If Labour continue their downwards trajectory since the 2024 general election, they're facing electoral oblivion at the next election. So how are they doing so badly?
It’s almost like it’s one last hurrah for neoliberalism before a sharp turn towards fascism.
Given that most liberals will back the right over the left when it comes down to it, it makes sense that their final gambit might involve destroying the traditional terrain of the left.
A bit conspiratorial, I know, but it would look an awful lot like this if it were true, wouldn’t it? 😅
Brilliant! And now we have Reeves once more openly pandering to the wealthy financiers, convinced that more profits in the financial sector will magically increase GDP and make life wonderful for everyone else (were those pigs I saw flying by?). It might technically increase GDP, but not in any meaningful sense for everyone else. Remember it was Robert Kennedy (the decent one, not his appalling son) who said "GDP measures everything except those things that actually make life better and worth living".
I wonder if this new poll will scare Labour enough to get rid of Starmer, re-instate Corbyn et al, and start implementing decent policy. If they could do this it would win them the next election.
Brilliant analysis which I truly enjoyed reading. The argument is very focused and the style is engaging throughout. Thank you so much for publishing this.
A totally twisted version of events from a far left perspective.
Starmer didn't steal the leadership. Calamity Corbyn resigned, there was an open election, the Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader.
It is perfectly normal for MPs who vote against a three line whip to be suspended.
Increasing public spending by £70bn isn't austerity.
I think everyone knows that the #corruptCONservatives broke the economy and public services, nobody knew that they illegally concealed unfunded public spending commitments, the black hole. One danger for every incoming Labour Government is loss of credibility in the financial markets which, had it happened would have prevented the £70bn increase in public spending. In order to show her toughness Rachel Reeves chose to means test WFA which was unpopular with the public, described as an "attack" on pensioners though it was nothing of the sort.
Britain is the only advanced economy where Sickness and Employment haven't returned to PreCovid levels. The welfare system, like every public service, is broken and needs reform, when Labour MPs refused the initial proposals the government withdrew them and sensibly agreed to go into conversation with disabled rights representatives, again it wasn't an attack on anyone but the need to control burgeoning spending. PIP cost £35bn last year but is forecast to reach £100bn by the end of the Parliament without change.
The Labour Government faces incessant reporting in the media. If Calamity Corbyn were PM, the far left would be squealing about the Tory media because it's Keir Starmer they endorse it.
Farage is the darling of the media, he offers simplistic, unworkable solutions but that appeals to people, there is a danger that the facist "reform" party could form the next government, if that happens you'll think Tory austerity was easy.
The far left, Calamity Corbyn and his Cult will be as culpable as the MSM.
You are not very bright are you ? Perhaps you really believe that criticising Starmer is a boon for the far right . The truth is Starmer is ding a fine job driving voters to Reform and the GreensBut yeah carry on punching left it’s all you have.
Absolute nonsense. The media are driving people to the right. They treat Farage as a potential PM and barely report Labour’s achievements while emphasising their difficulties.
You appear to be starting your history with Corbyn's resignation.
But, if you read the article, you will see that it makes a case that the resignation followed a years' long campaign to undermine Corbyn and that that campaign almost certainly cost Labour two elections. Much of the left's fury derives from the fact that the Labour right forfeited those two elections for factional advantage.
Until you grapple with that, your assertion that what follows is "twisted" isn't meaningful.
You go on to say that "Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader". Which is true but does neglect the fact that they did so on the basis of a platform that he went on to repudiate so systematically that, by the time of the GE, not a single one of the leadership pledges he had made remained. Not one
The fact is that Keir Starmer, like Tony Blair before him, actively despises the politics of many of the people upon whose votes he relies to get elected. It's a dangerous game and you have to be a very skilled politician to play it.
Tony Blair was a politician of vastly greater gifts and he came to power at a time when the economy was in reasonably decent shape. Keir Starmer is, by comparison, a dunderhead and the economy is in a parlous state. Which is why he finds himself friendless.
There's an old saw about being nice to people on your way up because you will meet them all again on the way down.
Whatever else you may say about Keir Starmer, he wasn't nice to people on his way up.
> Starmer didn't steal the leadership. Calamity Corbyn resigned, there was an open election, the Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader.
Lying your way into being elected by making pledges you had no intention of keeping is dishonest, like stealing is
> It is perfectly normal for MPs who vote against a three line whip to be suspended.
Our voting system and parliament is undemocratic. I don't care if it's "normal," it's wrong.
> Increasing public spending by £70bn isn't austerity.
Where is the spending going to? Are the cuts to Councils being reversed and then some to account for inflation? Nope.
