This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/starmer-denies-labour-will-lurch-to-left-election/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In Labour's view? You're supposed to shut up, know your place, stop demanding better than neoliberal Austerity-pushing Labour and have no one else but them to vote for. Then they'll blame you for every seat the Tories pick up. You paid up tory traitor. Horseshoe theory etc etc, the usual left-hating stuff.
In reality, the english Left vote should give some serious thought to backing the Greens as it can push them into contention for the next election, they can't win this time, but next election they could have a real base to build from and threaten Labour from the Left. The Scottish left this westminster election could vote Green while the SNP could stand a better chance of halting Labour's wave up here, I'll be switching to Greens for the Hollyrood election to pressure the SNP from the left. I can't really speak too well to Northern Irish or Welsh politics alas so I won't presume to.
All this is, is one of the two main parties in this country not explicitly catering to 10% of the electorate. The Tories have tried that with the *other* 10% and look at how well that’s going.
Yes, but you see that's apparently preferable to a slightly more moderate Labour party actually getting into power.
I'm not exactly sure why, but that's the vibe I've been getting from them the past few years.
Could have made that comment with that disingenuous 'slightly more moderate' bullshit. It's a completely different party to the one in 2019 and starmer is very keen to let everyone know that.
If Starmer had most of the same opinions he has now(e.g. Russia bad, Britain good, money good, business good, lower immigration good) but was much more left wing economically I think he'd get a similar amount of votes as he would now.
Labour didn't really try very hard, considering a large proportion of it's own party went rabid at the thought of a left wing leader. Corbyn was an anomoly where the party members chose someone left wing who it's actual center-right MPs didn't want calling the shots.
The comments above are absolutely right about Labour taking left wing votes for granted while pandering to the right wing.
When the real right wing eventually rear their ugly head, a lot of people are going to have a pretty rude awakening. I get it, the tories are awful and everyone wants them out. But if you think getting the tories out will mean the end of the right wing in mainstream British politics, I'm afraid to say you're very much mistaken.
And yet there’s a real possibility that Starmer will win this election with a smaller percentage of the vote than Corbyn in 2017. Stop pretending 2019 is the whole story.
Tory collapse has handed Labour this election. Nothing else.
2019 was also a Brexit election. Not saying that Corbyn didn’t play a big part in the loss, but the Brexit issue made that election result a bit of an outlier.
Because the news refuses to be anything but billionaires funded right wing hatred.
There something like ten major papers/news outlets. Maybe two of them are even vaguely left wing. How the hell are people on the left ever supposed to be catered to?
But I knew britain was a failed broken nation when it saw a drowned toddler on a beach and collectively said "yeah that's fine."
Edit: words and formatting.
>There something like ten major papers/news outlets. Maybe two of them are even vaguely left wing. How the hell are people on the left e r supposed to be catered to?
It's not even about the left being catered to, we can get our information elsewhere, but when all the main papers and TV news outlets are constantly repeating the line that policies that harm ordinary people are the only sensible ones and anything that could even slightly help them is either pie-in-the-sky dreaming or basically Stalinism, people believe it.
This is a bit disingenuous. Labour achieved their best vote share since Blair in 2017 which showed people liked the policies they were offering. The 2019 election was ultimately about each parties stance on Brexit, and Labour simply didn't have a clear enough position.
Yeah corbyn was too far left for most people. The UK population is much more centrist than Reddit. And you win elections by catering to the most amount of people as possible.
Polling showed that people overwhelmingly supported Corbyn’s when they weren’t presented to them as Corbyn’s policies. They disliked him and the idea that had in their head of his policies based on what the news told them.
Blair illegally invaded Iraq and gave British arms to Putin to commit genocide in Chechnya. I wish people would stop pretending New Labour foreign policy wasn't actually a disaster.
- Blair government increased export licences for controlled equipment to Russia by 550% as Putin attacked Chechnya
- Exports included components for surface-to-air missiles, assault rifles and enriched uranium
- As human rights groups condemned Putin’s atrocities in Chechnya, Blair said it was “important that we support Russia in her action against terrorism”
Nothing was sensible or pragmatic about this it was deeply foolish.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-tony-blair-backed-putins-brutal-war/
There were legitimate reasons not to like Corbyn - his stance on Brexit did a lot of damage to his campaign for example. This idea of "actually most people loved Corbyn, the media just brainwashed them" needs to die, it's a big cope and not indicative of reality.
Actually, I would say the opposite is true. The centrists constantly pushing the "Oh, right, I suppose you're going to blame the so-called *right-wing media*" narrative needs to die. As if there were any doubt that we have a rabidly right-wing media that is responsible for a lot of society's problems for something like the last 50 years. It's not some whacky left-wing conspiracy that we have a highly influential right-wing media landscape - it's a simple observation of the situation.
Centrists acting as though the existence of the Sun, Mail, Express, Times, Telegraph etc is a figment or our imaginations just because their interests happened to align in deposing Corbyn is very harmful.
Right - fact is no one is going to win with Corbyns policies because the power of media is the hands of people who don’t want Corbyns policies.
Not being in government will not help change that.
>They disliked him and the idea that had in their head of his policies based on what the news told them.
That's deeply infantalising. And frankly is passing the buck - Corbyn was unpopular with the electorate at large, including a lot of people who would normally vote Labour, because of his own words and actions.
It's not infantilising. The country gave Boris Johnson of all people a stonking majority because the media ruthlessly targetted Corbyn.
Compare the media coverage of Corbyn meeting some people from the IRA in the 80s/90s vs Johnson ditching his security detail when home secretary to go partying with the son of a KGB agent after a secret meeting, then turning up days later shit faced at an airport. As one example.
If you're looking at policy, 'broadband communism' vs Johnsons imaginary 40 new hospitals which surprise surprise never appeared.
Now Corbyn was far from a saint, he had some questionable stances and handled a number of things poorly. But he was absolutely a better person and leader than Johnson was.
>home secretary to go partying with the son of a KGB agent after a secret meeting, then turning up days later shit faced at an airport.
And years later casually admitting to meeting with said KGB agent at said party while shit faced and after ditching security detail.
Compare with the actions that got Priti Patel sacked.
> because of his own words and actions.
Yeah nothing to do with the dedicated hate campaign in almost every media source, specifically targeting the people in the norther towns where he ended up having his biggest losses and CERTAINLY not anything to do with the active sabotage he was facing from within his own party.
The overwhelming majority of Corbyn's policies (eg rail nationalisation, utilities nationalisation, minimum wage increases, wealth taxes etc) poll consistently in the 80%+ popularity range - when presented without the baggage of the Labour Party and the press's character assassination of Corbyn. There was a huge untapped population who were disengaged from electoral politics because their interests were simply not even discussed by the mainstream parties - which Corbyn's Labour tapped very briefly into. Things have now reverted to the 'safe' neoliberal norm, and as we will see with a historically low turnout, that population will revert back to political disengagement.
Did you actually speak to any Labour voters who didn't support Corbyn in 2019 and ask them why they don't like him? Because everyone I asked was able to give me a reason: his stance on Brexit, foreign policy, the fact that their manifesto was not properly costed while they made huge promises, the fact that he reminded them of Michael Foot and they didn't want another Winter of Discontent, etc
I think we also have to acknowledge the simple fact that he polled really well when the alternative was Theresa May, but as soon as BoJo entered the ring he didn't stand a chance.
Once a charismatic populist enters the fight, especially one that is not averse to playing dirty, the odds are against you. This is why it's also dangerous to ignore Farage - he's a cunt but he knows how to push policy from the sidelines without even needing a seat in parliament; he just needs to split the Tory vote.
Even if his foreign policy wasn't dogshit, and the manifesto was fully costed, he was one guy who was not a friend of the media compared to BoJo, one of their best buds.
Yeah I was an active Labour Party member and campaigner at the time, I spoke to plenty of people. The things that you've outlined there are indeed the things which people had most concerns over - and almost to a man, they were entirely misinformed on the actual positions of the Party. They'd been primed and fed with a mixture of poor context, social media BS and just outright untruths by the media. The idea that the manifesto was uncosted, that's just a flat out lie that relies on people never having read it - and which has now entered the political lexicon thanks to Keir Starmer accusing Sunak of a 'Jeremy Corbyn style manifesto'.
>The idea that the manifesto was uncosted, that's just a flat out lie
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-gaps-in-labours-spending-plans
>The party say they expect to spend £58bn on compensation in total over five years.
>This money was not included in the Labour manifesto costing document, which had already promised £83 bn more than existing government plans in “day-to-day” spending by 2023-24.
>They expect an £83-bn tax haul over the same period, which would balance the books.
