Topic: Labour Thread

[bigbonedrawky]

"who admonish Russia on a daily basis yet give tacit support to Isral"

"And we're not talking un-named random people on someone's tw@ter, we're talking posters right here on RAWK. "

Post posts mate, otherwise you're talking shite

'on a daily basis'

I read this forum quite a lot, so should be super easy, barely an inconvenience to post these (it must be literally thousands of posts if it's on a daily basis)

This Ukraine War or rather this phase of the war hasn't been going fot thousands of days but I get your point and I must confess I haven't read 90% of that thread and I am stretching a point but I'm sure the average reader will realise that and the point still stands. In many ways they remind me of Starmer himself ...Sorry for misleading you Andy.

As for attacking TLP on a daily basis or in some cases multiple times a day, for about 5 years. Again I'm stretching a point as I'm sure they will of taken a few days off during that time, Christmas Birthdays Holidays or when their Tw@ter went down etc but the point still stands....Once again sorry for misleading you.

I have taken on board what you said about the phrase "your boy " and how it can be "mean spirited" & "downright nasty" etc and I 'd agree if we were talking about Hitler or Stalin but we was talking about Streeting and I'm sure neither of us think he's that bad a person, well at least I dont anyway what about you ?
Also on the subject of taking offence at mean spirited and downright nasty comments on the Internet have you looked at your own comments on here ? And are you aware of the concept of Cry -bully ?   

PS
Your comment about Right Wing voters voting for Labour ( Actual right wing ,not right wing of TLP) You better get used to it Andy. It's the reason Starmer ran to Murdoch once appointed as LoTO, it's why he waves his flag.
 It's why Streeting wants to distance TLP from those "Bleeding Hearts " and why Rachel Reeves was imitating Frottage with her comments about Immigration.

[Cali]

They'd be fucking stupid to announce anything before a GE.


Did you bother to educate yourself on what Starmer has achieved ?

So they don’t want to give any hope to those on minimum wage is that what your saying but I’m guessing they want them to vote for them tho I think labour could be in for a shock on election night but we will see. One thing is for certain and that starmer has murdochs approval 🤮
Yeah I read up on what he’s done 

[filopastry]

So they don’t want to give any hope to those on minimum wage is that what your saying but I’m guessing they want them to vote for them tho I think labour could be in for a shock on election night but we will see. One thing is for certain and that starmer has murdochs approval 🤮
Yeah I read up on what he’s done 

Except they will clearly announce it before a general election.......

I mean why on earth would Labour announce what the Minimum Wage should be right now, they have no ability to implement it, the only time they could implement it would be after a GE in 24/25 and they obviously have no idea now what the economic conditions will look like then.

I really do think there is a fair number of people who would much rather Labour remained eternally in opposition, rather than having to offer compromises on areas where unfortunately the party is sometimes significantly out of step with public opinion.

There are certainly areas where I personally disagree with the party's positions under Starmer in terms of my beliefs but from an electoral point of view they make sense

[So… Howard Philips]

So they don’t want to give any hope to those on minimum wage is that what your saying but I’m guessing they want them to vote for them tho I think labour could be in for a shock on election night but we will see. One thing is for certain and that starmer has murdochs approval 🤮
Yeah I read up on what he’s done

Can you post the links to what Starmer has done?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

So they don’t want to give any hope to those on minimum wage is that what your saying but I’m guessing they want them to vote for them tho I think labour could be in for a shock on election night but we will see. One thing is for certain and that starmer has murdochs approval 🤮
Yeah I read up on what he’s done

If that's how you see it then it's pointless reading your posts.

[Cali]

Except they will clearly announce it before a general election.......

I mean why on earth would Labour announce what the Minimum Wage should be right now, they have no ability to implement it, the only time they could implement it would be after a GE in 24/25 and they obviously have no idea now what the economic conditions will look like then.

I really do think there is a fair number of people who would much rather Labour remained eternally in opposition, rather than having to offer compromises on areas where unfortunately the party is sometimes significantly out of step with public opinion.

There are certainly areas where I personally disagree with the party's positions under Starmer in terms of my beliefs but from an electoral point of view they make sense

To put pressure on the current government to do more ya know like the opposition should do

[Andy @ Allerton!]

This Ukraine War or rather this phase of the war hasn't been going fot thousands of days but I get your point and I must confess I haven't read 90% of that thread and I am stretching a point but I'm sure the average reader will realise that and the point still stands. In many ways they remind me of Starmer himself ...Sorry for misleading you Andy.

As for attacking TLP on a daily basis or in some cases multiple times a day, for about 5 years. Again I'm stretching a point as I'm sure they will of taken a few days off during that time, Christmas Birthdays Holidays or when their Tw@ter went down etc but the point still stands....Once again sorry for misleading you.

I have taken on board what you said about the phrase "your boy " and how it can be "mean spirited" & "downright nasty" etc and I 'd agree if we were talking about Hitler or Stalin but we was talking about Streeting and I'm sure neither of us think he's that bad a person, well at least I dont anyway what about you ?
Also on the subject of taking offence at mean spirited and downright nasty comments on the Internet have you looked at your own comments on here ? And are you aware of the concept of Cry -bully ?   