> think everyone knows that the #corruptCONservatives broke the economy and public services, nobody knew that they illegally concealed unfunded public spending commitments, the black hole.
Hilarious. If Labour had no idea they are incompetent. The "black hole" is just an excuse to continue austerity.
>One danger for every incoming Labour Government is loss of credibility in the financial markets which, had it happened would have prevented the £70bn increase in public spending
Zero evidence this is true.
>If Calamity Corbyn were PM, the far left would be squealing about the Tory media because it's Keir Starmer they endorse it.
Nope. I don't have to read far right rags to see this Labour Government is a joke.
>The far left, Calamity Corbyn and his Cult will be as culpable as the MSM.
2019 was a different world. Corbyn resigned in December 2019, keir Starmer was elected leader in March 2020. One week later the country was in lockdown then the EHRC report came out and Calamity Corbyn began his campaign to become a martyr for the far left.
Do you really expect what was planned at the end of 19 to be the same priority after covid?
JGCJ.. you sound like a real 'new labour' type person - I'm not sure you'll ever agree with any of this, you have obviously set your stall to hate the 'extreme' left as you call it .. its not extreme at all, its just that we're so used to getting lied to and manipulated we don't know the difference between a fair society/policies and one that is not - economics isn't a science, the liberal's, conservatives have failed just as much as all to make it absolute/fact .. the only time in my lifetime we have been close to having a fairer society/culture was when a lot of people were listening to a left leaning leader & party (that's Corbyn and his cabinet) and there was some possibility of them actually having some power .. what happens, corporations & like minded individuals (the ones who think having Billionaires in our country shows a successful country..) plotted and planned their way back to power.. lots of lies (antisemitic rubbish etc.) and lots of powerful pulling the plug on any kind of equality in this country. Look it up its fact.
I certainly don't agree. I am very far to the left but don't believe you will establish a socialist utopia with the narcissist Jeremy Corbyn and his ilk. What they call principle is based on bigotry. He has already proved his incompetence and unsuitability for leadership, that should have been obvious before he was foolishly made Labour leader. Having failed at two elections he resigned and proceeded to undermine his replacement. He set out to make himself a martyr for the far left and now is trying to rise again as JC the Messiah of the left, in reality all he can do is split the left's vote and ensure Facist Farage or the #corruptCONservatives form the next government.
I'm interested in your thoughts - what do you think of this Starmer government? I am appalled by it and pretty much everything they do and how they do it. I would be interested in knowing your thoughts on this please? thank you.
The tell (admittedly one of many) is electoral reform.
The fact that Labour won a huge landslide on the back of a historically low share of the vote/number of votes is a product of our utterly broken electoral system.
As Compass has shown, that broken system has massively favoured the Tories historically because the Left-Left of centre vote was split whilst the Tory vote was monolithic.
That situation arose, of course, as a result of the SDP - itself a rightward splinter group with delusious of grandeur. (And it was always their destiny to get their one sniff of power in coalition with the Tories and end up as a flak jacket for Osborne's austerity pitch)
If Labour had any principle, they would have moved towards PR years ago. They didn't because the long term benefit to the country never looked quite as important as governing alone.
Even after the last election, Starmer could have recognised that the result was a disproprtionate freak, which was only possible at all because of massive levels of tactical voting from would be greens. He could have acknowledged that the moral price of victory was electoral reform and, if he's played it right, it could have looked statemanlike. And he'd have had a vastly better chance of ending up leading the biggest party in the coalition that would have emerged after the next election.
But, because he's useless as well as unprincipled, he didn't.
And now, we've moved past principle. Now we have two right parties, and three left parties plus the nationalists and none of them can lay claim to more than 20% of the vote. If we hold the next election under FPTP, the result will be meaningless.
Thank you - a brilliant analysis of the last few shameful years. Starmer's a thoroughly unprincipled and self-serving man. The party's attitude to the Gaza situation is beyond description, and toadying up to Trump is yet another ghastly mistake. Starmer should have been gone long ago, and so should his team. They've deliberately destroyed the Labour Party.
Superb. Accurate. Sharing.
It’s almost like it’s one last hurrah for neoliberalism before a sharp turn towards fascism.
Given that most liberals will back the right over the left when it comes down to it, it makes sense that their final gambit might involve destroying the traditional terrain of the left.
A bit conspiratorial, I know, but it would look an awful lot like this if it were true, wouldn’t it? 😅
Not forgetting that Starmer's own constituency majority, just about, halved at GE24, even before he'd started on his Labour Austerity programme.
He didn't have the political wit notice.
Shared on BlueSky and Fb. People outside the immediate activist circles need to know about this stuff.
Absolutely spot-on.
