Labour: Left or Right?

[Vlerchan]

I honestly think that the answer to this question - if one has made any effort to tune into British politics since 2000 is self-evident: Labour have transitioned to the neo-liberal right, holding a position now similar to that of the US Democrats. This (apparently) isn't as obvious as I thought it was. In a bid to not kill/get locked the Feminism thread I'm requesting we shift all discussion here.

I'm wasn't going to address your points until you have finished reading the article, but this is just so blatantly off that I can't help it:

Labour are still far too concerned about the working class, they are actually making them worse.
Labour support austerity: that makes them, almost by definition, anti-working class.

[Gamma Male]

I don't know nearly enough about UK politics to have any opinions on the subject, but I'll definitely be watching this thread to see if I can learn something.

[phuckphace]

it's funny because the "far right" British National Party is actually more economically left-wing and pro-worker than the "Labour" Party has been in a while, as well as being the only party that continues to denounce neoliberalism for what it is. from an unbiased assessment of each party's platform, I would daresay the BNP is the better choice vs Labour if you're a member of the working class. yeah I know, "OMFG RACISTS!!1!one!1!!" but desperate times call for desperate measures, as they say.

[Harry Smith]

They are getting closer to the center but they are still left wing? (1) Why because they put poor people before everything! (2) Tax the wealthy who do the most for this country like crazy, (3)turn away investment, (4)up the national debt, (5)don't go into syria (That was the right decision in hindsight but is left wing associated they are happy to have welfare higher

(6) than minimum wage and (7)people living on welfare going on holidays completely relaxed.
image (http://img.skitch.com/20101023-x8tpubai1jmp5xs2dt7xn4r7t8.jpg)




I thought I'd bring this up from the other thread because well it graspes at a lot of the myths that are peddled by the Daily Mail in the country, and I think it shows the problem with political theory when it's made basic to the point of death.

(1) Are you telling me or asking me?

(2) I think the Blair years show that the labour party tend to put children before everyone, that's one of the only meaningful things they actually managed to achieve from the 1997 manifesto. I'd also argue that the primary role of a party created from the Unions would be to 'protect' the poorer people of the nation because they have a right to representation within Parliament. You claim that labour put the poor above everything else but that's simply not true-look at the last 3 years. They've voted for a benefit cap which goes against poor people, they've supported Austerity and they've remained quiet on the right to strike which gives the working class it's last ounce of voice within Britain.


(3)Have you seen Chuka Umana's speech, the conservatives are the one's who have turned away investment, they've failed in the two schemes they've introduced to actually bring in any investment. The Tories are also anti-EU are at heart which will drive away investment. Labour being pro-EU encourages investment-900 Billion according to CBI.

(4) Debt only increased during the last years of Brown due to a global recession(which wasn't caused by Labour), the fact that Labour have agreed to a spending plan, have submitted plans to a private company and became fiscally conservative shows that Labour really have no intention of raising the public debt if they return to office in 2015. So no there isn't really any evidence that labour would increase the public debt in office.

(5) It's not left wing to vote against war-30 liberal and conservative MPs voted against it in the commons which shows it's not only labour who were in favour of keeping out of syria. Your own argument about labour being left wing since they oppose war is completely defunct as they actually went into war 5 times under Tony Blair and New Labour.

(6) That's wrong-labour voted in favour of a welfare cap showing they are actually in favour of lowering welfare. The conservative party also favour an increase in minimum wage because it's at a very low level especially in cities such as London

(7) People on welfare have every right to go on holiday, the government can't tell them what to do with money that belongs to them. If you do that then where does it end-people on benefits are people too.

https://skitch-img.s3.amazonaws.com/20101023-x8tpubai1jmp5xs2dt7xn4r7t8.jpg

You posted this image before to back up your claim that Labour were in fact left wing, along with a link to a wikiepedia page. You wouldn't be able to use this in any sort of academic paper because it doesn't actually even mention New Labour who were the most important part of the change in the labour party. As I said before the diagram has multiple flaws. As Vlerchan posted before it only draws upon the abstract terms of right and left wing-it doesn't actual mention social/economic policy or it's authoritarian/liberty path. It just draws a rather outdated comparisons between the two parties.

The second mistake it makes is defining the liberal democrats as being in the centre ground-something that is simply not true. There's 3 different types of liberal democrats-something your source ignores. The orange book branch of the party should be judged as centre right on that graph. The social democrat wing of the party under Vince Cable is in fact very left wing-that part of the party simply isn't on the centre ground.