PS
Your comment about Right Wing voters voting for Labour ( Actual right wing ,not right wing of TLP) You better get used to it Andy. It's the reason Starmer ran to Murdoch once appointed as LoTO, it's why he waves his flag.
 It's why Streeting wants to distance TLP from those "Bleeding Hearts " and why Rachel Reeves was imitating Frottage with her comments about Immigration.

So for these to be so apparant, surely it would be easy for you to name names?

Also, it may have escaped your notice, but I'm not likely to sweep 'the most measured poster award' this year. There are some amazing posters on this forum and in the politics thread and I'm not one of them.

I don't care who votes for Labour as long as Labour get in. You seem to have a problem with 'right wing' people voting for Labour. Why is that? How does that personally affect you and why does it upset you?

I've always thought about Labour as a Party that helps people and over the years they have done just that in many ways - and many of those that they've helped have been poor and disadvantaged. I haven't seen any evidence that this wouldn't happen again. It happened under Blair, but I'm sure that you'll refute that, which seems a bit mad if you were old enough to have lived through Thatcher and her Conservaative Party. When Blair got in, he changed a lot for the better. He also made some mistakes. But the Tories being the same as Labour, nah, doesn't compute. The arguments in that line always seem pretty odd to me as well.

[oldfordie]

So for these to be so apparant, surely it would be easy for you to name names?

Also, it may have escaped your notice, but I'm not likely to sweep 'the most measured poster award' this year. There are some amazing posters on this forum and in the politics thread and I'm not one of them.

I don't care who votes for Labour as long as Labour get in. You seem to have a problem with 'right wing' people voting for Labour. Why is that? How does that personally affect you and why does it upset you?

I've always thought about Labour as a Party that helps people and over the years they have done just that in many ways - and many of those that they've helped have been poor and disadvantaged. I haven't seen any evidence that this wouldn't happen again. It happened under Blair, but I'm sure that you'll refute that, which seems a bit mad if you were old enough to have lived through Thatcher and her Conservaative Party. When Blair got in, he changed a lot for the better. He also made some mistakes. But the Tories being the same as Labour, nah, doesn't compute. The arguments in that line always seem pretty odd to me as well.

Problem is if they admit the last Labour government helped millions in so many ways then they are only left with the economic ideological argument which isn't that appealing when it comes to wining support.
All the many good things achieved that made a massive difference to tens of millions of lives have been covered and they can't be disputed but only a begrudged small acknowledgement of them only being slightly better than the Torys.

[Sangria]

Problem is if they admit the last Labour government helped millions in so many ways then they are only left with the economic ideological argument which isn't that appealing when it comes to wining support.
All the many good things achieved that made a massive difference to tens of millions of lives have been covered and they can't be disputed but only a begrudged small acknowledgement of them only being slightly better than the Torys.

See also the argument posted earlier, supported with graphs, that inequality has grown, as seen in the increase at the top end. The problem with that argument is that it ignores what happened at the bottom end, where staggering numbers of people were lifted out of experiencing poverty. Even if the top end wasn't punished as some may like, the bottom end benefited hugely from the Labour government. The question is what the left (including the centre left) looks for. Does it look for the deprived to be helped, or does it look for the privileged to be punished?

[oldfordie]

See also the argument posted earlier, supported with graphs, that inequality has grown, as seen in the increase at the top end. The problem with that argument is that it ignores what happened at the bottom end, where staggering numbers of people were lifted out of experiencing poverty. Even if the top end wasn't punished as some may like, the bottom end benefited hugely from the Labour government. The question is what the left (including the centre left) looks for. Does it look for the deprived to be helped, or does it look for the privileged to be punished?

Yeah not a great argument to be making right now as well knowing how bad things have got and what's to come.
 Punishing the privileged and changing our system does seem the priority and I haven't got a problem changing some of those things they want like our tax system. whatever they want I just wish they would fight the battle better as am  certain it all backfires on them as well, the argument of Labour being no better than the Torys loses Labour support, not a very clever argument to make if you intend to try and take control of the Labour party and campaign in a GE, what do you expect those same people who were convinced not to vote to say after they were told Labour are just the same as the Torys, they will say what they were told. nahh not bothering to vote, Labour are just the same as the Torys.
The argument really should be the last Labour government helped 10s of millions live a better life and they will always do more for you than the Torys but it could of been a lot better if the country had more money, then we could do amazing things. this is where New Labour could of done better, I could respect that.

[bigbonedrawky]

So for these to be so apparant, surely it would be easy for you to name names?

Also, it may have escaped your notice, but I'm not likely to sweep 'the most measured poster award' this year. There are some amazing posters on this forum and in the politics thread and I'm not one of them.

I don't care who votes for Labour as long as Labour get in. You seem to have a problem with 'right wing' people voting for Labour. Why is that? How does that personally affect you and why does it upset you?

I've always thought about Labour as a Party that helps people and over the years they have done just that in many ways - and many of those that they've helped have been poor and disadvantaged. I haven't seen any evidence that this wouldn't happen again. It happened under Blair, but I'm sure that you'll refute that, which seems a bit mad if you were old enough to have lived through Thatcher and her Conservaative Party. When Blair got in, he changed a lot for the better. He also made some mistakes. But the Tories being the same as Labour, nah, doesn't compute. The arguments in that line always seem pretty odd to me as well.

