotent party. All because of ideological purity. I would have thought this was beyond argument, unless you imagine some sort of socialist resurgence in the UK. Which is lunacy.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I've argued earlier that two centrist parties with policy differences is a viable scenario, as it is in Australia.

But more to the point, the first objective of a serious party with a chance of winning power is to have an electable leader. Labour is sacrificing any chance of power by stubbornly sticking to ideological purity. Stupidity.

This to me is so not what is important for a political party.

But Labour don't have anyone electable in their current guise so by your logic should they just disband the party?

Incidentally 2 centrist parties is not what's on offer. An increasingly right wing Tory party and apparently labour just following their lead blindly is what people seem to be suggesting. Thus won't work in Scotland Wales large parts of Northern England etc. They don't want Tory lite.

In Scotland the SNP will take their vote perhaps elsewhere it's not so clear where they go but I think you arent quite appreciating the political landscape here. There are 3 or 4 different voting segments that Labour are trying to appeal to. I'm not sure it's any longer possible.

Of course Labour could abandon Scotland and just fight it out toe to toe with the Tories for Middle England but that would be the end of the UK in rather short order.

 

[Darat]

Really? He's an unreconstructed socialist. Traditional Labour ideology is socialism. This equals unelectability.

People who stick with Corbyn are happy to accept an impotent party. All because of ideological purity. I would have thought this was beyond argument, unless you imagine some sort of socialist resurgence in the UK. Which is lunacy.

As party leader he has input but does not decide policies. The same people would be deciding on policy no matter who was the leader.

 

[lionking]

This to me is so not what is important for a political party.

But Labour don't have anyone electable in their current guise so by your logic should they just disband the party?

Incidentally 2 centrist parties is not what's on offer. An increasingly right wing Tory party and apparently labour just following their lead blindly is what people seem to be suggesting. Thus won't work in Scotland Wales large parts of Northern England etc. They don't want Tory lite.

In Scotland the SNP will take their vote perhaps elsewhere it's not so clear where they go but I think you arent quite appreciating the political landscape here. There are 3 or 4 different voting segments that Labour are trying to appeal to. I'm not sure it's any longer possible.

Of course Labour could abandon Scotland and just fight it out toe to toe with the Tories for Middle England but that would be the end of the UK in rather short order.

I think fighting it out in the middle is far better than farish left and farish right fighting it out. And would lead to a more stable government. But I understand your position.

 

[lionking]

As party leader he has input but does not decide policies. The same people would be deciding on policy no matter who was the leader.

My main point is that he's unelectable. Do you agree or not? If you agree, what is the solution other than an ideological pure but impotent party?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I think fighting it out in the middle is far better than farish left and farish right fighting it out. And would lead to a more stable government. But I understand your position.

Possibly fighting the middle is OK but if you end up in the US situation where you have far right and medium right then it isn't. And that's where we would seem to be heading.

Incidentally, are Corbyn Labour's policies even that left wing? I don't think I actually recall any of his policies which probably says a lot about the current situation.

I know about Trident which personally I think is a nothing issue that gets people overly excited but what are his economic policies for example? I'm not sure I could really articulate them

 

[Francesca R]

Possibly fighting the middle is OK but if you end up in the US situation where you have far right and medium right then it isn't.

It's rather illogical to suggest that parties seeking to capture the middle both end up on the right. They should end up either side of the middle.

If you think otherwise it is more likely it's you who is some way left of the middle.

I suppose the political view distribution could be multi-modal though I can't recall evidence that this is the case.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

My main point is that he's unelectable. Do you agree or not? If you agree, what is the solution other than an ideological pure but impotent party?

I think Labour is unelectable. Period.

The solution is probably a mass genocide of Tory voters but I don't think that's practical.

I think Labour in Scotland could be salvaged but only if they find a constitutional position that works - perhaps they need to define Devo Max and make it policy or even just switch to an independence platform.