If you think the Labour party are left wing then simply google-Clause Four 1994. That's when Labour moved away from Socialism, and thus moved away from the left of British Politics. Even Miliband hasn't been able to move away from the centre ground-look at his support for Austerity and a welfare cap

[ninja789]

it's funny because the "far right" British National Party is actually more economically left-wing and pro-worker than the "Labour" Party has been in a while, as well as being the only party that continues to denounce neoliberalism for what it is. from an unbiased assessment of each party's platform, I would daresay the BNP is the better choice vs Labour if you're a member of the working class. yeah I know, "OMFG RACISTS!!1!one!1!!" but desperate times call for desperate measures, as they say.

I agreed with you up until I read "desperate times call for desperate measures"
There is no way having the BNP in control would improve this country. A real disgrace in the way they treat non-whites and Jews
I'm white but still think that

[phuckphace]

I agreed with you up until I read "desperate times call for desperate measures"
There is no way having the BNP in control would improve this country. A real disgrace in the way they treat non-whites and Jews
I'm white but still think that

the economic reforms that the BNP proposes are an excellent alternative to the status quo, and would dramatically improve the plight of the British working class by undoing a lot of the damage done by neoliberalism and globalization. your reasoning here is essentially "that wouldn't work because they're racist," but whether or not the BNP is "racist" has absolutely nothing to do with the feasibility or effectiveness of their economic policies. that's a non-sequitur.

people act like the BNP is NSDAP 2.0, but an unbiased look would reveal that the BNP's "racism" is massively subdued in comparison. according to their current platform, they want to offer immigrants incentives to voluntarily move back to their native countries. that really doesn't sound as horrible as it's made out to be.

honestly, I'm getting kind of tired of people dismissing the BNP without seriously considering their platform as a whole. when Nick Griffin appeared on Question Time a few years ago, he was ganged up on by a sniveling audience who just hooted "RACIST!!" at him while self-righteously patting themselves on the back BLIMEY GUVNA I SURE SHOWED THAT RACIST KNOB 'ED WHAT FOR INNIT. and people say Fox News is biased.

[ninja789]

the economic reforms that the BNP proposes are an excellent alternative to the status quo, and would dramatically improve the plight of the British working class by undoing a lot of the damage done by neoliberalism and globalization. your reasoning here is essentially "that wouldn't work because they're racist," but whether or not the BNP is "racist" has absolutely nothing to do with the feasibility or effectiveness of their economic policies. that's a non-sequitur.

people act like the BNP is NSDAP 2.0, but an unbiased look reveals that the BNP's "racism" is massively subdued in comparison. according to their current platform, they want to offer immigrants incentives to voluntarily move back to their native countries. that really doesn't sound as horrible as it's made out to be.
i said i agreed with you up until that point. Therefore I agree with their economic proposals
however it isnt just first generation immigrants

personally I cant understand how a friend of mine can represent our country (his of birth but african and Irish parents) would be requested to leave with them
How does he choose which one he goes to
They are here now so I think they should stay
Half of the clubs in my school wouldnt exist if it wasnt for too pakistani girls
from what i have seen these people can be better assets to our country than many of the White British

[Harry Smith]

the economic reforms that the BNP proposes are an excellent alternative to the status quo, and would dramatically improve the plight of the British working class by undoing a lot of the damage done by neoliberalism and globalization. your reasoning here is essentially "that wouldn't work because they're racist," but whether or not the BNP is "racist" has absolutely nothing to do with the feasibility or effectiveness of their economic policies. that's a non-sequitur.

people act like the BNP is NSDAP 2.0, but an unbiased look would reveal that the BNP's "racism" is massively subdued in comparison. according to their current platform, they want to offer immigrants incentives to voluntarily move back to their native countries. that really doesn't sound as horrible as it's made out to be.

honestly, I'm getting kind of tired of people dismissing the BNP without seriously considering their platform as a whole. when Nick Griffin appeared on Question Time a few years ago, he was ganged up on by a sniveling audience who just hooted "RACIST!!" at him while self-righteously patting themselves on the back BLIMEY GUVNA I SURE SHOWED THAT RACIST KNOB 'ED WHAT FOR INNIT. and people say Fox News is biased.

The BNP's economic policy is terrible-I mean it pretty much resolves around massive state control that would make the Labour leaders in 1945 cringe. From a standing point they'd destroy the NHS, bring back the barbaric death penalty, speed up the process of climate change and destroy Britain of any of it's actual history/heritage. Also look at the fact that they want to increase defense spending by 5%-that sounds really economically sound in a recession

I mean look at their recent campaign ad-it had the spitfire plan flying around claiming that it defended Britain from Invaders and that only the BNP will help defend Britain this time. I mean it's stupid because the squadron with the most kills during the Battle of Britain was the 303 polish fighter squard. It just shows that even in 1940 it was the Polish who were saving our country-not just the brits.