A lot to unpack here Andy...So you don't care to try and hold yourself to the values you expect of others who post on here. Can you see the problems that might arise from that position ?

 I don't care who votes Labour but I do care about dog whistles to the Right, while Labours busy telling the Left to fuck off..."Unite the Party" my arse.
 
You claimed you'd honestly never met any right wing or right leaning people who voted Labour so here's a definition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics You might be surprised. Now you might be going off a prevalant definition on here ie Votes Tory or Brexit reads right wing rags etc or moving further Right  xenophobic or racist...You might even believe Right wing equates to someone who thinks Chubby Brown or Jimmy Carr etc should'nt be cancelled ( primarily by labour councils who unnecessarily risk been cancelled themselves at the next election ) or even someone who believes context is relevant in regards to free speech 
Whichever way you want to define it, Right wingers have voted Labour and Right wingers are within the party itself .

Helping the poor and disadvantaged "It happened under Blair"... Why do you think I'd refute that ?
Is it because you believe it. So therefore I must think the opposite, because we have difference of opinion about a different person and different issues ?
Domestically he did quite well, generally speaking your average person had a bit more money in their pocket but like Hicks & Gillete at LFC, he leveraged the fuck out of the hospitals and Schools and we're still paying for his mistakes. His War on Terror didn't help the poor and disadvantaged but it certainly changed a lot of lives and to some extent, we're still paying for his mistakes.
And Starmer doesn't want to be Starmer he want's to be Blair 2.0 because he's weak, he lacks character and lacks vision, he's a candle in the wind.
     
"The Tories been the same as Labour" Why do you think I believe that ? Once again You don't believe it, so therefore I must believe it yeah ?
I know all too well they may seem inches apart, but generally speaking life is a game of inches and for 3 people who I grew up with, the difference between Tory sanctions and a Labour Gov was life and death in 2018/19
Whilst TLP was busy fighting their own narrow ideological battles, while some of them were doing their best to ensure TLP lost the 2017 election.

Btw
Last year I read the sheet music to the tune to which the right wing of TLP were dancing during the Corbyn era.
And guess what they're still there advising a weak leader with no solid foundation or guiding  principle's of his own ...   

[bigbonedrawky]

Problem is if they admit the last Labour government helped millions in so many ways then they are only left with the economic ideological argument which isn't that appealing when it comes to wining support.
All the many good things achieved that made a massive difference to tens of millions of lives have been covered and they can't be disputed but only a begrudged small acknowledgement of them only being slightly better than the Torys.

The problem might be that you see them as "they" and not "we" and without a doubt vice versa.
Where's it all come from ?
5 years of civil war I'm guessing and Starmers carried it on and aggravated it.

[oldfordie]

The problem might be that you see them as "they" and not "we" and without a doubt vice versa.
Where's it all come from ?
5 years of civil war I'm guessing and Starmers carried it on and aggravated it.

The WE is the center Left, the THEY is the LEFT. you've acknowledged it exists by saying there's a civil war between the 2. if we are going to discuss the difference between the 2 then I can either use WE or Center Left as I consider myself center left in the debate, I could use the LEFT or they, all the same.
It's gone on for decades long before Starmer took over. am sure Yorkie will give examples in history I can only go back to the mid 70s which turned things nasty in the 80s. 
Starmers playing for keeps. if people on the left want to leave themselves wide open by breaking Labour party rules going back over a 100yrs to challenge him thinking he will back down in fear of confrontation then they have misjudged him badly.

[bigbonedrawky]

The WE is the center Left, the THEY is the LEFT. you've acknowledged it exists by saying there's a civil war between the 2. if we are going to discuss the difference between the 2 then I can either use WE or Center Left as I consider myself center left in the debate, I could use the LEFT or they, all the same.
It's gone on for decades long before Starmer took over. am sure Yorkie will give examples in history I can only go back to the mid 70s which turned things nasty in the 80s. 
Starmers playing for keeps. if people on the left want to leave themselves wide open by breaking Labour party rules going back over a 100yrs to challenge him thinking he will back down in fear of confrontation then they have misjudged him badly.

Yeah I know there are two factions within one party both sides use the term I'm not having a go at you or them for using the terms, I'm pointing out that the division exists and because of the division it's cost TLP elections in the past and it will in the future.
Ideological purity and an inability to work together from both the left and right has let the Tories run roughshod most of my life... Divided and Conquered.
Then we have another poisonous ideology thrown into the mix and I know it will never heal... t'other Yorkie can tell us all about that too.   
     
PS
What are these 100 year old rules 'the left' are breaking ?

[Cali]

Problem is if they admit the last Labour government helped millions in so many ways then they are only left with the economic ideological argument which isn't that appealing when it comes to wining support.
All the many good things achieved that made a massive difference to tens of millions of lives have been covered and they can't be disputed but only a begrudged small acknowledgement of them only being slightly better than the Torys.