Brilliant! And now we have Reeves once more openly pandering to the wealthy financiers, convinced that more profits in the financial sector will magically increase GDP and make life wonderful for everyone else (were those pigs I saw flying by?). It might technically increase GDP, but not in any meaningful sense for everyone else. Remember it was Robert Kennedy (the decent one, not his appalling son) who said "GDP measures everything except those things that actually make life better and worth living".
I wonder if this new poll will scare Labour enough to get rid of Starmer, re-instate Corbyn et al, and start implementing decent policy. If they could do this it would win them the next election.
Nope. Starmer and co don't give a **** about what the UK public think or want.
the 'and Co.' is the point, the party can get him out.
And they would replace him with another right-winger.
Brilliant analysis which I truly enjoyed reading. The argument is very focused and the style is engaging throughout. Thank you so much for publishing this.
This link to a publication called Double Down News has a video which goes some way towards explaining the Starmer conundrum:
https://substack.com/@jonathancook/note/c-135667306?r=1g1qij&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
It's intentional.
He was only ever there to sabotage the left. Beyond that, he couldn't give a shit who comes after him.
(Unless it looks like Corbyn's new party is going to win. THEN you'll see Starmer resharpening his knives.)
A totally twisted version of events from a far left perspective.
Starmer didn't steal the leadership. Calamity Corbyn resigned, there was an open election, the Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader.
It is perfectly normal for MPs who vote against a three line whip to be suspended.
Increasing public spending by £70bn isn't austerity.
I think everyone knows that the #corruptCONservatives broke the economy and public services, nobody knew that they illegally concealed unfunded public spending commitments, the black hole. One danger for every incoming Labour Government is loss of credibility in the financial markets which, had it happened would have prevented the £70bn increase in public spending. In order to show her toughness Rachel Reeves chose to means test WFA which was unpopular with the public, described as an "attack" on pensioners though it was nothing of the sort.
Britain is the only advanced economy where Sickness and Employment haven't returned to PreCovid levels. The welfare system, like every public service, is broken and needs reform, when Labour MPs refused the initial proposals the government withdrew them and sensibly agreed to go into conversation with disabled rights representatives, again it wasn't an attack on anyone but the need to control burgeoning spending. PIP cost £35bn last year but is forecast to reach £100bn by the end of the Parliament without change.
The Labour Government faces incessant reporting in the media. If Calamity Corbyn were PM, the far left would be squealing about the Tory media because it's Keir Starmer they endorse it.
Farage is the darling of the media, he offers simplistic, unworkable solutions but that appeals to people, there is a danger that the facist "reform" party could form the next government, if that happens you'll think Tory austerity was easy.
The far left, Calamity Corbyn and his Cult will be as culpable as the MSM.
If Reform win the next election Starmer id 100% .Own it
Calamity Corbyn far right enabler.
You are not very bright are you ? Perhaps you really believe that criticising Starmer is a boon for the far right . The truth is Starmer is ding a fine job driving voters to Reform and the GreensBut yeah carry on punching left it’s all you have.
Absolute nonsense. The media are driving people to the right. They treat Farage as a potential PM and barely report Labour’s achievements while emphasising their difficulties.
As a response to my comment your response is an illogical mess. But anyway I will bite, you list those ‘achievements’ Sunshine?
You appear to be starting your history with Corbyn's resignation.
But, if you read the article, you will see that it makes a case that the resignation followed a years' long campaign to undermine Corbyn and that that campaign almost certainly cost Labour two elections. Much of the left's fury derives from the fact that the Labour right forfeited those two elections for factional advantage.
Until you grapple with that, your assertion that what follows is "twisted" isn't meaningful.
You go on to say that "Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader". Which is true but does neglect the fact that they did so on the basis of a platform that he went on to repudiate so systematically that, by the time of the GE, not a single one of the leadership pledges he had made remained. Not one
The fact is that Keir Starmer, like Tony Blair before him, actively despises the politics of many of the people upon whose votes he relies to get elected. It's a dangerous game and you have to be a very skilled politician to play it.
Tony Blair was a politician of vastly greater gifts and he came to power at a time when the economy was in reasonably decent shape. Keir Starmer is, by comparison, a dunderhead and the economy is in a parlous state. Which is why he finds himself friendless.
There's an old saw about being nice to people on your way up because you will meet them all again on the way down.
Whatever else you may say about Keir Starmer, he wasn't nice to people on his way up.
> Starmer didn't steal the leadership. Calamity Corbyn resigned, there was an open election, the Labour Party members selected Keir Starmer to be the new leader.
Lying your way into being elected by making pledges you had no intention of keeping is dishonest, like stealing is
> It is perfectly normal for MPs who vote against a three line whip to be suspended.