And yes the BNP are racist, and it's clear from comments made by Nick Griffin such as claiming that you 'can't be Black and Welsh, and then insulting a British born black comedian''. So yes if the leader of said party is making comments on his own twitter that are clearly racist then the Party quite clearly supports this

[phuckphace]

personally I cant understand how a friend of mine can represent our country (his of birth but african and Irish parents) would be requested to leave with them
How does he choose which one he goes to
They are here now so I think they should stay
Half of the clubs in my school wouldnt exist if it wasnt for too pakistani girls


the intention behind that policy is to target the children of immigrants who refuse to integrate into British society even after the second and third generation, and instead live in their own crime-filled enclaves. it's what many of them do...they have no intention of integrating when they can just import their own backwards Third World customs into the UK and get NHS access to boot. in other words, they want to bitch about how racist and evil whitey is, while at the same time taking whitey's money and using whitey's healthcare services.

from what i have seen these people can be better assets to our country than many of the White British

in a certain perverse way, you're right here...the true intention behind immigration was always to displace native British workers in favor of a sea of shiftless and often violent Third Worlders, the toxic effects of neoliberalism in a nutshell. whites are now officially the only ethnic group who are not allowed to form and maintain their own ethnically and culturally homogenous nation. you mentioned how the BNP mistreats Jews? well, Jews have their own country called Israel, which just so happens to be the world's most notorious apartheid state. but I forget, it's only racist if whites do it

[Harry Smith]

the intention behind that policy is to target the children of immigrants who refuse to integrate into British society even after the second and third generation, and instead live in their own crime-filled enclaves. it's what many of them do...they have no intention of integrating when they can just import their own backwards Third World customs into the UK and get NHS access to boot. in other words, they want to bitch about how racist and evil whitey is, while at the same time taking whitey's money and using whitey's healthcare services.



in a certain perverse way, you're right here...the true intention behind immigration was always to displace native British workers in favor of a sea of shiftless and often violent Third Worlders, the toxic effects of neoliberalism in a nutshell. whites are now officially the only ethnic group who are not allowed to form and maintain their own ethnically and culturally homogenous nation. you mentioned how the BNP mistreats Jews? well, Jews have their own country called Israel, which just so happens to be the world's most notorious apartheid state. but I forget, it's only racist if whites do it

I'm sorry but do you have any experience actually living in Britain? I mean Britain is based on a shared global culture-you complain about immigrants coming over here and refusing to integrate-if you look at the three most British customs-Tea, Cricket and the Royal Family they're all standards that have come from immigration. Our national drink is from India, our head of state is German and our country has been built from immigration since the roman era. As someone who lives in Britain and who is in fact White I can happily say I have much more in common with the immigrants your describe above then with the landed gentry that run Eton-but sure I should embrace them because they're white.

With the NHS-it's something called a national health service. It's not the WHS-it's for everyone. 40% of NHS staff are not from Britain, without immigration our public service would collapse-this would lead to chaos, and shows the whole stupidity behind your National socialist thinking-you want to defend the working class by pulling down our free healthcare service?

I've told this many times before but you simply don't seem to understand the history of migration within Britain-we needed immigrants after WW2 to survive, not only did they fight for us in the war, not only did we pillage their homeland but they helped drive the buses, build the roads and help Britain actually rebuild after a destructive war.

It's also a general tip that you make want to cover up the blatant racism

[Vlerchan]

... as well as being the only party that continues to denounce neoliberalism for what it is.
In the time it took me to read this post I'd thought up three British parties who matched the BNP in being pro-worker and against neo-liberalism. In the time it took me to quote this post and write the last line (on my phone) I'd thought up a further two.

[phuckphace]

In the time it took me to read this post I'd thought up three British parties who matched the BNP in being pro-worker and against neo-liberalism. In the time it took me to quote this post and write the last line (on my phone) I'd thought up a further two.

and they are...?

[Vlerchan]

and they are...?
Left Unity.
The Green Party.
The Socialist Workers Party.
These were my original three.

The Communist Party of Britian.
Sinn Féin.
These were the second two.

I also just looked at the Wikipedia page for British parties, and apparently I missed a lot.