Doing that might allow them to have significantly different positions in Scotland and England on key issues to appeal to the different groups.

Perhaps they could find something similar for the regions of England and devolve greater powers to them. Labour could win London. Wales. Scotland. Other major cities.

Strategically, breaking up the power base of the UK might allow them to capture more influence in specific areas rather than have to win the whole country to get anywhere. The country is Blue. At least in terms of the current system.Maybe they should push for a PR system as an alternative approach?

But I'm afraid the idea that Labour can stand against Conservative and win a straight fight is not realistic in the short term. Not even with a new leader. Not even with 10 new leaders.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It's rather illogical to suggest that parties seeking to capture the middle both end up on the right. They should end up either side of the middle.

If you think otherwise it is more likely it's you who is some way left of the middle.

I suppose the political view distribution could be multi-modal though I can't recall evidence that this is the case.

Do you think the American parties are centrist?

Remember also that politicians influence as well as reflect opinion. The 'centre' can drift.

To be honest I think the left/right thing is an oversimplification of the diversity of opinion in politics but I use it as shorthand.

I don't want to end up in a society that thinks free at the point of delivery universal healthcare is a crazy far left notion. For example. Or that higher education is a commodity to be bought and sold to the highest bidder.

ETA: To take an issue I think we agree on. I don't like the situation where both Labour and Tory are anti-immigration. That to be isn't two parties fighting over the middle. That's two parties on the right of the issue and no dissenting voice.

 

[lionking]

I think Labour is unelectable. Period.

The solution is probably a mass genocide of Tory voters but I don't think that's practical.

I think Labour in Scotland could be salvaged but only if they find a constitutional position that works - perhaps they need to define Devo Max and make it policy or even just switch to an independence platform.

Doing that might allow them to have significantly different positions in Scotland and England on key issues to appeal to the different groups.

Perhaps they could find something similar for the regions of England and devolve greater powers to them. Labour could win London. Wales. Scotland. Other major cities.

Strategically, breaking up the power base of the UK might allow them to capture more influence in specific areas rather than have to win the whole country to get anywhere. The country is Blue. At least in terms of the current system.Maybe they should push for a PR system as an alternative approach?

But I'm afraid the idea that Labour can stand against Conservative and win a straight fight is not realistic in the short term. Not even with a new leader. Not even with 10 new leaders.

As I have said earlier I'm born and bred Labo(u)r. I want a party in power which has socially progressive policies, but which can effectively deal with the big end of town which drives the economy. Labor in Australia can do this. The Greens can't.

Who would I vote for if I was in the UK? I have no idea. If there was a Blairite Labour Party, I would vote for it without hesitation. A Corbyn Labour Party? No way.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

As I have said earlier I'm born and bred Labo(u)r. I want a party in power which has socially progressive policies, but which can effectively deal with the big end of town which drives the economy. Labor in Australia can do this. The Greens can't.

Who would I vote for if I was in the UK? I have no idea. If there was a Blairite Labour Party, I would vote for it without hesitation. A Corbyn Labour Party? No way.

You'd probably vote Tory like everyone else to be honest.

It depends what you mean by socially progressive really. Gay marriage? Immigration? Welfare?

I don't know what the political situation is like in Australia and how homogenous the various parts are but in the UK you have quite big gaps appearing especially on the left and the SNP have put a fairly big spanner in the Labour works.

20 years ago Labour could be guaranteed 50 seats from Scotland no matter what they did. Now they aren't.

The right seems to have held together a bit better. Their biggest debate seems to be whether to string up immigrants or just send them home.
Whether that holds now the EU referendum has been held and we have to deal with the fallout we will need to wait and see but it appears that the UKIP threat has been staved off/conceded to (depending on your view) and the Tories have held onto most of their support.

I think there needs to be a reinvention of the parties and it might be that Labour does need to split to move forward in the long term if the Lib Dem corpse can't be re-animated. There is a need for a slightly left of the Tories alternative in England I think but that's not necessarily an electable party either if you are talking about forming a government.