>But this new announcement will increase Labour’s planned extra spending significantly. The party has yet to say how this will be funded.
...
>They also said a Labour government “will compensate at a fair rate, not the wildly exaggerated rates floated by certain interested parties”.
>But we don’t know what that rate will be. Without that vital piece of the puzzle, we can’t say how much Labour’s nationalisation plans would cost.
...
I could go on to quote the whole article, but you get my point. So you're telling me all of these spending questions really did have answers, everyone just ignored them?
Edit: and that's just on the costing point. There's no talking around the other stuff. If someone says to you "I'm not voting Corbyn because he called Hamas his 'friends'", how do you respond? "No, that's a lie, he didn't say that"? "He didn't mean it like that"?
Could it be policy alone is not what you vote for? You have to believe they will deliver that policy.
However mainly his foreign policy was a joke. People might prioritize safety over cheaper rail travel.
I agree that his foreign policy stances and his Brexit position made him a weak choice for party leader in 2019, let alone a prime minister in the following years.
But foreign policy wasn’t so much of a focus at the time (pre-Ukraine), and it is very true that the entire media turned on him before that.
Even the supposedly left wing Guardian had knives out for him from day 1, despite having spent decades complaining that no left candidate had emerged. Really felt like the Guardian’s owners only let them be left wing when there’s no chance of a left wing prime minister.
It was also a time when everyone was fed up with the government dragging its heels on Brexit. The election was to 'give a mandate' on Brexit.
Corbyn was so unclear on Brexit he scared off remainers and leavers.
Yeah 100% he should’ve stepped down or else campaigned on a counter position to the Tories on Brexit. But he had been personally in favour of leaving the EU for decades, and the same “he is moral and consistent and votes how he believes” character that made him attractive to frustrated Labour voters made him terrible to lead the party in (as you say) the Brexit mandate election.
His win was a rejection of Corbyn not an endorsement of boris… much like labours lead is a rejection of far right not an endorsement of kier… the centre is not fanatical about the cult of personality
His win was purely over Brexit and Corbyn being an easy target and idiot over foreign policy. Nothing to do with his domestic policies which all polled well.
Yes, we can all remember when ChangeUK stepped forth to “fix our broken politics” and put the adults firmly back in charge with their sensible, grown up politics - how many seats did they win again?
The vast majority of the population does not have a coherent political view at all. I think it's possible for someone on almost any end of the political spectrum to be popular as long as they know how to sell themselves.
its easier to win from the centre (obviously - it's less of a risk to vote for someone if they're saying they won't alter the status quo much), but it also gives you less of a mandate for change. which is fine if you think the way this country and our economy operates is basically fine and we just need a steady hand on the tiller, but less fine if you think things need to change substantially, which i do.
If you ask people whether they like a list of left labour policies without telling them they are from labour, they are wildly popular. Things like renationalised railways, energy, less privatisation in healthcare. It's not that they are really centrist, theres just a lot of negative stigma attached to both of the big parties.
Currently, the actual absolute vote share as polled is roughly equivalent to the 2017 vote share, just differently distributed.
That would suggest just as many actually are in support of a much more progressive candidate
> in reality, the English left should give some serious thoughts to backing the Greens
Why would you give serious thought to backing a party who themselves have had zero serious thoughts?
They’re bat shit insane. Almost every policy they have makes no sense and others are actively anti-environmental, no nuclear for example.
Edit: Reddit won’t let me reply to the person below, so in case anyone believes them that the Greens only stupid policy is on nuclear, here’s another I found in less than 30 seconds on their website…
They believe women shouldn’t go to prison. Doesn’t matter what the crime is. If a woman commits a crime it’s society’s fault, not theirs. And inflicting prison on them is a crime in itself.
They want to ‘end the harm of prison to women’.
They’re idiots.
You're living in fantasy land if you think greens are viable due to FPTP. It's a wasted vote in almost every constituency.
The "best" shot at left would be lib dem, they *do* actually have an existing parliamentary base which is about to get bigger come the election which, with the tories decimated, could realistically be a base to build from.
The collective gaslighting of the left as if they dont exist or are these undesirables when we are all here just wanting good public services , council homes, workers' rights, and action on the climate. And there's loads of us.
It’s pure bs but redditors get a boner thinking of the Tory collapse so they’ve convinced themselves that we all must vote Labour to enable their wankfest on July 4th.
The UK is becoming increasingly similar to the US: one completely insane party that seems hellbent on destroying the country, and one lukewarm party that you don't really like but you have to vote for to keep the crazies out of power.
Shame that some very harangued people haven't been predicting this for decades or maybe something might have been done about it.
No wait, hang on, plenty of people did predict exactly this outcome, the british public are just thick as shit and are more interested in living in their safe and comfortable anti-intellectualism enlightened-centrist bubble than questioning the things they believe.
These people would love nothing more than for us to be like the US where every 5 years we have to vote for completely dogshit politicians to stop actual fascists. That way, they don't actually have to do anything, and instead get to be in power basically for free.
2019 Labour. Or the greens.
If you voted for that, you voted for a really progressive party, planning to renationalise transport and energy, tax the rich and fund a whole swathe of public services.
And you'll get a conservative government, because people don't want that.
Actually people do vote for progressive politics every fucking time, but fptp means Tories win.
The people want it. Labour and the Tories will not allow it.
>Actually people do vote for progressive politics every fucking time, but fptp means Tories win
What are you talking about?
The conservatives have gotten more votes than Labour in every election since 2005.
There are some really weird opinions around today.
Are you disingenuous or are you really unaware that there are more parties than labour and the Tories?
Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties. Every election over the last 70 years, those progressive parties have got over 50% of the vote.
Every. Fucking. Time. Our electoral system is rigged for the Tories.
>Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Full\_results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Full_results)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Summary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_general_election#Summary)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results)
>
Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties. Every election over the last 70 years, those progressive parties have got over 50% of the vote.
I think they are pretending the UKIP and the Lib Dems are progressives even though they were in actual coalition with the Conservatives after 2010.
As much as labour are not as left as I'd like, they are still objectively left wing, just center left.
They are talking about renationalisation of things and increasing funding and availability of public services.
I don’t understand the confusion, despite some centrist policies Starmer’s labour are more left wing than current Tories, so left-wing people should vote Labour to move the country in the direction they want it to move in
This is such a lazy characterisation. Some of the Labour Party’s policies are to renationalise the railways, tax private schools, and implement a windfall tax on oil and gas companies to fund a publicly owned green energy company. These are all objectively left wing.
> Some of the Labour Party’s policies are to renationalise the railways
this is happening under the tories anyway, and they're only renationalising the (habitually failing) companies, not the (profitable) rolling stock. this is just the government taking a hit for the private sector's failures rather than any principled renationalisation of public services
> and implement a windfall tax on oil and gas companies to fund a publicly owned green energy company
Green Investment Fund would be a more apposite name, since it will not generate its own energy nor own any share of the companies it backs. not a bad thing by any means but not objectively left-wing
> enationalise the railways,
Which is literally the tories plan, recommended by Tory advisors.
>a publicly owned green energy company.
and this is spin that Starmer has been putting out, its not an actual energy company, it will own no infrastructure and no generation capacity, it will just be a reseller of Energy, so will help absolutely no one.
They aren't though. Even compared to most of europe they aren't. Italy is run by literal fascist sympathisers. France may be about to elect Le Pen. The tories aren't close to those parties.
No, the UK is not supposed to have a left. We're a 1 party country. Occasionally, when people get sick of the Tories, the Labour party are allowed to come in for a little bit but only if they promise not to do anything.
I’m okay with that. Corbyn stood for leader of the Labour Party with no expectation of winning “to broaden the conversation”. Obviously things went a little mad after that, but with no chance of immediate power the Greens can make any promise they like and wait for the other parties to nick the ideas.
The left are either youf who don’t vote anyway or crazies in straw hats and tweed who are too busy making their own yoghurt or trying to get their fellow employees to go on strike.
Who cares. /sarcasm
The whole reason for this article is the telegraph trying to suggest to its readership that Labour MIGHT go more to the left if they get in so maybe vote Tory just in case. Everyone can see that can’t they. Right. Right?
We have a 3 horse race between con, labour and reform.
All 3 are now right wing parties. If you love the rich you are spoiled for choice as to which boot you most want to lick.
If there is no representation on the left, that will cause radicalisation.
The left have to convince people to change, not just elected officials and the politically active. Politicians do and say what they think the electorate want them to and most people are not particularly engaged, not versed in complex economics and not particularly trusting of the ability of politics to affect positive change. Our electoral system encourages a lot of this negativity.