[Ajmichael]

Since the advent of New Labour in 1995, all of the major parties are now pretty much in the centre ground with labour being slightly to the left, but embracing Thatcher's Free Market economic policy whilst handing out state benefits to whomever asked for them. The Conservatives are attempting to restrict state welfare in an effort to sort out Labours economic mess but at the same time have a more socialist view on prisoners (e.g. Hug a Hoodie). Although, in recent months, the main parties seem to be leaning outwards again now that they've realised that everyone in the centre causes coalition government. Whichever government comes in in 2015, they will have to make huge austerity cuts regardless of what they say in their election campaigns.

[Emerald Dream]

Let's stay on topic, please and not go off on a wild tangent. Quoting things from other threads definitely steers this into an unrelated discussion.

[Harry Smith]

Since the advent of New Labour in 1995, all of the major parties are now pretty much in the centre ground with labour being slightly to the left, but embracing Thatcher's Free Market economic policy whilst handing out state benefits to whomever asked for them. The Conservatives are attempting to restrict state welfare in an effort to sort out Labours economic mess but at the same time have a more socialist view on prisoners (e.g. Hug a Hoodie). Although, in recent months, the main parties seem to be leaning outwards again now that they've realised that everyone in the centre causes coalition government. Whichever government comes in in 2015, they will have to make huge austerity cuts regardless of what they say in their election campaigns.

Yeah Labour caused the 2008 global recession-another tory myth. The only mistake they made was not regulating the banks-something David Cameron wanted to do even further. And no Labour didn't hand out benefits to anyone but lets keep pushing right wing myths about how benefit cheats are destroying britain.

Cameron is not being socialist in Prisons-he's cut legal aid for the poorest, he's banned books from Britain and he's handed them over to private companies like G4s who've not been too great

[britishboy]

right wing myths about how benefit cheats are destroying britain.


But tax avoiders are? Left-wing logic.

[Harry Smith]

But tax avoiders are? Left-wing logic.

Yes they are, you said in another post that you wanted to reduce the government deficit so surely one way to do that is to increase the amount of tax that people should rightfully pay.

Amazon had £4 Billion sales, employes 420,000 yet only pays 2.3 million in tax a year-that's not right or ethical considering the company is profitting off both the British customers and the British workers. A company should pay it's tax, because as you also said in another thread you should respect the laws of the land.

I mean look-The amount of tax lost through non-payment and avoidance increased last year to £35bn, according to official figures released on Friday.

That's a lot of money-which could be used to stop the Defence cuts you feel so strongly about. You could even use the extra 35 billion to lower income taxes-something I believe the right is in favour in. That missing 35 billion is clearly destroying Britain because it could be used in hospitals, schools and housing

And no it's not just the left who care about tax avoidance

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/apr/12/george-osborne-plans-to-strengthen-criminal-law-on-tax-dodging

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/mar/15/landlords-hmrc-undeclared-lettings-income-tax

[Donkey]

I honestly think that the answer to this question - if one has made any effort to tune into British politics since 2000 is self-evident: Labour have transitioned to the neo-liberal right, holding a position now similar to that of the US Democrats. This (apparently) isn't as obvious as I thought it was. In a bid to not kill/get locked the Feminism thread I'm requesting we shift all discussion here.

I'm wasn't going to address your points until you have finished reading the article, but this is just so blatantly off that I can't help it:


Labour support austerity: that makes them, almost by definition, anti-working class.

Funnily enough I've agreed with everything you've had to say in this thread. You're right, the answer is very obvious.

The Observer did a two page spread on Ed Miliband and immigration today. I think that debate is pretty emblematic of the issue you are discussing. There is a smaller version here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/31/labour-tough-line-mass-migration

It's worth looking at the "Red Labour" movement within the Labour Party, and specific self-described socialist Labour MPs. British politics is pretty fragmented and polarised at the moment, and Red Labour is a group offering a radical alternative - uniquely being the only part of the Labour Party, as you have mentioned, to denounce the neoliberal consensus.

It might be worth not looking at the Labour Party as a homogenous entity, but a broad coalition of different interests, with a disparity not only of ideology between Blue, Purple and Red Labour but from the top to the bottom of its hierarchy.

[Harry Smith]

Funnily enough I've agreed with everything you've had to say in this thread. You're right, the answer is very obvious.

The Observer did a two page spread on Ed Miliband and immigration today. I think that debate is pretty emblematic of the issue you are discussing. There is a smaller version here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/31/labour-tough-line-mass-migration

It's worth looking at the "Red Labour" movement within the Labour Party, and specific self-described socialist Labour MPs. British politics is pretty fragmented and polarised at the moment, and Red Labour is a group offering a radical alternative - uniquely being the only part of the Labour Party, as you have mentioned, to denounce the neoliberal consensus.