I think the issue people have with new labour is that yeah they did help a lot of people but they didn’t stop the root causes as to why people needed help in the first place and with the majority they had in 97 they could have made sweeping generational changes but didn’t do any good they did was easily reversed when the tories came back in it’s almost as if labour just keep the hot seat warm for them

[Sangria]

I think the issue people have with new labour is that yeah they did help a lot of people but they didn’t stop the root causes as to why people needed help in the first place and with the majority they had in 97 they could have made sweeping generational changes but didn’t do any good they did was easily reversed when the tories came back in it’s almost as if labour just keep the hot seat warm for them

I'll only speak for the time that I've been alive, but Labour had got the most votes on each occasion they took power, and the Tories got the most votes on each occasion that they've taken power, and the Tories have been in power for the entirety of my life barring the 1997-2010 period. What are the root causes that you talk about that make people need help in the first place?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Yeah I know there are two factions within one party both sides use the term I'm not having a go at you or them for using the terms, I'm pointing out that the division exists and because of the division it's cost TLP elections in the past and it will in the future.
Ideological purity and an inability to work together from both the left and right has let the Tories run roughshod most of my life... Divided and Conquered.
Then we have another poisonous ideology thrown into the mix and I know it will never heal... t'other Yorkie can tell us all about that too.   
     
PS
What are these 100 year old rules 'the left' are breaking ?

"Ideological purity and an inability to work together from both the left and right"

Do you think this ideological purity is really a thing of the Left and the Centre-Left or just the left? I can't see much evidence for the Centre-Left. As I said before, I don't care who votes for Labour - I'd like them to be viable as a Political Party that can be in power and to reverse some of the Damage that the Conservative Party have inflicted on the Country. For that to happen, they have to appeal to as broad a base as possible.

As has been said a few times, I actually think that it might be a good idea for the Party to split. As Yorkie has said a couple of times - you have ideal candidates RIGHT THERE to lead the new Party - a slew of wronged Socialist Leaders and MPs with great ideas and a great plan. Perhaps it is time for them to set up a 'Real Labour' Party and to put those plans and ideas to the general public. I've heard many times that there is a real appetite for change and that these plans and ideas could revolutionise the country. Maybe this Party could go for it and see how many people come along - there are many diassaffected voters and if the apeal is good enough and the engagement is sufficient then a real change could happen.

I would have to bow to minds greater than mine, but there is one thing that 'the left' always say - that Labour has betrayed the Working Class and has always been far to the left of where it is now, but from what I've read on here and elsewhere, that wasn't ever the case was it? Wasn't that just after WW II when the Tories thought they would walk it and got booted out by a tired and angry country and on that back of that, great things were done - like the NHS.

People are tired and angry now, so maybe it is the time to put 'The Left' against the country - to see how many people in the UK would pick it up and go with it. If it's obvious that most of the country want this, then that might pull Labour and the country to the left. Great things might happen.

[oldfordie]

Yeah I know there are two factions within one party both sides use the term I'm not having a go at you or them for using the terms, I'm pointing out that the division exists and because of the division it's cost TLP elections in the past and it will in the future.
Ideological purity and an inability to work together from both the left and right has let the Tories run roughshod most of my life... Divided and Conquered.
Then we have another poisonous ideology thrown into the mix and I know it will never heal... t'other Yorkie can tell us all about that too.   
     
PS
What are these 100 year old rules 'the left' are breaking ?

Not all the left, some Labour members are being expelled from the Labour party, many are saying this is a purge on the left, I assumed you were touching on this when you said Starmers carrying on the civil war.
People have defended them arguing free speech which isn't a defence not when they come out in support of a group that opposes the Labour party.  a proscribed group. eg. The President of the Unison Union has just been expelled for sharing articles by the Socialist group. a proscribed group. sharing the article is supporting the groups aims which go against the values of the Labour party. this is one of the first rules made when the Labour party rules were wrote.
Some have deliberately caused confrontation knowing they've broken the rules then argued free speech to attack Starmer when expelled. they left themselves wide open and the NEC are taking none of it. I could find better examples but will have to do that later, bit busy now.

[oldfordie]

I think the issue people have with new labour is that yeah they did help a lot of people but they didn’t stop the root causes as to why people needed help in the first place and with the majority they had in 97 they could have made sweeping generational changes but didn’t do any good they did was easily reversed when the tories came back in it’s almost as if labour just keep the hot seat warm for them

I imagine people will say the same if Labour win power for another 13yrs in 2024. the problems will be similar, everything run down to the ground right across the board. you mentioned something yesterday about the government allowing low pay to exist while topping it up with the tax payers money. very true.
How it came about is a long story but it was impossible for Labour to abolish it. it was about Thatcher keeping the unemployment figures artificialy low for political reasons. to argue Labour are the party of unemployment, the Tory party are the party of employment. yeah I know Thatchers government caused millions to be unemployed but she still covered up the true higher unemployment in a few ways, this was one of them. giving companys very cheap Labour and topping their wages up with tax payers money. companys naturally jumped at it. what would have happened if Labour had stopped it.? the companies would have got rid of a lot of that cheap Labour. unemployment would have shot up. the Torys would have said Labour are throwing millions on the dole. Labour lose the election. unemplyment was a massive political issue back then, Torys still try to attack Labour with it now.
There are lots of reasons why Labour couldn't do some of the stuff many wanted, it's easy to judge now but I would hope people ask why rather than judge them.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Not all the left, some Labour members are being expelled from the Labour party, many are saying this is a purge on the left, I assumed you were touching on this when you said Starmers carrying on the civil war.
People have defended them arguing free speech which isn't a defence not when they come out in support of a group that opposes the Labour party.  a proscribed group. eg. The President of the Unison Union has just been expelled for sharing articles by the Socialist group. a proscribed group. sharing the article is supporting the groups aims which go against the values of the Labour party. this is one of the first rules made when the Labour party rules were wrote.
Some have deliberately caused confrontation knowing they've broken the rules then argued free speech to attack Starmer when expelled. they left themselves wide open and the NEC are taking none of it. I could find better examples but will have to do that later, bit busy now.

but I believe the It was only proscribed in 2021.  Its just a newspaper, a left wing newspaper. 
It was founded in 1992 why have the NEC decided to ban it now if its such a threat to the party.