 

[Craig B]

As I have said earlier I'm born and bred Labo(u)r. I want a party in power which has socially progressive policies, but which can effectively deal with the big end of town which drives the economy. Labor in Australia can do this. The Greens can't.

Who would I vote for if I was in the UK? I have no idea. If there was a Blairite Labour Party, I would vote for it without hesitation. A Corbyn Labour Party? No way.

I don't think Blair has been "dealing" with the "big end of town". He IS the big end of town. If an adviser to JP Morgan isn't the big end of town, who the hell is?

 

[angrysoba]

As I have said earlier I'm born and bred Labo(u)r. I want a party in power which has socially progressive policies, but which can effectively deal with the big end of town which drives the economy. Labor in Australia can do this. The Greens can't.

Who would I vote for if I was in the UK? I have no idea. If there was a Blairite Labour Party, I would vote for it without hesitation. A Corbyn Labour Party? No way.

The Tories fit the bill. They are socially progressive, business friendly and electable. What more can you want? You merely have to unshackle yourself from assumptions foisted on you in your childhood.

 

[lionking]

The Tories fit the bill. They are socially progressive, business friendly and electable. What more can you want? You merely have to unshackle yourself from assumptions foisted on you in your childhood.

Maybe. I'm not convinced of the Tory socially progressive status. The ALP does me. I seriously don't see an electable party in the UK like the ALP. The SDP would get my vote if they weren't a rabble.

 

[Francesca R]

Do you think the American parties are centrist?

They are either side of the American political centre, yes.

To be honest I think the left/right thing is an oversimplification of the diversity of opinion in politics but I use it as shorthand.

Agreed.

I don't want to end up in a society that thinks free at the point of delivery universal healthcare is a crazy far left notion.

On that issue in particular I think there is a particular aspect of universal wefare that is distinctly regressive and not left (inconsistent with a progressive notion of left anyway, more aligned with expanding the size of the state as a good thing in and of itself. Some on the left might like that but normally they don't profess to it), and I don't support a completely free at delivery health service to all. But that is another topic.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

They are socially progressive,.

For very limited values of socially progressive I think.

 

[catsmate]

What chance to you give Labour of forming government under Corbyn? it's 1000/1 for mine.

It depends on the tories. As with the chasing lion, Corbyn doesn't have to be perceived as good, just better than the alternative.

 

[catsmate]

The Tories fit the bill. They are socially progressive, business friendly and electable. What more can you want?

I believe you're thinking of someone other than the UK Conservative party.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

They are either side of the American political centre, yes.
Agreed.

On that issue in particular I think there is a particular aspect of universal wefare that is distinctly regressive and not left (inconsistent with a progressive notion of left anyway, more aligned with expanding the size of the state as a good thing in and of itself. Some on the left might like that but normally they don't profess to it), and I don't support a completely free at delivery health service to all. But that is another topic.

You missed out a couple of my key points and introduce this idea of an 'American' centre which muddies the water.

By that measure the CCP is centrist too since they represent the Chinese centre?

This seems to make a mockery of the idea of left/right/centre meaning anything. You might as well say every elected party is centre since they got the biggest chunk of the vote.

 

[jimbob]

The Tories fit the bill. They are socially progressive, business friendly and electable. What more can you want? You merely have to unshackle yourself from assumptions foisted on you in your childhood.

Theresa May is only socially progressive in comparison to Andrea Leadsom; for all their faults Gove, Cameron and Johnson probably are socially progressive.

I'm not sure how Business friendly it was to arrange the Brexit referendum when there was no need, and certainly don't think that some of the options proposed are business friendly.

They are electable, but only because Labour has an utterly ineffective leader. All Labour need at the moment is someone who doesn't sabotage the party and who is vaguely competent. They *really* don't need to have stellar performance.

The Lib Dems are still irrelevant, and the SNP is only based in Scotland.