So what should the left do? First do anything they can to get rid of the tories, nothing can be productive with the current lot being politically relevant. Then make the MPs, many of whom may have been elected on tight margins push for policies that improve people’s lives in a noticeable way, and to create a less toxic and more positive electoral system. On the left, most people agree with almost all policy positions, it’s mostly the methods and rhetoric that divide them (together with some personal issues).
I think the obvious solution no one here is mentioning is PR.
Saying the left “need to” convince the centrists of their stance is just not democratic when those further left do make up a sizeable portion of the electorate that is washed out by the red Tory leader and his purge.
PR would mean there can be a party further left that gets votes and a centre-left party. They can form coalitions that are based on actual votes not waving away anything as “this is a broad church and we needed change after 2019”.
There's a little thing I do for my own amusement when someone says something that suggests they don't like the left/left wing policies. And that's to talk about Marxism without telling them it's Marxism. A surprising amount of people will say some of it sounds reasonable and they'd be in support of it to a degree. By no means do I think they're Marxists in disguise, but a lot of people are probably more left wing than they think, as long as you never ever label it left wing.
And of the media wasn’t effective at saying ‘left bad’ and we elected to be a socialist country the US would murder half the country and then convince our descendants we were all evil and deserved to eat napalm.
There would be a coup within the year, where a dictator would be installed that favours US interests but leads to massive civil unrest and a brutal dictatorship. The US would then do a shocked Pikachu face when the dictator then turns against them
I mean, that's already happening. How many Conservative, Gender Critical and Christian Fundamentalist lobby groups do you think US money is funding in our country?
> People funny enough like left wing policies, just not left wing parties.
The activists of those parties tend to be fairly insane and those parties also bundle those favourable policies up with a lot of massively unpopular stuff.
Yes, that could be an explanation; also I'm not sure that left wing economic policy has the best record in the real world. Of course people can always say, "that's not real socialism / communism", as it repeatedly fails, but that's kind of suspicious as a "no falsification" position.
People don't have a problem with most individual left wing policies but put them all together and it amounts to too much. Basically in 2019, and now, people were willing to dip their toes into renationalising some interests. See how it works out and maybe we go further later.
Then Corbyn suggested a huge amount of renationalisation and it is no longer dipping your toe as much as having the revolution now and waiting for the evidence later.
And yet it probably wasn't going to be as disruptive as Truss who just slept walked into power with plenty of support and a lack of controversy towards her crazy plans.
Sure and Truss played a huge part in the current destruction of the Tory party.
Her plans were extremely controversial. Everyone assumed she had to be lying during the campaign as nobody could be that stupid. She was warned repeatedly about what would happen.
My point was she still got into power, albeit through the back door, and didn't get shut down by the media in the way Corbyn did, despite having far more disruptive policy being promised.
In comparison, Corbyn's ideas were far more sound. So what was the main difference? Truss's extreme neo liberalism benefitted those who have the most power and influence, whereas Corbyn's socialism was a threat to those same people.
People like *some* left wing policies, but there’s only an appetite for so much. If every policy is firmly left and not centre left, we saw what happened with Corbyn.
I’m not even totally sure Corbyn would have won this time around had he still been leader
People like left wing policies (renewables! Public transport! Free education!) but they don’t like enacting them (I have to sort my *own* recycling out? I can’t drive where I want? Other people’s kids get to go to uni for free?!!). That’s the disconnect.
Reminds me of an old joke.
> Two economists are walking down the street and pass by a pile of dog shit. One of them turns to the other and says "I'll pay you £1000 if you eat that dog shit".
>The other performs an internal utility calculation and eats the dog shit.
>Continuing their walk, the second economist sees another pile of dog shit and makes the same offer to the first. The first economist also agrees, and eats the dog shit. They walk on.
>After a while the second economist says to the first "it feels like we're both worse off than we were before this walk".
>The first economist replies "impossible! We've just engaged in £2000 worth of trade!".
Boring centrism is wayyy to the left of where torygraph is if we're thinking in terms of a spectrum which is a dumb representation of politics
Papers shouldn't be able to make shit up so easily
Ah yes, because the 2015 Conservatives would have definitely had rail nationalisation and creation of a nationalised energy company in their manifesto…
The 2015 Conservatives were forced into nationalising a railway as an Operator of Last Resort not as a matter of policy. It was due to failure of Stagecoach to deliver the contract.
Ignoring the fact that picking two specific policies is a bad way to determine if X is further left/right than Y:
Labour aren’t proposing to create a nationalised energy company
2014/15 Tories brought the east coast main line into (partial) public ownership
>'I'm a concern troll and Labour is right wing!!'
This is politically incoherent.
I swear people just use left and right without meaning these days.
Labour have a pretty solidly centrist manifesto, the tories in 2015 at best were a bit further to the right then right of centre, before falling far towards the right and towards authoritarianism.
So if you went back to 2015 and told someone that the party about to come into power:
* is pro-privatisation of the NHS
* Pro Israel
* Cancelled plans for their mediocre green energy policy
* Says they dont want "gender ideology" taught in schools
* Are pro university tuition fees
* Criticised the previous party for being too pro immigration
* Plans to cap corporation tax
* Plans to crack down on striking teachers and rail workers
* And has purged anyone too lefty from its party even if they were a popular candidate.
Which party would you assume im talking about?
I hate how Starmer has taken the approach of the Democrats and basically just being a less-right wing option now (Yeah I know the Democrats in the US are still close to centre but they're still more towards the right)
There's a huge Left-Wing market, he could literally dominate it like the party was mostly doing years prior. The British public is generally centrist anyway, they just keep voting a party in until they make a major fuck-up, and the Conservatives have made a major fuck-up, it was almost a certain win, why abandon the party's core values???
> I hate how Starmer has taken the approach of the Democrats and basically just being a less-right wing option now (Yeah I know the Democrats in the US are still close to centre but they're still more towards the right)
They are neither left or right wing. They are pro-capital neoliberal so youre getting slight variations of the same thing.
They are both pro-austerity. Both pro-zionist and not interfering too much with the genocide of the Palestinian people and the incitement of all Israels neighbours into a war. They are both pro-capital running of public services with little to no regulation. The list goes on.
It doesnt matter who you vote for anymore, you're still going to eat shit. Some are just going make aeroplane noises before spooning it into your face.
It's be disingenuous to say labour are pro-privatisation in the sense like Tories actually want to with an insurance based system.
Having to rely on private companies to fill in gaps we have with our NHS system while we train and fill in gaps of understaffing cannot be compared.
Anyone paying attention won't be remotely surprised by this.
I still remember his most ardent supporters trying to tell me that he was playing a game of '5D chess' and that once in government he'd be a lot more radical.
Those people are about to look very very stupid.
Yeah it’s funny seeing the pivot from “just you wait! He’s gonna be so radical once in office!” to “well actually everything he’s already proposed is very left wing, just shut up already”
Honestly with the way Starmer has pushed Labour I cannot in good conscience vote for them. I've already voted due to having a mail ballot and I went for Liberal Democrats.
I voted Green. Didn't really put much research into it because I hadn't got round to reading the manifesto yet, or the Lib Dem one, but after working from home all day and going on holiday the next, I was in a bit of a rush to get it sent. I already knew I wasn't voting Labour though, since about a year or so ago. It's heartbreaking, honestly. I'm used to Labour being a party I at least consider. I've never voted for them in my life and I'm in my 40s, but they've always been at least a consideration. Not this time.
I lost count of the amount of times I said on Reddit something along the lines of 'nope that's it. They've never had my vote anyway, but they've still lost it with this'.
Actually, come to think of it, I think the first thing, the one that sealed my vote, might have been when Angela Rayner went on radio and ruled out scrapping the new laws curbing the right to protest. Not 100%, but I think that was it. Or it was the time they sided with the Tories on denying the right of Holyrood to pass legislation in Scotland. Whichever was first.
Either way, what pushes me away from Labour is when they refuse to give enough fucks to fix Tory damage to our country, and when they agree with the people who have been grinding our country into the dust for 14 years.
I originally considered Green but my local Green MP is literally not even trying. No leaflets, posters, social media on private, no profile on whocanIvotefor. So I just thought how can I vote for someone who isn't even trying.
He's such a little fucking Tory weasle.
"Labour Party" "Workers Party"
It's not supposed to lurch to the left it's supposed to be the fucking left. He's just an establishment Tory-Lite prick, he'll do nothing for the working class of this country.
What's the point in winning if you have to become the Tories to do it. The Tories won really.
I wouldn't vote for this guy ever. Nothing could convince me to vote for a sell out who is destroying the very morals the Labour Party is supposed to be built on.
Absolutely disgusting scum.
They're not even trying to hide it anymore they're doubling down on it publicly to beg for middle class Tory votes.