[Cali]

I imagine people will say the same if Labour win power for another 13yrs in 2024. the problems will be similar, everything run down to the ground right across the board. you mentioned something yesterday about the government allowing low pay to exist while topping it up with the tax payers money. very true.
How it came about is a long story but it was impossible for Labour to abolish it. it was about Thatcher keeping the unemployment figures artificialy low for political reasons. to argue Labour are the party of unemployment, the Tory party are the party of employment. yeah I know Thatchers government caused millions to be unemployed but she still covered up the true higher unemployment in a few ways, this was one of them. giving companys very cheap Labour and topping their wages up with tax payers money. companys naturally jumped at it. what would have happened if Labour had stopped it.? the companies would have got rid of a lot of that cheap Labour. unemployment would have shot up. the Torys would have said Labour are throwing millions on the dole. Labour lose the election. unemplyment was a massive political issue back then, Torys still try to attack Labour with it now.
There are lots of reasons why Labour couldn't do some of the stuff many wanted, it's easy to judge now but I would hope people ask why rather than judge them.

Your probably correct in that people will be saying the same in years to come about starmers labour if he gets in and I know things arent easy to reverse and labour would be attacked by the media and tories which makes things really difficult at times for them because as you say it’ll probably mean they lose the next election or it makes it really difficult for them at least but still imo no reason to not do the right thing and when the same media and tories were attacking corbyn what did the PLP and loads of labour voters do they joined in with them and helped tarnish him to the point of no return what was said about him was absolutely scandalous they just threw mud at him until something stuck and I’d love to be able to vote for the Labour Party it should be the party of someone like me a working class person I just don’t think this current incarnation of it is sadly it’s a party that courts the Tory vote wants supposed power over doing the right thing well good luck labour I think you’ll need it and I won’t be a part of it

[oldfordie]

but I believe the It was only proscribed in 2021.  Its just a newspaper, a left wing newspaper. 
It was founded in 1992 why have the NEC decided to ban it now if its such a threat to the party.

This is just a example off the top of my head I read yesterday.
Is that a defence, it was only proscribed in 2021 and it's only a newspaper.
I think some have deliberately done things to push back at Starmers Labour to put them in a position hoping they will back down, if they didn't back down and expelled them then they would try and turn it into a purge accusation.
Starmers Labour have gone the other way, rather than back down and relax the rules they've tightened them up. the SCG and Ukraine is a another example. they were threatened with expulsion, they must of known they were breaking the rules but they still pushed it.

[oldfordie]

Your probably correct in that people will be saying the same in years to come about starmers labour if he gets in and I know things arent easy to reverse and labour would be attacked by the media and tories which makes things really difficult at times for them because as you say it’ll probably mean they lose the next election or it makes it really difficult for them at least but still imo no reason to not do the right thing and when the same media and tories were attacking corbyn what did the PLP and loads of labour voters do they joined in with them and helped tarnish him to the point of no return what was said about him was absolutely scandalous they just threw mud at him until something stuck and I’d love to be able to vote for the Labour Party it should be the party of someone like me a working class person I just don’t think this current incarnation of it is sadly it’s a party that courts the Tory vote wants supposed power over doing the right thing well good luck labour I think you’ll need it and I won’t be a part of it

I can only think of 1 incident when Corbyn could claim he was unfairly vilified with lies. when a Tory MP said something about him being paid by Russia. Corbyn sued and won.
Whether you think he was unfairly treated doesn't really matter, his baggage made him a very easy target. he may have felt unfairly treated himself so why didn't he defend himself at the time rather than ignoring all the attacks and insults. it happened every week in Parliament. vicious attacks on him personally but he just ignored them. this was all certain to happen and one the reasons why many thought he would make a bad leader.

[Nobby Reserve]

See also the argument posted earlier, supported with graphs, that inequality has grown, as seen in the increase at the top end. The problem with that argument is that it ignores what happened at the bottom end, where staggering numbers of people were lifted out of experiencing poverty. Even if the top end wasn't punished as some may like, the bottom end benefited hugely from the Labour government. The question is what the left (including the centre left) looks for. Does it look for the deprived to be helped, or does it look for the privileged to be punished?

Poverty can only ever be relative.

Relative to what the wealthiest have.

[Sangria]

Poverty can only ever be relative.

Relative to what the wealthiest have.

That's the academic definition. I disagree on how it's experienced. The experience is that people want a certain baseline, and experienced poverty is what's below that baseline. Bringing down the top end may make it look as though there is less inequality, but it matters little to those at the bottom if the baseline is not met. If people are raised above that baseline, do many of them care what's happening at the top?