Our voting system and parliament is undemocratic. I don't care if it's "normal," it's wrong.
> Increasing public spending by £70bn isn't austerity.
Where is the spending going to? Are the cuts to Councils being reversed and then some to account for inflation? Nope.
> think everyone knows that the #corruptCONservatives broke the economy and public services, nobody knew that they illegally concealed unfunded public spending commitments, the black hole.
Hilarious. If Labour had no idea they are incompetent. The "black hole" is just an excuse to continue austerity.
>One danger for every incoming Labour Government is loss of credibility in the financial markets which, had it happened would have prevented the £70bn increase in public spending
Zero evidence this is true.
>If Calamity Corbyn were PM, the far left would be squealing about the Tory media because it's Keir Starmer they endorse it.
Nope. I don't have to read far right rags to see this Labour Government is a joke.
>The far left, Calamity Corbyn and his Cult will be as culpable as the MSM.
Lol, you guys never own up to anything, do you?
2019 was a different world. Corbyn resigned in December 2019, keir Starmer was elected leader in March 2020. One week later the country was in lockdown then the EHRC report came out and Calamity Corbyn began his campaign to become a martyr for the far left.
Do you really expect what was planned at the end of 19 to be the same priority after covid?
JGCJ.. you sound like a real 'new labour' type person - I'm not sure you'll ever agree with any of this, you have obviously set your stall to hate the 'extreme' left as you call it .. its not extreme at all, its just that we're so used to getting lied to and manipulated we don't know the difference between a fair society/policies and one that is not - economics isn't a science, the liberal's, conservatives have failed just as much as all to make it absolute/fact .. the only time in my lifetime we have been close to having a fairer society/culture was when a lot of people were listening to a left leaning leader & party (that's Corbyn and his cabinet) and there was some possibility of them actually having some power .. what happens, corporations & like minded individuals (the ones who think having Billionaires in our country shows a successful country..) plotted and planned their way back to power.. lots of lies (antisemitic rubbish etc.) and lots of powerful pulling the plug on any kind of equality in this country. Look it up its fact.
I certainly don't agree. I am very far to the left but don't believe you will establish a socialist utopia with the narcissist Jeremy Corbyn and his ilk. What they call principle is based on bigotry. He has already proved his incompetence and unsuitability for leadership, that should have been obvious before he was foolishly made Labour leader. Having failed at two elections he resigned and proceeded to undermine his replacement. He set out to make himself a martyr for the far left and now is trying to rise again as JC the Messiah of the left, in reality all he can do is split the left's vote and ensure Facist Farage or the #corruptCONservatives form the next government.
I'm interested in your thoughts - what do you think of this Starmer government? I am appalled by it and pretty much everything they do and how they do it. I would be interested in knowing your thoughts on this please? thank you.
Probably the dumbest excuse for dropping pledges I've ever heard.
drivel I'm afraid and straight from the daily mail..
I would've know as I have never read it as you obviously have.
Follow the money, the whisperers, especially the closest one/s
The tell (admittedly one of many) is electoral reform.
The fact that Labour won a huge landslide on the back of a historically low share of the vote/number of votes is a product of our utterly broken electoral system.
As Compass has shown, that broken system has massively favoured the Tories historically because the Left-Left of centre vote was split whilst the Tory vote was monolithic.
That situation arose, of course, as a result of the SDP - itself a rightward splinter group with delusious of grandeur. (And it was always their destiny to get their one sniff of power in coalition with the Tories and end up as a flak jacket for Osborne's austerity pitch)
If Labour had any principle, they would have moved towards PR years ago. They didn't because the long term benefit to the country never looked quite as important as governing alone.
Even after the last election, Starmer could have recognised that the result was a disproprtionate freak, which was only possible at all because of massive levels of tactical voting from would be greens. He could have acknowledged that the moral price of victory was electoral reform and, if he's played it right, it could have looked statemanlike. And he'd have had a vastly better chance of ending up leading the biggest party in the coalition that would have emerged after the next election.
But, because he's useless as well as unprincipled, he didn't.
And now, we've moved past principle. Now we have two right parties, and three left parties plus the nationalists and none of them can lay claim to more than 20% of the vote. If we hold the next election under FPTP, the result will be meaningless.
Because he is doing as he is told!
The new party using Keith's 10 pledges would be chef's kiss
Well, he just copied them from Corbyn anyway.
Thank you - a brilliant analysis of the last few shameful years. Starmer's a thoroughly unprincipled and self-serving man. The party's attitude to the Gaza situation is beyond description, and toadying up to Trump is yet another ghastly mistake. Starmer should have been gone long ago, and so should his team. They've deliberately destroyed the Labour Party.