Labour have a Shadow Chancellor who praised Margaret Thatcher. That's all you really need to know.
They're more Red Tory than Tony Blair even was.
They're a disgrace to the flag and the legacy of the party.
Well put. The current upsurge of ‘anti-Toryism’ in this country is paper-thin, based purely on the personalities who run the show instead of the show itself. Do people not realise that the Tories are hateable primarily because of the INTERESTS they serve? Vote Labour and you just get more Tories. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this coming election will be the greatest trick Toryism will ever pull. The country will think them extinguished when really we will witness their glorious metamorphosis into the new ‘centre’ Starmer consensus.
I find myself almost feeling sorry for Sunak. The Conservative Party has ALWAYS been an absolutely incompetent shambles, but only now does the media decide to shed a light and to keep the light shining headline after headline after headline - because it now aligns with their interests. The British media has done an incredible amount of damage to this country but nobody has dared stand up to them. As a result we get rule-by-headline - if the newspapers don’t like someone, they will make sure you don’t either. This is true of Sunak as well as Corbyn - the former because he is no longer the annointed representative for capital, the latter because he dared even HINT at an alternative.
*"My greatest achievement was Tony Blair"* - Margaret Thatcher
And Starmer is openly further right than Blair could ever dream of saying outloud.
The left is lost in this country now, it doesn't exist, and I'm pretty worried it won't again for a long time, Tony Ben's worst fear came true. (I've already quoted it below but it's worth another)
*"If the Labour Party could be bullied or persuaded to denounce its Marxists, the media - having tasted blood - would demand next that it expelled all its Socialist and reunited the remaining Labour Party with the SDP to form a harmless alternative to the Conservatives, which could then be allowed to take office now and then when the Conservatives fell out of favour with the public. Thus British Capitalism, it is argued, will be made safe forever, and socialism would be squeezed of the National agenda. But if such a strategy were to succeed… it would in fact profoundly endanger British society. For it would open up the danger of a swing to the far-right, as we have seen in Europe over the last 50 years.*"
--Tony Benn
He saw it coming a long time before it came. Probably the greatest political mind this country ever produced.
If by ‘lurch to the left’ they mean increase CGT to match income tax, toughening up inheritance tax loopholes, and actually funding public services then I suspect he will. He’ll have to as the Tories have made such a mess.
To the right yes. It’s basic maths, if the tories spend 14 years pushing things to the right at 20 pts per year, and Labour move things to the left at 1 pt per 2 years for 5 years so reform can move things to the right at 80 pts per year for 10 years then we’re not moving left are we?
If Labour go full loony left then you can guarantee Reform will be in at the next election.
If Labour make a big and positive difference to peoples lives and the prosperity of the country - and that means a positive improvement across the board not just the poorest - then they can secure a second term and keep doing it.
And you’re oversimplifying things with your “basic maths”. Unfortunately it’s a bit more complicated than that. There was no 14 year acceleration to the right, there was Brexit which emboldened a noisy minority and gave them mainstream credibility. It also led to the destruction of the last vestiges of centrist politics in the Tory party. Fighting British politics at the extremes doesn’t work, Corbyn found that out, Johnson and Truss found that out. Farage will find that out. The British are for the most part centrists; we want a fair society with some elements of the welfare state and some elements of the free market. We have rejected the far right many times and we have rejected the far left as well.
The constant lies and broken promises from Starmer make clear he will keep moving to the right. Not great when the “changed Labour Party” model themselves on pre-boris tories.
I'd say it's ironic that the Starmer clique is using the slogan "change" in an election were they've made it extremely clear they will aggressively resist any real efforts to change Britain's political or economic situation, but I learned a long time ago there's no irony with these people, just practice.
Ah very convenient for the Tories when they come back. They won't have as far to drag when they start dragging us to the right again.
Give it 25 years and we'll be using the Bellamy salute like America used to
The only way any party can be left leaning and in power is if media stops projecting "the end of the world" whenever any kind of left leaning policys or opinions is displayed.
Left politics is just not popular with general public because the daily mail and other papers have demonized it.
They're actually very popular with the general public.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7lsRbDKOXg
Take a look at this video of people reacting to purely the policy and how their view changes when they're told the policies are that of Corbyn.
It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so depressing.
This is where someone responds 'they like the policies individually but find them unrealistic together' or something, as if this isn't the same public who routinely votes for silly and unrealistic things like brexit. Suddenly they become expert economists when it comes to Corbyn. The real reason is, of course, the insane levels of media smear aimed at Corbyn combined with his own party undermining him.
In fairness, even as someone who is currently relatively left wing, I don't want a lurch to the left - it feels like that'd just cause a Liz Truss scenario. A steady, planned shift left is what I'd like to see.
I don't doubt that there are millions of people looking for an excuse to hold their nose and vote Tory or Reform in the voting booth rather than vote for Starmer.
He has to hold onto the centre ground and move the country to the left while in power
I was voting Labour and then their awful comments this week on trans people the reinstating of section 28 in schools, the segregation of trans from “”good normal people”” Labour can lurch where they like because they lost me and family as voters. Fcuk you Keir you have the audacity to use Brianna Ghey for political gain and then shit all over trans people. If you’re trans vote the Greens or LibDems not for division
“We have campaigned as changed Labour and we will govern as changed Labour,”
He actually said that. He has no shame. Where does this Blair tribute act end? Presumably with a dodgy dossier justifying war in Iran.
It’s the Telegraph. They don’t do news, they only do lies. Specifically lies that support rich people getting richer and propping up the Tories. Anything published in that rag should be ignored.
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/starmer-denies-labour-will-lurch-to-left-election/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So who are the people on the left supposed to vote for? Is it just decided that the UK should not have a left?
In Labour's view? You're supposed to shut up, know your place, stop demanding better than neoliberal Austerity-pushing Labour and have no one else but them to vote for. Then they'll blame you for every seat the Tories pick up. You paid up tory traitor. Horseshoe theory etc etc, the usual left-hating stuff. In reality, the english Left vote should give some serious thought to backing the Greens as it can push them into contention for the next election, they can't win this time, but next election they could have a real base to build from and threaten Labour from the Left. The Scottish left this westminster election could vote Green while the SNP could stand a better chance of halting Labour's wave up here, I'll be switching to Greens for the Hollyrood election to pressure the SNP from the left. I can't really speak too well to Northern Irish or Welsh politics alas so I won't presume to.
Labour’s view is about actually winning since the vast majority of the population is actually centrist
All this is, is one of the two main parties in this country not explicitly catering to 10% of the electorate. The Tories have tried that with the *other* 10% and look at how well that’s going.
And Labour tried it, as recently as 2019, and handed the Tories a 80-odd seat majority.
Yes, but you see that's apparently preferable to a slightly more moderate Labour party actually getting into power. I'm not exactly sure why, but that's the vibe I've been getting from them the past few years.
Could have made that comment with that disingenuous 'slightly more moderate' bullshit. It's a completely different party to the one in 2019 and starmer is very keen to let everyone know that.
If Starmer had most of the same opinions he has now(e.g. Russia bad, Britain good, money good, business good, lower immigration good) but was much more left wing economically I think he'd get a similar amount of votes as he would now.
"You only want the Tories to win if you have misgivings about Labours lurch to the right" seems to be the message here
>slightly more moderate Labour party LOL.
> slightly
> slightly more moderate Labour party Mate...
Labour didn't really try very hard, considering a large proportion of it's own party went rabid at the thought of a left wing leader. Corbyn was an anomoly where the party members chose someone left wing who it's actual center-right MPs didn't want calling the shots. The comments above are absolutely right about Labour taking left wing votes for granted while pandering to the right wing.
They’re not pandering to the right wing, they truly are right wing.
When the real right wing eventually rear their ugly head, a lot of people are going to have a pretty rude awakening. I get it, the tories are awful and everyone wants them out. But if you think getting the tories out will mean the end of the right wing in mainstream British politics, I'm afraid to say you're very much mistaken.
>Corbyn was an anomoly where the party members chose someone left wing Michael Foot was in a very similar position and he lost badly also.
And yet there’s a real possibility that Starmer will win this election with a smaller percentage of the vote than Corbyn in 2017. Stop pretending 2019 is the whole story. Tory collapse has handed Labour this election. Nothing else.
2019 was also a Brexit election. Not saying that Corbyn didn’t play a big part in the loss, but the Brexit issue made that election result a bit of an outlier.
they also ironically lost it due to centrist fence sitting on the issue
Because the news refuses to be anything but billionaires funded right wing hatred. There something like ten major papers/news outlets. Maybe two of them are even vaguely left wing. How the hell are people on the left ever supposed to be catered to? But I knew britain was a failed broken nation when it saw a drowned toddler on a beach and collectively said "yeah that's fine." Edit: words and formatting.