[Kenny's Jacket]

This is just a example off the top of my head I read yesterday.
Is that a defence, it was only proscribed in 2021 and it's only a newspaper.
I think some have deliberately done things to push back at Starmers Labour to put them in a position hoping they will back down, if they didn't back down and expelled them then they would try and turn it into a purge accusation.
Starmers Labour have gone the other way, rather than back down and relax the rules they've tightened them up. the SCG and Ukraine is a another example. they were threatened with expulsion, they must of known they were breaking the rules but they still pushed it.

Im trying to find our why it was proscribed and why no incarnation of the labour party thought of banning it in the past if its so bad.

Are there any examples of centrist, centre right or right wing publications getting proscribed? - writing articles in the s*n seems more acceptable than sharing articles in a left wing newspaper. I know which one Id rather read.

[oldfordie]

Im trying to find our why it was proscribed and why no incarnation of the labour party thought of banning it in the past if its so bad.

Are there any examples of centrist, centre right or right wing publications getting proscribed? - writing articles in the s*n seems more acceptable than sharing articles in a left wing newspaper. I know which one Id rather read.

Well that's where the argument over it being free speech falls down, your entitled to think and say what you want as your a individual not a organisation thats spent the last 120yrs trying to get as many MPs into Parliament as possible. One of the rules is this below. she's entitled to her views but Labour can't be supporting people who make arguments that go against what the Labour party stand for.
A leter sent to Egan on November 15 from the Labour party disputes team said that Egan's membership had been terminated because she shared two posts on social media from the Marxist group Socialist Appeal.

Last year, the Labour party condemned Socialist Appeal - a newspaper made up of Marxist members within the Labour party - as "not compatible with Labour's rules or our aims and values."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23136020.unison-president-andrea-egan-expelled-labour-party/

[Kenny's Jacket]

Well that's where the argument over it being free speech falls down, your entitled to think and say what you want as your a individual not a organisation thats spent the last 120yrs trying to get as many MPs into Parliament as possible. One of the rules is this below. she's entitled to her views but Labour can't be supporting people who make arguments that go against what the Labour party stand for.
A leter sent to Egan on November 15 from the Labour party disputes team said that Egan's membership had been terminated because she shared two posts on social media from the Marxist group Socialist Appeal.

Last year, the Labour party condemned Socialist Appeal - a newspaper made up of Marxist members within the Labour party - as "not compatible with Labour's rules or our aims and values."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23136020.unison-president-andrea-egan-expelled-labour-party/

What exactly are we discussing here OF, its not free speech, I thought it was KS purging the left and aggravating the civil war?

You mentioned laws in place for 100 years, the law against Socialist appeal has been in place for 1 year.
TLP/NEC said that SA doesnt fit in with labour values, I find it troublesome that the s*n fits in with labour values better than a socialist newspaper.

If threre is no aggravating of the civil war or any purge, can you tell me when someone got banned for promoting a centrist or right wing publication?
when was the last time the NEC voted to proscribe such a publication?.

[Cali]

What exactly are we discussing here OF, its not free speech, I thought it was KS purging the left and aggravating the civil war?

You mentioned laws in place for 100 years, the law against Socialist appeal has been in place for 1 year.
TLP/NEC said that SA doesnt fit in with labour values, I find it troublesome that the s*n fits in with labour values better than a socialist newspaper.

If threre is no aggravating of the civil war or any purge, can you tell me when someone got banned for promoting a centrist or right wing publication?
when was the last time the NEC voted to proscribe such a publication?.

Game set and match

[oldfordie]

What exactly are we discussing here OF, its not free speech, I thought it was KS purging the left and aggravating the civil war?

You mentioned laws in place for 100 years, the law against Socialist appeal has been in place for 1 year.
TLP/NEC said that SA doesnt fit in with labour values, I find it troublesome that the s*n fits in with labour values better than a socialist newspaper.

If threre is no aggravating of the civil war or any purge, can you tell me when someone got banned for promoting a centrist or right wing publication?
when was the last time the NEC voted to proscribe such a publication?.

As a individual you are entitled to say anything you want under free speech but organisations have rules, there are rules on this forum, you can't come in saying United a blah blah and Liverpool are blah blah and then start screaming your entitled to say it when your kicked out moaning about your free speech, the Labour party also has rules based on their values and aims.  I remember a lad trying to do it one time. hilarious, my free speech rights.
It doesn't matter when the rules were brought in, am not disputing the fact Labour are tightening up the rules, remember Millitant members being kicked out of the party, Labour ended up drawing up a list to proscribe certain organisations, maybe Momentum might be proscribed and added to the list if they campaign for Corbyn if he stands as a independent.

[Kenny's Jacket]

As a individual you are entitled to say anything you want under free speech but organisations have rules, there are rules on this forum, you can't come in saying United a blah blah and Liverpool are blah blah and then start screaming your entitled to say it when your kicked out moaning about your free speech, the Labour party also has rules based on their values and aims.  I remember a lad trying to do it one time. hilarious, my free speech rights.
It doesn't matter when the rules were brought in, am not disputing the fact Labour are tightening up the rules, remember Millitant members being kicked out of the party, Labour ended up drawing up a list to proscribe certain organisations, maybe Momentum might be proscribed and added to the list if they campaign for Corbyn if he stands as a independent.

Mate, Im not suggesting there is any free speech argument.  You're building a strawman

I was exploring the left wing purge and the agitation of the civil war, plus the direction of the party when left wing newspapers are seen as worse than the s*n.

