Should Labour move right or left?

[I1L2T3]

no he wasn't. Gladstone was age 59 when he first became Prime Minister, never mind anything else - and he'd already been the Chancellor of the Exchequer for 18 years before that. That is a frontline politician, like Churchill had been a frontline politician for thirty years before he became head of his party or faction.

 

Corbyn has got no experience and is like a little insect compared to them. Even if he wins this 2015 Labour leadership election there is no way his leadership will last through the entire parliament.

 

Corbyn has got 34 years experience as an MP.

 

Cameron and Clegg when they became leaders of their parties had but a fraction of that.

 

I don't think anybody really expects Corbyn to lead Labour into the next election but they are expecting him to put a rocket under the backside of the Labour party. He's in for a few years.

[apelike]

 

With age comes wisdom. The sort you can't get in Universities. Never heard of an 'Elder Statesman?'

 

No it doesn't, its just one of those sound bites that people like to hear. If it was true then Sheffield politics would have changed instead of still being left with a tint of communism. Instead we have the old voting the same as their parents did "cause its the right thing to do."

 

I never liked Blair and am not a Blair-ite but I respect what he did, he certainly gave the Tories a run for their money and modernised the old fashioned doddering Labour party. If Labour are to survive then they need to embrace modern economics and politics. If people vote for Corbyn then as Blair points out Labour will become a doomed party and be annihilated.

[blake]

Blair will probably resign from the Labour party if Corbyn wins.

 

however he might join again when somebody else other than Corbyn becomes Labour party leader in two or three years. However it might be somebody even more left-wing, than Corbyn who after all being so old, will need to be replaced soon anyway.

 

is there anybody in the parliamentary Labour party who is like 40 to 50 and not 60 to 70 like Corbyn is, who is even more left wing than him, to carry the mantle?

[Mister M]

No it doesn't, its just one of those sound bites that people like to hear. If it was true then Sheffield politics would have changed instead of still being left with a tint of communism. Instead we have the old voting the same as their parents did "cause its the right thing to do."

I never liked Blair and am not a Blair-ite but I respect what he did, he certainly gave the Tories a run for their money and modernised the old fashioned doddering Labour party. If Labour are to survive then they need to embrace modern economics and politics. If people vote for Corbyn then as Blair points out Labour will become a doomed party and be annihilated.

 

 

One of the reasons that Blair was very successful as a politician was that he (and Mandelson) used what Michael Foot called "the dark arts" of politics i.e. media spin and marketing - which they had copied from the Tories. Apparently Foot hated all that.

A lot of people complain that modern politics is way too vacuous, and that our choices have become restricted. Essentially, at present, there are 3 main parties all singing from the same neoliberal hymn sheet. What Corbyn is saying is that there is an alternative - a genuine mixed economy with social democracy, rather than the constant marketization agenda we've had since 1979. I support him in that.

[I1L2T3]

Blair will probably resign from the Labour party if Corbyn wins.

 

however he might join again when somebody else other than Corbyn becomes Labour party leader in two or three years. However it might be somebody even more left-wing, than Corbyn who after all being so old, will need to be replaced soon anyway.

 

is there anybody in the parliamentary Labour party who is like 40 to 50 and not 60 to 70 like Corbyn is, who is even more left wing than him, to carry the mantle?

 

There is nobody right now but a couple of years of challenging the status quo might embolden the next generation of politicians to deviate from the neoliberal agenda. As I said before this isn't about lefty Labour politics but challenging the accepted wisdom that neoliberalism is the right solution for us. Clearly it isn't.

[May Blob]

People should remember who and why the Labour was formed including some MPs.

[DrNorm]

One of the reasons that Blair was very successful as a politician was that he (and Mandelson) used what Michael Foot called "the dark arts" of politics i.e. media spin and marketing

 

You can adhere to your principles as much as you like but if you're not savvy in the dark arts of politics you're not going to survive in the political jungle. Corbyn may or may not be "A Man for all Seasons", but if he doesn't have a modicum of Machiavelian chicanery in his armoury he'll end up sidelined, irrelevant and metaphorically beheaded.

 

Essentially, at present, there are 3 main parties all singing from the same neoliberal hymn sheet.

 

Well that jibe hurts and maybe because there's some truth in it. But for now, I still believe that capitalism need massive reform rather than rejecting outright. My personal boundary distinguishes hard working inventive entrepreneurs (intelligent labourers) from capitalist speculators who have no interest in the common good, only personal advancement,

 

What Corbyn is saying is that there is an alternative - a genuine mixed economy with social democracy, rather than the constant marketization agenda we've had since 1979. I support him in that.

 

Phrased like that, I'm warming to the guy ... but still have doubts.

[apelike]

People should remember who and why the Labour was formed including some MPs.

 

I agree.

 

It was formed in 1900 when politics in the UK was in its infancy and the treatment of working people was appaulling. Totally different to the modern politics of today, and totally different to modern peoples needs and expectations.

 

In 1957 Macmillan stated that "people have never had it so good" and the same applies today.

[Anna B]

I agree.

 

It was formed in 1900 when politics in the UK was in its infancy and the treatment of working people was appaulling. Totally different to the modern politics of today, and totally different to modern peoples needs and expectations.

 

In 1957 Macmillan stated that "people have never had it so good" and the same applies today.

That might have been true up until the crash of 2008, but since then we have been going backwards.

 

Those entering the workforce post 2008 are experiencing a very different world. Workers rights have been trampled on. 0 hours, temporory contracts, agency work, the umbrella system, macjobs, influx of migrant labour, periods of unemployment, etc. And without some stability in the labour market, everything else goes downhill too.

 

The Welfare state is being dismantled when it has never been more needed, and we are now seeing serious social problems coming to the fore; need for foodbanks, affordable housing, mental health problems, care for the elderly, the working poor etc. Meanwhile there is more money sloshing around the system than ever before but the mega corporations and mega rich are syphoning up the money. The gap between rich and poor is growing greater and nowhere more so than the UK. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk-most-unequal-country-in-the-west-1329614.html)

 

The world is changing rapidly. Everything needs to be looked at afresh. Meanwhile the politicians we have at the moment might as well belong to the same party; their complacency is pitiful, they hardly acknowledge the problems, much less enter into a meaningful debate.

 

The ordinary working man needs a champion again, to ask the right questions, find new ways of doing things, stir things up and get things moving again.

The incisive Jeremy Corbyn might be just the man to do it.

[*_ash_*]

We're all living longer according to Cameron.

 

Damn these Tory scum liars!