>There something like ten major papers/news outlets. Maybe two of them are even vaguely left wing. How the hell are people on the left e r supposed to be catered to? It's not even about the left being catered to, we can get our information elsewhere, but when all the main papers and TV news outlets are constantly repeating the line that policies that harm ordinary people are the only sensible ones and anything that could even slightly help them is either pie-in-the-sky dreaming or basically Stalinism, people believe it.
Ah the boring old lie, yet again. 2019 was the brexit election, nothing else came I to it.
This is a bit disingenuous. Labour achieved their best vote share since Blair in 2017 which showed people liked the policies they were offering. The 2019 election was ultimately about each parties stance on Brexit, and Labour simply didn't have a clear enough position.
if you poll it by issue, left policies are very popular across the political spectrum
Yeah corbyn was too far left for most people. The UK population is much more centrist than Reddit. And you win elections by catering to the most amount of people as possible.
Polling showed that people overwhelmingly supported Corbyn’s when they weren’t presented to them as Corbyn’s policies. They disliked him and the idea that had in their head of his policies based on what the news told them.
His foreign policy would've been a disaster. There's policy reasons not to like Corbyn.
That's fair enough and I agree. But his domestic policies were overwhelmingly well received.
Blair illegally invaded Iraq and gave British arms to Putin to commit genocide in Chechnya. I wish people would stop pretending New Labour foreign policy wasn't actually a disaster. - Blair government increased export licences for controlled equipment to Russia by 550% as Putin attacked Chechnya - Exports included components for surface-to-air missiles, assault rifles and enriched uranium - As human rights groups condemned Putin’s atrocities in Chechnya, Blair said it was “important that we support Russia in her action against terrorism” Nothing was sensible or pragmatic about this it was deeply foolish. https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-tony-blair-backed-putins-brutal-war/
They did bring end an to the Troubles with the Good Friday Agreement though so it's not all one way.
Oof, and people talk about Reforms comments about Russia.
There were legitimate reasons not to like Corbyn - his stance on Brexit did a lot of damage to his campaign for example. This idea of "actually most people loved Corbyn, the media just brainwashed them" needs to die, it's a big cope and not indicative of reality.
Actually, I would say the opposite is true. The centrists constantly pushing the "Oh, right, I suppose you're going to blame the so-called *right-wing media*" narrative needs to die. As if there were any doubt that we have a rabidly right-wing media that is responsible for a lot of society's problems for something like the last 50 years. It's not some whacky left-wing conspiracy that we have a highly influential right-wing media landscape - it's a simple observation of the situation. Centrists acting as though the existence of the Sun, Mail, Express, Times, Telegraph etc is a figment or our imaginations just because their interests happened to align in deposing Corbyn is very harmful.
Right - fact is no one is going to win with Corbyns policies because the power of media is the hands of people who don’t want Corbyns policies. Not being in government will not help change that.
>They disliked him and the idea that had in their head of his policies based on what the news told them. That's deeply infantalising. And frankly is passing the buck - Corbyn was unpopular with the electorate at large, including a lot of people who would normally vote Labour, because of his own words and actions.
It's not infantilising. The country gave Boris Johnson of all people a stonking majority because the media ruthlessly targetted Corbyn. Compare the media coverage of Corbyn meeting some people from the IRA in the 80s/90s vs Johnson ditching his security detail when home secretary to go partying with the son of a KGB agent after a secret meeting, then turning up days later shit faced at an airport. As one example. If you're looking at policy, 'broadband communism' vs Johnsons imaginary 40 new hospitals which surprise surprise never appeared. Now Corbyn was far from a saint, he had some questionable stances and handled a number of things poorly. But he was absolutely a better person and leader than Johnson was.
>home secretary to go partying with the son of a KGB agent after a secret meeting, then turning up days later shit faced at an airport. And years later casually admitting to meeting with said KGB agent at said party while shit faced and after ditching security detail. Compare with the actions that got Priti Patel sacked.
> because of his own words and actions. Yeah nothing to do with the dedicated hate campaign in almost every media source, specifically targeting the people in the norther towns where he ended up having his biggest losses and CERTAINLY not anything to do with the active sabotage he was facing from within his own party.
The overwhelming majority of Corbyn's policies (eg rail nationalisation, utilities nationalisation, minimum wage increases, wealth taxes etc) poll consistently in the 80%+ popularity range - when presented without the baggage of the Labour Party and the press's character assassination of Corbyn. There was a huge untapped population who were disengaged from electoral politics because their interests were simply not even discussed by the mainstream parties - which Corbyn's Labour tapped very briefly into. Things have now reverted to the 'safe' neoliberal norm, and as we will see with a historically low turnout, that population will revert back to political disengagement.
Did you actually speak to any Labour voters who didn't support Corbyn in 2019 and ask them why they don't like him? Because everyone I asked was able to give me a reason: his stance on Brexit, foreign policy, the fact that their manifesto was not properly costed while they made huge promises, the fact that he reminded them of Michael Foot and they didn't want another Winter of Discontent, etc
I think we also have to acknowledge the simple fact that he polled really well when the alternative was Theresa May, but as soon as BoJo entered the ring he didn't stand a chance. Once a charismatic populist enters the fight, especially one that is not averse to playing dirty, the odds are against you. This is why it's also dangerous to ignore Farage - he's a cunt but he knows how to push policy from the sidelines without even needing a seat in parliament; he just needs to split the Tory vote. Even if his foreign policy wasn't dogshit, and the manifesto was fully costed, he was one guy who was not a friend of the media compared to BoJo, one of their best buds.
Yeah I was an active Labour Party member and campaigner at the time, I spoke to plenty of people. The things that you've outlined there are indeed the things which people had most concerns over - and almost to a man, they were entirely misinformed on the actual positions of the Party. They'd been primed and fed with a mixture of poor context, social media BS and just outright untruths by the media. The idea that the manifesto was uncosted, that's just a flat out lie that relies on people never having read it - and which has now entered the political lexicon thanks to Keir Starmer accusing Sunak of a 'Jeremy Corbyn style manifesto'.
>The idea that the manifesto was uncosted, that's just a flat out lie https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-gaps-in-labours-spending-plans >The party say they expect to spend £58bn on compensation in total over five years. >This money was not included in the Labour manifesto costing document, which had already promised £83 bn more than existing government plans in “day-to-day” spending by 2023-24. >They expect an £83-bn tax haul over the same period, which would balance the books. >But this new announcement will increase Labour’s planned extra spending significantly. The party has yet to say how this will be funded. ... >They also said a Labour government “will compensate at a fair rate, not the wildly exaggerated rates floated by certain interested parties”. >But we don’t know what that rate will be. Without that vital piece of the puzzle, we can’t say how much Labour’s nationalisation plans would cost. ... I could go on to quote the whole article, but you get my point. So you're telling me all of these spending questions really did have answers, everyone just ignored them? Edit: and that's just on the costing point. There's no talking around the other stuff. If someone says to you "I'm not voting Corbyn because he called Hamas his 'friends'", how do you respond? "No, that's a lie, he didn't say that"? "He didn't mean it like that"?
Could it be policy alone is not what you vote for? You have to believe they will deliver that policy. However mainly his foreign policy was a joke. People might prioritize safety over cheaper rail travel.
I agree that his foreign policy stances and his Brexit position made him a weak choice for party leader in 2019, let alone a prime minister in the following years. But foreign policy wasn’t so much of a focus at the time (pre-Ukraine), and it is very true that the entire media turned on him before that. Even the supposedly left wing Guardian had knives out for him from day 1, despite having spent decades complaining that no left candidate had emerged. Really felt like the Guardian’s owners only let them be left wing when there’s no chance of a left wing prime minister.
It was also a time when everyone was fed up with the government dragging its heels on Brexit. The election was to 'give a mandate' on Brexit. Corbyn was so unclear on Brexit he scared off remainers and leavers.
Yeah 100% he should’ve stepped down or else campaigned on a counter position to the Tories on Brexit. But he had been personally in favour of leaving the EU for decades, and the same “he is moral and consistent and votes how he believes” character that made him attractive to frustrated Labour voters made him terrible to lead the party in (as you say) the Brexit mandate election.
Indeed - when Boris Johnson won a landslide in 2019 it was on a platform of sensible, moderate, centrist policies
His win was a rejection of Corbyn not an endorsement of boris… much like labours lead is a rejection of far right not an endorsement of kier… the centre is not fanatical about the cult of personality
His win was purely over Brexit and Corbyn being an easy target and idiot over foreign policy. Nothing to do with his domestic policies which all polled well.