You have avoided all of my questions. on the above

[oldfordie]

Mate, Im not suggesting there is any free speech argument.  You're building a strawman

I was exploring the left wing purge and the agitation of the civil war, plus the direction of the party when left wing newspapers are seen as worse than the s*n.

You have avoided all of my questions. on the above

I mentioned the free speech arguments in earlier posts and you've only just challenged me on it . it is being used so it's not a Strawman. if the person shares the articles and they are expelled, what argument are you making to defend them? is it nor free speech.
I haven't avoided the question, am not getting into any discussions about the Sun as a comparison to say Militant or in this case the Marxist Socialist newspaper which must have views which go against Labour values.  can't you see the difference, are you saying if they expel someone from a proscribed organisations that goes against what Labour stand for then they should be expelling everyone who buys the sun newspaper or passes the sun to someone else.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Poverty can only ever be relative.

Relative to what the wealthiest have.

I couldn't disagree more.

I came from a very, very poor background and lived in some right shitholes. Any thoughts about 'the rich' were a million miles away from my family and many others that couldn't put food on the table or turn the lights on. I remember our family used to band up with others around and make big stews and turn it into a party where everyone ate.

Why the fuck anyone would think that people in such dire straits would give a fuck about some dickheads having a Ferrari or a Private Plane somewhere else in the country really does show that some people really have no idea about just how fucked things were under Thatcher.

 “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

[Kenny's Jacket]

I mentioned the free speech arguments in earlier posts and you've only just challenged me on it . it is being used so it's not a Strawman.  is it nor free speech.
I haven't avoided the question, am not getting into any discussions about the Sun as a comparison to say Militant or in this case the Marxist Socialist newspaper which must have views which go against Labour values.  can't you see the difference, are you saying if they expel someone from a proscribed organisations that goes against what Labour stand for then they should be expelling everyone who buys the sun newspaper or passes the sun to someone else.

To be fair I mentioned Im not arguing about free speech in earlier posts, but you kept it up, anyway nothing to dwell on.

if the person shares the articles and they are expelled, what argument are you making to defend them

Im cautious not to defend Andrea Egan until I know what article she shared, however my point is the ongoing attacks on the left.
If the newspaper has been proscribed because its a far left publication, and Ive seen nothing to suggest anything to the contrary
then why has that been proscribed as a newspaper you cant promote? It was fine 2 years ago, never mind the 100 years ago you mentioned earlier.
I suspect its because its left wing, which appears to be against labour values.
The same Labour values that has not proscribed any centrist or right wing publications. 

are you saying if they expel someone from a proscribed organisations that goes against what Labour stand for then they should be expelling everyone who buys the sun newspaper or passes the sun to someone else.

No Im questioning why you cant promote a left wing paper, but you can write articles in a right wing one.

I think that right wing newspaper goes against what TLP stands for, dont you?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

To be fair I mentioned Im not arguing about free speech in earlier posts, but you kept it up, anyway nothing to dwell on.

Im cautious not to defend Andrea Egan until I know what article she shared, however my point is the ongoing attacks on the left.
If the newspaper has been proscribed because its a far left publication, and Ive seen nothing to suggest anything to the contrary
then why has that been proscribed as a newspaper you cant promote? It was fine 2 years ago, never mind the 100 years ago you mentioned earlier.
I suspect its because its left wing, which appears to be against labour values.
The same Labour values that has not proscribed any centrist or right wing publications. 

No Im questioning why you cant promote a left wing paper, but you can write articles in a right wing one.

I think that right wing newspaper goes against what TLP stands for, dont you?

Well this is the article which says why they were banned;

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-expels-groups-critical-tackle-232400759.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADVCqcc9CTZDND-PSA7MPfvwbxx4FQvJTK4_lRcHDFEjWl0ir4NNrLCzeSQGR5s-TFWXVWxAWy2xB1AJ1a-z1Wpj0HXSOIYBu3fkNBlx9kHowmgsDu6jj3Kj6Sfmv0qaOWao4_RzrDFWVzkeYZSczk2Prw7Pdf4NhXtQgNZrWkhs

Labour has expelled four associated groups after its ruling committee decided they were “not compatible” with the party’s values.

According to multiple reports, the organisations – Resist, Socialist Appeal, Labour in Exile Network and Labour Against the Witchhunt – were proscribed during a National Executive Committee meeting on Tuesday.

Insiders said some of the groups were directed by people who had been expelled from the party, while others had described work to tackle anti-Semitism as a “witch-hunt” or a “smear” campaign.

The Mirror, which broke the story last week, said as many as 1,000 members could see their membership revoked as a result of the purge.

The move was agreed in a nine-hour meeting in which the full scale of the party’s dire financial state was also laid bare, with a voluntary redundancy process under way for staff.

On the expulsions, a Labour spokeswoman said: “Labour is a broad, welcoming and democratic party and we are committed to ensuring it stays that way.

“The NEC has decided that these organisations are not compatible with Labour’s rules or our aims and values.”

The Jewish Labour Movement welcomed the ruling, stating that it sent a “strong political signal” over the party’s desire to tackle anti-Semitism under Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.

The proposal to expel far-left members had been criticised beforehand by former leader Jeremy Corbyn – who is still suspended following his reaction to the equalities watchdog report into anti-Semitism within the party – and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell.