It might be worth not looking at the Labour Party as a homogenous entity, but a broad coalition of different interests, with a disparity not only of ideology between Blue, Purple and Red Labour but from the top to the bottom of its hierarchy.

To be honest that's the same with nearly every party in the UK-I'd say that Cameron is probably a lot closer to Blair in his view than Miliband would ever be

[tovaris]

they are neither, their political asociation is what you would call british or even as far as english

[Donkey]

To be honest that's the same with nearly every party in the UK-I'd say that Cameron is probably a lot closer to Blair in his view than Miliband would ever be

Labour is more divided than the Conservatives, although you are right they are both, to an extent, broad coalitions of interest - as are the Lib Dems. Apart from the main parties though, the vast majority of parties in the UK are fairly ideologically cohesive. Labour is almost unique for how broad it is.

[Harry Smith]

Labour is more divided than the Conservatives, although you are right they are both, to an extent, broad coalitions of interest - as are the Lib Dems. Apart from the main parties though, the vast majority of parties in the UK are fairly ideologically cohesive. Labour is almost unique for how broad it is.

Just wait until 2017-if the EU referendum comes up along with the 'rise' of UKIP then the conservative party could split

[phuckphace]

our pseudo-conservatives are pretty divided too. you have the baron capitalists (Romney), the paleo church chicks (Palin and Bachmann), the Randroids (Rand Paul) and twelve dozen other Mossad agents masquerading as Congressmen and Senators. it's a truly hideous sight to behold.

[Vlerchan]

It might be worth not looking at the Labour Party as a homogenous entity, but a broad coalition of different interests, with a disparity not only of ideology between Blue, Purple and Red Labour but from the top to the bottom of its hierarchy.
I wasn't actually aware of this. It's definitely a fair bit different to Irish politics: in which, unless a parties support is in massive decline (see: Irish Labour now), they remain largely cohesive and hold a common policy direction.

they are neither, their political asociation is what you would call british or even as far as english
I'm not quite sure I understand what you are trying to say here.

[Donkey]

Just wait until 2017-if the EU referendum comes up along with the 'rise' of UKIP then the conservative party could split

I find it very unlikely that the Conservative Party will split. If you know your 19th century history, you might be aware of the Ultra Tory split after the repeal of the Corn Laws by Sir Robert Peel. But remember the Conservative Party of the 21st century has a recent ideological legacy of One Nation Conservatism and Thatcherism that is broad and strong in moulding the party as one body.

The Conservatives has long been fairly broad with its members, with members elected in more liberal (arguably Lib Dem marginal) constituencies such as South Cambridgeshire and Andrew Lansley, David Cameron for Witney or Alan Duncan for Rutland and Melton far more to the left of the party socially, supporting gay marriage and more progressive taxation etc, to more conservative (small c) MPs like those in the Cornerstone Group such as Nadine Dorries for Mid Bedfordshire. Typically the ideology of MPs matches that of their constituency, and this allows the Conservative Party to be a governing voting bloc. Every MP knows this and this makes a split very unlikely

[Harry Smith]

I find it very unlikely that the Conservative Party will split. If you know your 19th century history, you might be aware of the Ultra Tory split after the repeal of the Corn Laws by Sir Robert Peel. But remember the Conservative Party of the 21st century has a recent ideological legacy of One Nation Conservatism and Thatcherism that is broad and strong in moulding the party as one body.

The Conservatives has long been fairly broad with its members, with members elected in more liberal (arguably Lib Dem marginal) constituencies such as South Cambridgeshire and Andrew Lansley, David Cameron for Witney or Alan Duncan for Rutland and Melton far more to the left of the party socially, supporting gay marriage and more progressive taxation etc, to more conservative (small c) MPs like those in the Cornerstone Group such as Nadine Dorries for Mid Bedfordshire. Typically the ideology of MPs matches that of their constituency, and this allows the Conservative Party to be a governing voting bloc. Every MP knows this and this makes a split very unlikely

All the liberal leaning tories have been purged-Tim Yeo got deselected. I mean I'd agree that in 2010 Cameron was part of the modernizing block but he's clearly taken a massive sway towards the right in order to stop UKIP. It was probably a bit too far to say the party would split but I think unless Cameron gets a Majority in 2015 (very unlikely) then the party is going to move to the right to stop UKIP