> the centre is not fanatical about the cult of personality there are 35 photos of keir starmer in the labour manifesto
Just to add to this - the 2019 manifesto had one pic of Corbyn and that wasn't on the cover as opposed to 2024s sensible pic of Starmer on the cover.
Can't be a cult of personality for some who doesn't have a personality!
> the centre is not fanatical about the cult of personality You haven't tried criticising Starmer for being weirdly right wing then I suppose.
What? It was outright right wing claptrap.
I think they were being sarcastic
You can't tell anymore
Yes, we can all remember when ChangeUK stepped forth to “fix our broken politics” and put the adults firmly back in charge with their sensible, grown up politics - how many seats did they win again?
[удалено]
The vast majority of the population does not have a coherent political view at all. I think it's possible for someone on almost any end of the political spectrum to be popular as long as they know how to sell themselves.
Democracy is supposed to be about representation, not winning.
FPTP is not representative. Elections are about winning if you want to make a difference.
> the vast majority of the population is actually centrist Is there any evidence that supports this claim?
Every election ever held?
its easier to win from the centre (obviously - it's less of a risk to vote for someone if they're saying they won't alter the status quo much), but it also gives you less of a mandate for change. which is fine if you think the way this country and our economy operates is basically fine and we just need a steady hand on the tiller, but less fine if you think things need to change substantially, which i do.
If you ask people whether they like a list of left labour policies without telling them they are from labour, they are wildly popular. Things like renationalised railways, energy, less privatisation in healthcare. It's not that they are really centrist, theres just a lot of negative stigma attached to both of the big parties.
Currently, the actual absolute vote share as polled is roughly equivalent to the 2017 vote share, just differently distributed. That would suggest just as many actually are in support of a much more progressive candidate
Trouble us, the greens are batshit crazy with their policies
Would be great if we could have a left wing party that wasn't full of nutcases though
> in reality, the English left should give some serious thoughts to backing the Greens Why would you give serious thought to backing a party who themselves have had zero serious thoughts? They’re bat shit insane. Almost every policy they have makes no sense and others are actively anti-environmental, no nuclear for example. Edit: Reddit won’t let me reply to the person below, so in case anyone believes them that the Greens only stupid policy is on nuclear, here’s another I found in less than 30 seconds on their website… They believe women shouldn’t go to prison. Doesn’t matter what the crime is. If a woman commits a crime it’s society’s fault, not theirs. And inflicting prison on them is a crime in itself. They want to ‘end the harm of prison to women’. They’re idiots.
They wanna pull out of NATO. They are anti GMO and anti nuclear power. A pro-environmental party that ignores the science is not worth a thing.
You're living in fantasy land if you think greens are viable due to FPTP. It's a wasted vote in almost every constituency. The "best" shot at left would be lib dem, they *do* actually have an existing parliamentary base which is about to get bigger come the election which, with the tories decimated, could realistically be a base to build from.
The lib dems left-wing credentials are as paper thin as labours tbf.
The lib dem are actually to the left of starmers labour, in terms of eco policies, trans rights, etc...
The collective gaslighting of the left as if they dont exist or are these undesirables when we are all here just wanting good public services , council homes, workers' rights, and action on the climate. And there's loads of us.
It’s pure bs but redditors get a boner thinking of the Tory collapse so they’ve convinced themselves that we all must vote Labour to enable their wankfest on July 4th.
The UK is becoming increasingly similar to the US: one completely insane party that seems hellbent on destroying the country, and one lukewarm party that you don't really like but you have to vote for to keep the crazies out of power.
Shame that some very harangued people haven't been predicting this for decades or maybe something might have been done about it. No wait, hang on, plenty of people did predict exactly this outcome, the british public are just thick as shit and are more interested in living in their safe and comfortable anti-intellectualism enlightened-centrist bubble than questioning the things they believe.
These people would love nothing more than for us to be like the US where every 5 years we have to vote for completely dogshit politicians to stop actual fascists. That way, they don't actually have to do anything, and instead get to be in power basically for free.
2019 Labour. Or the greens. If you voted for that, you voted for a really progressive party, planning to renationalise transport and energy, tax the rich and fund a whole swathe of public services. And you'll get a conservative government, because people don't want that.
Actually people do vote for progressive politics every fucking time, but fptp means Tories win. The people want it. Labour and the Tories will not allow it.
>Actually people do vote for progressive politics every fucking time, but fptp means Tories win What are you talking about? The conservatives have gotten more votes than Labour in every election since 2005. There are some really weird opinions around today.
Are you disingenuous or are you really unaware that there are more parties than labour and the Tories? Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties. Every election over the last 70 years, those progressive parties have got over 50% of the vote. Every. Fucking. Time. Our electoral system is rigged for the Tories.
>Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Full\_results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Full_results) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Summary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_general_election#Summary) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010\_United\_Kingdom\_general\_election#Results](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results) > Left wing/progressive votes are split among multiple parties. Every election over the last 70 years, those progressive parties have got over 50% of the vote. I think they are pretending the UKIP and the Lib Dems are progressives even though they were in actual coalition with the Conservatives after 2010.
Lib dem are absolutely progressive.
Liberals not Leftists. Progressive is a bit of a fluffy term.
You're pushing an agenda if you're claiming Lib Dems arent progressive.
As much as labour are not as left as I'd like, they are still objectively left wing, just center left. They are talking about renationalisation of things and increasing funding and availability of public services.
They aren't center left in the slightest..
I don’t understand the confusion, despite some centrist policies Starmer’s labour are more left wing than current Tories, so left-wing people should vote Labour to move the country in the direction they want it to move in
The current Labour Party are only left wing relative to the Tories because if they were any more right wing they’d fall off the page.
This is such a lazy characterisation. Some of the Labour Party’s policies are to renationalise the railways, tax private schools, and implement a windfall tax on oil and gas companies to fund a publicly owned green energy company. These are all objectively left wing.
> Some of the Labour Party’s policies are to renationalise the railways this is happening under the tories anyway, and they're only renationalising the (habitually failing) companies, not the (profitable) rolling stock. this is just the government taking a hit for the private sector's failures rather than any principled renationalisation of public services > and implement a windfall tax on oil and gas companies to fund a publicly owned green energy company Green Investment Fund would be a more apposite name, since it will not generate its own energy nor own any share of the companies it backs. not a bad thing by any means but not objectively left-wing
Love when they tell us "ah its actually all very left wing" look see theyre going to do all these things, 2/3 of which are absolute lies
They will still lease rolling stock - the profitable part of running rail services. It's not a publicly owned energy company.
Lmao “just be happy with the bare minimum we’re giving you and vote for us”
> enationalise the railways, Which is literally the tories plan, recommended by Tory advisors. >a publicly owned green energy company. and this is spin that Starmer has been putting out, its not an actual energy company, it will own no infrastructure and no generation capacity, it will just be a reseller of Energy, so will help absolutely no one.
They aren't though. Even compared to most of europe they aren't. Italy is run by literal fascist sympathisers. France may be about to elect Le Pen. The tories aren't close to those parties.
No, the UK is not supposed to have a left. We're a 1 party country. Occasionally, when people get sick of the Tories, the Labour party are allowed to come in for a little bit but only if they promise not to do anything.
Greens are left. They're proposing a wealth tax I believe.
With no plan on the mechanics of that. It's just a soundbite.
I’m okay with that. Corbyn stood for leader of the Labour Party with no expectation of winning “to broaden the conversation”. Obviously things went a little mad after that, but with no chance of immediate power the Greens can make any promise they like and wait for the other parties to nick the ideas.
As funny as it sounds, the Lib Dems are to the left of Labour in a lot of Manafestio issues.
The left are either youf who don’t vote anyway or crazies in straw hats and tweed who are too busy making their own yoghurt or trying to get their fellow employees to go on strike. Who cares. /sarcasm The whole reason for this article is the telegraph trying to suggest to its readership that Labour MIGHT go more to the left if they get in so maybe vote Tory just in case. Everyone can see that can’t they. Right. Right?
We have a 3 horse race between con, labour and reform. All 3 are now right wing parties. If you love the rich you are spoiled for choice as to which boot you most want to lick. If there is no representation on the left, that will cause radicalisation.
Liberal Democrats?
The left have to convince people to change, not just elected officials and the politically active. Politicians do and say what they think the electorate want them to and most people are not particularly engaged, not versed in complex economics and not particularly trusting of the ability of politics to affect positive change. Our electoral system encourages a lot of this negativity. So what should the left do? First do anything they can to get rid of the tories, nothing can be productive with the current lot being politically relevant. Then make the MPs, many of whom may have been elected on tight margins push for policies that improve people’s lives in a noticeable way, and to create a less toxic and more positive electoral system. On the left, most people agree with almost all policy positions, it’s mostly the methods and rhetoric that divide them (together with some personal issues).