Mr McDonnell said it was “bizarre” and “desperate” to oust people when most of those targeted had “left already”, and called for the restoration of the whip to Mr Corbyn.

Standard Blairite fare to try show how strong a leader you are by taking on your own party but bizarre to do it by expelling people, most of whom have left already. Looks desperate when what is needed is restoration of whip to Jeremy Corbyn, publication of Ford & taking on Tories

— John McDonnell MP (@johnmcdonnellMP) July 17, 2021



According to the Labour List website, general secretary David Evans attended the NEC meeting to give an update about the party’s financial position.

He reportedly told the committee “we don’t have any money”, with sources telling the website that party reserves – once in rude health due to a membership surge under Mr Corbyn – are down to only one month’s payroll.

Mr Evans reportedly said Labour’s bank balance had suffered due to lost members and requiring central funds to deal with anti-Semitism cases.

The party confirmed it does have financial pressures and had on Tuesday started a voluntary severance scheme (VSS).

“This is not an easy decision and we recognise it will be a very difficult time for staff and we will fully engage and consult with them and the trade unions throughout,” a party spokeswoman said.

“We are reshaping our party’s operation with a view towards being fighting fit for upcoming campaigns and the next general election.”

[Kenny's Jacket]

It doesnt tell us anything we didnt already know, that the NEC have proscribed them.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

It doesnt tell us anything we didnt already know, that the NEC have proscribed them.

I suppose it comes down to whether you believe that there was a problem or not with Antisemitism in the Labour Party or not.

There are probably three views

1. There was no problem - it was all just a conspiracy to get rid of the best Labour Leader in the history of the Party
2. There was a problem, but who gives a fuck
3. There was a problem and something rightly was done about it

[Kenny's Jacket]

I suppose it comes down to whether you believe that there was a problem or not with Antisemitism in the Labour Party or not.

There are probably three views

1. There was no problem - it was all just a conspiracy to get rid of the best Labour Leader in the history of the Party
2. There was a problem, but who gives a fuck
3. There was a problem and something rightly was done about it

Andy do you know what the antisemitism claim relating to the proscribing of the Socialist Appeal actualy was?
If you do enlighten us

How do you feel about Tory Wakeford not facing a trigger ballot, but some left wing MPs facing one?
How do you feel about the other questions I asked OF?

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Andy do you know what the antisemitism claim relating to the proscribing of the Socialist Appeal actualy was?
If you do enlighten us

How do you feel about Tory Wakeford not facing a trigger ballot, but some left wing MPs facing one?
How do you feel about the other questions I asked OF?

Well that's the reason given.

Which of those three views do you broadly adhere to (or add a 4th if you want)

The S*n is a difficult subject on a Liverpool board. As a Liverpool fan, they can get to fuck. As someone that lives in Liverpool, they can get to fuck. As just myself, an individual, they can get to absolute fuck.

But the Labour Party isn't about Liverpool FC. The Labour Party isn't about Liverpool, the City. The Labour Party doesn't give a shiny shite what I think and why should it? The Labour Party is a national Party. While many (all?) of us on here think the S*n is a fucking shithouse twat of a bellend and not even a Newspaper, many people in the country don't. (Though encouragingly that number of dropping weekly and hopefully one day it'll cease to be and fuck off)

What would your answer to Starmer be if you, Kenny, had absolute full control of the Labour Party. How would you get everyone to work together and how would you address those that openly broke rules (As suggested above) - let's not even pick any rules or any people - what would your blanket action be to handle rule breaking by anyone and draw the party closer together. Imagine that you have unlimited time, resources, money and people. What would you do that would work and would also get enough of the country to vote for you and give you an overall majority in Parliament?

[bigbonedrawky]

"Ideological purity and an inability to work together from both the left and right"

Do you think this ideological purity is really a thing of the Left and the Centre-Left or just the left? I can't see much evidence for the Centre-Left. As I said before, I don't care who votes for Labour - I'd like them to be viable as a Political Party that can be in power and to reverse some of the Damage that the Conservative Party have inflicted on the Country. For that to happen, they have to appeal to as broad a base as possible.

As has been said a few times, I actually think that it might be a good idea for the Party to split.

I would have to bow to minds greater than mine, but there is one thing that 'the left' always say - that Labour has betrayed the Working Class

You can't see the centre left and their ideological purity ? Really It's happening right in front of your eyes and you can't see it ? Have you even looked at what been going on since 2016 ?
"They have to appeal to as broad a base as possible"  by hoping to swap anyone to 'the left' of the  ideology Starmer has recently adopted  with 'the right '... Thats the broad church that will win an election.
And then you go on to say it might be a good idea for the Party to split...The same principle that led to the SDP and Thatchers dominance in the 80s and Major in the 90s when you had it hard and you think thats a good idea 
Compared to the Austerity driven Tory govs and their Benefit cuts & UC sanctions... life was easy then mate .

"The left always say that Labour has always betrayed the Working Class" A massive generalisation right there,
Who and When did they always say that ? are you on about Communist back in the 80s.
Instead of spending hours on here get out there do some research of your own dude don't rely on me or any one else on this thread...I know you will be surprised or even shocked with what you find out about TLP.   
You might want to read the Forde report