This is also very true.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
I think a lot of people who think they are middle-class really aren't. They may not be mining coal or working in a factory, but they aren't where they think they are in society.
We largely agree. I'm not trying to pin the loss of red wall seats on Blair and say that Corbyn was blameless. Corbyn's deep unpopularity clearly seems to have had an enormous effect. However, I do think it's important that we recognise that it's more complicated than one man. I think a truer reading is that because of Brexit and his personal unpopularity, Corbyn has felt the blunt force of a deep mistrust and disillusionment of parliamentary politics that has been brewing in these regions over the last 40 years.
With this in mind, it’s probably a good time for Labour and Lib Dem to stop cannibalising each other. It may seem like they need to compete for Tory scraps but in reality they would both get a far better go at the prime cut if they didn’t spend so much energy competing to sit at the dining table.
On a similar note - what it does even mean to be working class these days? You’ve got blue collar labourers earning more than teachers and highly educated Russel group graduates working at Starbucks for minimum wage.
One major centre left party would imo probably be the natural party of government in the UK... But momentum etc
It's funny that the dominate intellectual trend regarding Labour has shifted from centre criticism a few years ago- 'the reason Labour don't do well is that they're just Tory-lite now and have forgotten their roots and who they were meant to represent...the likes of Tony Blair just DON'T GET IT!!!'- to 'no one can win with a socialist manifesto in a country that is socially conservative, YOU'RE JUST NOT GETTING IT!!!'. I'm beginning to think there is no way to reconcile the disparate elements this party. I suppose the democrats are in the same boat in America with Bernie and the centre candidates there.
There are people severely underestimating the impact of the media in these elections. The two biggest selling newspapers in this country are the Daily Mail and The Sun who will vehemently attack anyone perceived as a socialist (remember 'Red Ed' and the DM story about how his father was a Marxist who hated this country?'). The sad reality is that people's lives seem to be more complicated and chaotic than ever and that we're beset with all sorts of stuff we have to deal with and as far as political opinions go, people just latch on to something that's easy to digest. This is where the media comes in.
How do Labour reach voters like the guy at 10:56 ? On the one hand you feel deeply sorry for him and the state of his community but on the other you can't help but feel frustrated by the cognitive dissonance on display when he complains about the devastation wrought by Thatcher ....and then votes for the Tory party and people who openly despise unions?
There are people severely underestimating the impact of the media in these elections. The two biggest selling newspapers in this country are the Daily Mail and The Sun who will vehemently attack anyone perceived as a socialist (remember 'Red Ed' and the DM story about how his father was a Marxist who hated this country?'). The sad reality is that people's lives seem to be more complicated and chaotic than ever and that we're beset with all sorts of stuff we have to deal with and as far as political opinions go, people just latch on to something that's easy to digest. This is where the media comes in.
How do Labour reach voters like the guy at 10:56 ? On the one hand you feel deeply sorry for him and the state of his community but on the other you can't help but feel frustrated by the cognitive dissonance on display when he complains about the devastation wrought by Thatcher ....and then votes for the Tory party and people who openly despise unions?
Very very good post.
I think we need a new broader re-examination of the idea of being working class. Millennials working in the service economy renting in London are currently so politically different to a baby boomer electrician in an ex-mining town in Durham, or a 45 year old civil servant in Bristol, but we need a labour movement that represents all of them to stand against a party who serves the interests of a tiny minority.
We're a service economy with virtually no industry left so job type clearly doesn't work. Wages and cost of living vary dramatically in different parts of the country, so income doesn't work either.
My preferred framework would be people who depend on wages to live rather than assets. Bring these diverse groups together by representing the people who need to work to live rather than the people who own everything. How you appeal to such a broad church is difficult though.
do we need to label people into classes anymore?
However, if you use your criteria, I expect that will cover the vast vast majority of people in the uk? Most people need a wage do they not? You could be earning £2-300k pa and this would be the case would it not?
Last edited:
Yes, it does cover the vast majority of people in the UK - 99.9% of people in the UK.
I think that should answer your question about whether I think we need to label people into classes any more - in the traditional sense, no we shouldn't need to. What we're facing in a financialised economy, post-financial crash is in my opinion, a distinction between capital and labour.
I'm speechless.
It is an oxygen mask, not an IV drip bag. The Chief Medical Officer confirmed there were no beds in the statement:
There's a breakdown of the conspiracy theory here.
Classes exist independently of our labelling. It is no longer quite so obvious as when the original Marxist class theory was put forward in the wake of the industrial revolution, but while you might have to change some of the categories, it's still a valid way of describing modern British society.
There was an interesting call on Maajid Nawaz' show today that made me pause for thought.
He firstly said the working class had lost their minds, then he said the working class no longer existed. When pressed he basically meant that the people who would traditionally see themselves as working class now see themselves as middle class. Their kids are at university, they have a car, a house, a job, a £500 super computer in their pockets, a steady job and annual holidays. They've seen a generational wealth change that is fantastic.