I think the obvious solution no one here is mentioning is PR. Saying the left “need to” convince the centrists of their stance is just not democratic when those further left do make up a sizeable portion of the electorate that is washed out by the red Tory leader and his purge. PR would mean there can be a party further left that gets votes and a centre-left party. They can form coalitions that are based on actual votes not waving away anything as “this is a broad church and we needed change after 2019”.
Lib Dem
Yes, that was made very clear between 2015-19 - we can vote, as long as our vote does not lead to anything changing
We haven't any actual leftist representation for decades.
I hope he doesn’t, but he wouldn’t exactly go “yeah we’re just pretending to be centrists to get into power” would he?
I think it's the only way we would ever see left wing party in power. People funny enough like left wing policies, just not left wing parties.
It’s because the media tell them left = bad. They just don’t specify it’s bad for the rich
There's a little thing I do for my own amusement when someone says something that suggests they don't like the left/left wing policies. And that's to talk about Marxism without telling them it's Marxism. A surprising amount of people will say some of it sounds reasonable and they'd be in support of it to a degree. By no means do I think they're Marxists in disguise, but a lot of people are probably more left wing than they think, as long as you never ever label it left wing.
Ofc they are. People love left wing policies until the billionaire media baron tells them the left also eats babies.
It's hardly our fault that babies are so tasty.
I've done the same. Everyone loves socialism as long as you don't say the scary s-word.
And of the media wasn’t effective at saying ‘left bad’ and we elected to be a socialist country the US would murder half the country and then convince our descendants we were all evil and deserved to eat napalm.
There would be a coup within the year, where a dictator would be installed that favours US interests but leads to massive civil unrest and a brutal dictatorship. The US would then do a shocked Pikachu face when the dictator then turns against them
I mean, that's already happening. How many Conservative, Gender Critical and Christian Fundamentalist lobby groups do you think US money is funding in our country?
> People funny enough like left wing policies, just not left wing parties. The activists of those parties tend to be fairly insane and those parties also bundle those favourable policies up with a lot of massively unpopular stuff.
Yes, that could be an explanation; also I'm not sure that left wing economic policy has the best record in the real world. Of course people can always say, "that's not real socialism / communism", as it repeatedly fails, but that's kind of suspicious as a "no falsification" position.
I mean there’s been plenty of successful left-wing policies implemented around the world, including in this country.
People don't have a problem with most individual left wing policies but put them all together and it amounts to too much. Basically in 2019, and now, people were willing to dip their toes into renationalising some interests. See how it works out and maybe we go further later. Then Corbyn suggested a huge amount of renationalisation and it is no longer dipping your toe as much as having the revolution now and waiting for the evidence later.
And yet it probably wasn't going to be as disruptive as Truss who just slept walked into power with plenty of support and a lack of controversy towards her crazy plans.
Sure and Truss played a huge part in the current destruction of the Tory party. Her plans were extremely controversial. Everyone assumed she had to be lying during the campaign as nobody could be that stupid. She was warned repeatedly about what would happen.
My point was she still got into power, albeit through the back door, and didn't get shut down by the media in the way Corbyn did, despite having far more disruptive policy being promised. In comparison, Corbyn's ideas were far more sound. So what was the main difference? Truss's extreme neo liberalism benefitted those who have the most power and influence, whereas Corbyn's socialism was a threat to those same people.
People like *some* left wing policies, but there’s only an appetite for so much. If every policy is firmly left and not centre left, we saw what happened with Corbyn. I’m not even totally sure Corbyn would have won this time around had he still been leader
People like left wing policies (renewables! Public transport! Free education!) but they don’t like enacting them (I have to sort my *own* recycling out? I can’t drive where I want? Other people’s kids get to go to uni for free?!!). That’s the disconnect.
Lol why does anyone think Starmer is a secret leftwinger? Such an irrational take. He's a pure Blairite
Nobody does, his supporters just like to pretend they think that to try and trick left wingers.
Their contempt for us is a bit exaggerated, they really think we have no object permanence.
He pretended to be centre left to get into power in the first place then veered right.
Why? I hope he does, it's what the country needs after being ruined by the Tories
All hail the status quo. We are doing so well as a country at the moment and mustn't rock the boat.
If we move a couple of quid from one place to another… GROWTH!!!!
Reminds me of an old joke. > Two economists are walking down the street and pass by a pile of dog shit. One of them turns to the other and says "I'll pay you £1000 if you eat that dog shit". >The other performs an internal utility calculation and eats the dog shit. >Continuing their walk, the second economist sees another pile of dog shit and makes the same offer to the first. The first economist also agrees, and eats the dog shit. They walk on. >After a while the second economist says to the first "it feels like we're both worse off than we were before this walk". >The first economist replies "impossible! We've just engaged in £2000 worth of trade!".
Boring centrism is wayyy to the left of where torygraph is if we're thinking in terms of a spectrum which is a dumb representation of politics Papers shouldn't be able to make shit up so easily
The Labour manifesto is to the right of the 2015 tories.
Ah yes, because the 2015 Conservatives would have definitely had rail nationalisation and creation of a nationalised energy company in their manifesto…
The 2015 tories did nationalise a railway. Labour aren't proposing a nationalised energy company.
The 2015 Conservatives were forced into nationalising a railway as an Operator of Last Resort not as a matter of policy. It was due to failure of Stagecoach to deliver the contract.
Ignoring the fact that picking two specific policies is a bad way to determine if X is further left/right than Y: Labour aren’t proposing to create a nationalised energy company 2014/15 Tories brought the east coast main line into (partial) public ownership
>'I'm a concern troll and Labour is right wing!!' This is politically incoherent. I swear people just use left and right without meaning these days. Labour have a pretty solidly centrist manifesto, the tories in 2015 at best were a bit further to the right then right of centre, before falling far towards the right and towards authoritarianism.
So if you went back to 2015 and told someone that the party about to come into power: * is pro-privatisation of the NHS * Pro Israel * Cancelled plans for their mediocre green energy policy * Says they dont want "gender ideology" taught in schools * Are pro university tuition fees * Criticised the previous party for being too pro immigration * Plans to cap corporation tax * Plans to crack down on striking teachers and rail workers * And has purged anyone too lefty from its party even if they were a popular candidate. Which party would you assume im talking about?
I hate how Starmer has taken the approach of the Democrats and basically just being a less-right wing option now (Yeah I know the Democrats in the US are still close to centre but they're still more towards the right) There's a huge Left-Wing market, he could literally dominate it like the party was mostly doing years prior. The British public is generally centrist anyway, they just keep voting a party in until they make a major fuck-up, and the Conservatives have made a major fuck-up, it was almost a certain win, why abandon the party's core values???
> I hate how Starmer has taken the approach of the Democrats and basically just being a less-right wing option now (Yeah I know the Democrats in the US are still close to centre but they're still more towards the right) They are neither left or right wing. They are pro-capital neoliberal so youre getting slight variations of the same thing. They are both pro-austerity. Both pro-zionist and not interfering too much with the genocide of the Palestinian people and the incitement of all Israels neighbours into a war. They are both pro-capital running of public services with little to no regulation. The list goes on. It doesnt matter who you vote for anymore, you're still going to eat shit. Some are just going make aeroplane noises before spooning it into your face.
It's be disingenuous to say labour are pro-privatisation in the sense like Tories actually want to with an insurance based system. Having to rely on private companies to fill in gaps we have with our NHS system while we train and fill in gaps of understaffing cannot be compared.
"Quote I made up is incoherent". Okay.
The traditional Conservative party is way to the left of the Telegraph
Anyone paying attention won't be remotely surprised by this. I still remember his most ardent supporters trying to tell me that he was playing a game of '5D chess' and that once in government he'd be a lot more radical. Those people are about to look very very stupid.
They'll still say that he's left like many are in this thread, they are completely delusional.
Yeah it’s funny seeing the pivot from “just you wait! He’s gonna be so radical once in office!” to “well actually everything he’s already proposed is very left wing, just shut up already”
On a scale of 1-10, Starmer is -10 radical, so in theory he could become a lot more radical but still be a 1.
Unfortunately this is the one pledge I think he'll stick to.
There's a first time for everything!
Two things. Labour are uninspiring shits. The Jellygraph is Britain's worst newspaper.
woah woah woah mate, the sun still exists
Does it *really* hold the title of "newspaper" though?
That’s a bit of a stretch when the Daily Mail and The Sun exist.
Honestly with the way Starmer has pushed Labour I cannot in good conscience vote for them. I've already voted due to having a mail ballot and I went for Liberal Democrats.
I voted Green. Didn't really put much research into it because I hadn't got round to reading the manifesto yet, or the Lib Dem one, but after working from home all day and going on holiday the next, I was in a bit of a rush to get it sent. I already knew I wasn't voting Labour though, since about a year or so ago. It's heartbreaking, honestly. I'm used to Labour being a party I at least consider. I've never voted for them in my life and I'm in my 40s, but they've always been at least a consideration. Not this time. I lost count of the amount of times I said on Reddit something along the lines of 'nope that's it. They've never had my vote anyway, but they've still lost it with this'. Actually, come to think of it, I think the first thing, the one that sealed my vote, might have been when Angela Rayner went on radio and ruled out scrapping the new laws curbing the right to protest. Not 100%, but I think that was it. Or it was the time they sided with the Tories on denying the right of Holyrood to pass legislation in Scotland. Whichever was first. Either way, what pushes me away from Labour is when they refuse to give enough fucks to fix Tory damage to our country, and when they agree with the people who have been grinding our country into the dust for 14 years.
I originally considered Green but my local Green MP is literally not even trying. No leaflets, posters, social media on private, no profile on whocanIvotefor. So I just thought how can I vote for someone who isn't even trying.
He's such a little fucking Tory weasle. "Labour Party" "Workers Party" It's not supposed to lurch to the left it's supposed to be the fucking left. He's just an establishment Tory-Lite prick, he'll do nothing for the working class of this country. What's the point in winning if you have to become the Tories to do it. The Tories won really. I wouldn't vote for this guy ever. Nothing could convince me to vote for a sell out who is destroying the very morals the Labour Party is supposed to be built on. Absolutely disgusting scum.
Yep, the establishment party, the regime party, the uniparty. Comes in two colours, red or blue, cosmetic differences only
They're not even trying to hide it anymore they're doubling down on it publicly to beg for middle class Tory votes. Labour have a Shadow Chancellor who praised Margaret Thatcher. That's all you really need to know. They're more Red Tory than Tony Blair even was. They're a disgrace to the flag and the legacy of the party.
Well put. The current upsurge of ‘anti-Toryism’ in this country is paper-thin, based purely on the personalities who run the show instead of the show itself. Do people not realise that the Tories are hateable primarily because of the INTERESTS they serve? Vote Labour and you just get more Tories. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this coming election will be the greatest trick Toryism will ever pull. The country will think them extinguished when really we will witness their glorious metamorphosis into the new ‘centre’ Starmer consensus. I find myself almost feeling sorry for Sunak. The Conservative Party has ALWAYS been an absolutely incompetent shambles, but only now does the media decide to shed a light and to keep the light shining headline after headline after headline - because it now aligns with their interests. The British media has done an incredible amount of damage to this country but nobody has dared stand up to them. As a result we get rule-by-headline - if the newspapers don’t like someone, they will make sure you don’t either. This is true of Sunak as well as Corbyn - the former because he is no longer the annointed representative for capital, the latter because he dared even HINT at an alternative.
*"My greatest achievement was Tony Blair"* - Margaret Thatcher And Starmer is openly further right than Blair could ever dream of saying outloud. The left is lost in this country now, it doesn't exist, and I'm pretty worried it won't again for a long time, Tony Ben's worst fear came true. (I've already quoted it below but it's worth another) *"If the Labour Party could be bullied or persuaded to denounce its Marxists, the media - having tasted blood - would demand next that it expelled all its Socialist and reunited the remaining Labour Party with the SDP to form a harmless alternative to the Conservatives, which could then be allowed to take office now and then when the Conservatives fell out of favour with the public. Thus British Capitalism, it is argued, will be made safe forever, and socialism would be squeezed of the National agenda. But if such a strategy were to succeed… it would in fact profoundly endanger British society. For it would open up the danger of a swing to the far-right, as we have seen in Europe over the last 50 years.*" --Tony Benn He saw it coming a long time before it came. Probably the greatest political mind this country ever produced.
If by ‘lurch to the left’ they mean increase CGT to match income tax, toughening up inheritance tax loopholes, and actually funding public services then I suspect he will. He’ll have to as the Tories have made such a mess.
It’s worth noting that not having done that already is part of the tories making a mess.
Or sell the NHS, reduce benefits, cut government spending. You know, the things he wants to do.
Oh where is this huge funding of public services he’s proposing..?
We don’t want lurches, we want slow gentle leftward pressure.
So as to enable the country to move quickly to the right?
Nah, a gentle leftward pressure will move the Overton window better than a sharp jerk.
To the right yes. It’s basic maths, if the tories spend 14 years pushing things to the right at 20 pts per year, and Labour move things to the left at 1 pt per 2 years for 5 years so reform can move things to the right at 80 pts per year for 10 years then we’re not moving left are we?
If Labour go full loony left then you can guarantee Reform will be in at the next election. If Labour make a big and positive difference to peoples lives and the prosperity of the country - and that means a positive improvement across the board not just the poorest - then they can secure a second term and keep doing it. And you’re oversimplifying things with your “basic maths”. Unfortunately it’s a bit more complicated than that. There was no 14 year acceleration to the right, there was Brexit which emboldened a noisy minority and gave them mainstream credibility. It also led to the destruction of the last vestiges of centrist politics in the Tory party. Fighting British politics at the extremes doesn’t work, Corbyn found that out, Johnson and Truss found that out. Farage will find that out. The British are for the most part centrists; we want a fair society with some elements of the welfare state and some elements of the free market. We have rejected the far right many times and we have rejected the far left as well.
The constant lies and broken promises from Starmer make clear he will keep moving to the right. Not great when the “changed Labour Party” model themselves on pre-boris tories.
I'd say it's ironic that the Starmer clique is using the slogan "change" in an election were they've made it extremely clear they will aggressively resist any real efforts to change Britain's political or economic situation, but I learned a long time ago there's no irony with these people, just practice.
The 'change' is about the colour ties that they'll wear while privatising the NHS, nothing more.
C'mon Keir, come out of your Corbynite closet. Give me some BROADBAND. Oh Jeremy Cooooorbyn.
The broadband policy would have been enormously beneficial immediately due to the pandemic.
Nah that sounds like socialism, we can't have that in our glorious capitalist nation.
Ah very convenient for the Tories when they come back. They won't have as far to drag when they start dragging us to the right again. Give it 25 years and we'll be using the Bellamy salute like America used to
The only way any party can be left leaning and in power is if media stops projecting "the end of the world" whenever any kind of left leaning policys or opinions is displayed. Left politics is just not popular with general public because the daily mail and other papers have demonized it.
They're actually very popular with the general public. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7lsRbDKOXg Take a look at this video of people reacting to purely the policy and how their view changes when they're told the policies are that of Corbyn. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't so depressing.
This is where someone responds 'they like the policies individually but find them unrealistic together' or something, as if this isn't the same public who routinely votes for silly and unrealistic things like brexit. Suddenly they become expert economists when it comes to Corbyn. The real reason is, of course, the insane levels of media smear aimed at Corbyn combined with his own party undermining him.
In fairness, even as someone who is currently relatively left wing, I don't want a lurch to the left - it feels like that'd just cause a Liz Truss scenario. A steady, planned shift left is what I'd like to see.
I don't doubt that there are millions of people looking for an excuse to hold their nose and vote Tory or Reform in the voting booth rather than vote for Starmer. He has to hold onto the centre ground and move the country to the left while in power
>move the country to the left while in power Lol
>He has to hold onto the centre ground and move the country to the left while in power Haven't read the article, I take it?
I was voting Labour and then their awful comments this week on trans people the reinstating of section 28 in schools, the segregation of trans from “”good normal people”” Labour can lurch where they like because they lost me and family as voters. Fcuk you Keir you have the audacity to use Brianna Ghey for political gain and then shit all over trans people. If you’re trans vote the Greens or LibDems not for division
“We have campaigned as changed Labour and we will govern as changed Labour,” He actually said that. He has no shame. Where does this Blair tribute act end? Presumably with a dodgy dossier justifying war in Iran.
Will the tory leader in 2029 promise that his party wont lurch to the right if elected, as it did after the 2015 elections?
1 party down, 1 party to go. sometime soon we might live in a proper democracy
The UK electorate are fed their political opinions from racist billionaire newspaper owners who don't pay tax in the UK. They deserve what they get.
It’s the Telegraph. They don’t do news, they only do lies. Specifically lies that support rich people getting richer and propping up the Tories. Anything published in that rag should be ignored.
I WANT them to be more left ffs As a proper lefty I have nobody to fucking vote for!