However the caller said they'd betrayed Labour. Nawaz pressed them saying that surely all of those things are positive. Greater access to education, a huge increase in quality of life, a steady job. He wouldn't have it though... he felt that they were deluding themselves.
I think that's one of the problems Labour have. They're trying to fight for people who now only exist in somewhat tiny numbers electorally. Of course the homeless, disabled and people in actual poverty need support, but you need a broader offering when talking to the middle class (who're firstly the people who actually vote and secondly the people who will decide any election). Certainly not an offering so broad that will frighten millions of people who feel they've created some semblance of wealth for themselves and their families (they're also old enough to know that the cost of a socialist agenda only ever falls on the class they know identify with).
As someone who believes statist socialism is predicated on the belief that bringing everyone down to the level of the lowest common denominator is the only means of true fairness; and in a society where there are very few people who actually vote who see themselves anywhere near this category... I'm fascinated to see what happens next.
Logically speaking I'd say a media friendly, business friendly, middle class friendly party with a liberal left leaning agenda would do well. However I'm aware that a heavily statist presence remains in the party and I'm not sure they'll give up their grip.
In other words, you want Labour to not be Labour? You just described a centre-right liberal party.
Last edited:
I don't think that working class people see themselves as middle class now. There's a ton of anecdotal evidence on twitter right now from Labour canvassers, and from local TV vox pops, where working class people voted for the tories because Labour hadn't done anything in their town, or there's more homeless people now, or Boris can't do anything worse than the last lot. Some people genuinely thought that Labour were responsible for the shit state of their towns and communities even though they haven't been in power. We, in here, and we on twitter, love a bit of politics, but there's a lot of people who pay absolutely no attention to any of it. That's one of the reasons why Corbyn was able to be demonised so easily with some people. Soundbites that were abject lies from Johnson and the newspapers were repeated back to Labour activists on the doorsteps. The mud stuck.
However, he also seemed to be oblivious to the nationalism of many of Labour's traditional supporters. Now, I'm from a republican area of Belfast. When Corbyn was labelled pro-IRA, I never batted an eyelid. When he didn't sing the national anthem, I didn't care. When he said he watched the Queen's speech in the morning, I knew it was bullshit but I don't watch it either, so I didn't care. When he ummed and aahed about pressing the nuclear button, I thought fair play, I'd hate to have to make that decision, too. There's more examples of him doing things or saying things that might give people the impression that he's not a patriot, but it didn't matter to me because I'm not English and it's all nonsense to me. However, a lot of people from Stoke, from Bolsover, from Blyth, and so on, DO give a shit about that. Some will have served in the forces. Some will have seen his stance on nukes as weakness. Some might not be ardent republicans, but might see it as disrespectful to lie about the Queen's speech and not sing the anthem. To them, he doesn't seem very pro-British at all, always reaching out to this community and that community, always got his arm around this minority and that minority. "What about us?", they might have thought.
I also think that the manifesto should have been shorter and more realistic. It may have been costed and may have been championed by 163 top economists or whatever, but guess what? British people generally don't have a favourite economist. British people tend to not know any bloody economists! And they tend to think of government spending as "We have X amount of money and that's it." Promising them free this, free that, more of this and more of that, might have been a good idea, but it became too much for people to believe. Every day, a new promise emerged. We're going to give Waspi women £60bn. "What??!! Where's THAT money coming from?" And, as I said earlier, people who pay little attention to politics and do pay attention to soundbites, hear Tory Boy Pierce on GMB sneering about a magic money tree and they nod in agreement!
The takeaway from this election, I feel, is that Labour decided to give people what they thought they wanted. And the lying, racist, homophobic prick that is Boris de feckin Pfeffel Johnson said that he would get Brexit done. 80 million times. That was what they wanted to hear. And that was enough.
However, he also seemed to be oblivious to the nationalism of many of Labour's traditional supporters. Now, I'm from a republican area of Belfast. When Corbyn was labelled pro-IRA, I never batted an eyelid. When he didn't sing the national anthem, I didn't care. When he said he watched the Queen's speech in the morning, I knew it was bullshit but I don't watch it either, so I didn't care. When he ummed and aahed about pressing the nuclear button, I thought fair play, I'd hate to have to make that decision, too. There's more examples of him doing things or saying things that might give people the impression that he's not a patriot, but it didn't matter to me because I'm not English and it's all nonsense to me. However, a lot of people from Stoke, from Bolsover, from Blyth, and so on, DO give a shit about that. Some will have served in the forces. Some will have seen his stance on nukes as weakness. Some might not be ardent republicans, but might see it as disrespectful to lie about the Queen's speech and not sing the anthem. To them, he doesn't seem very pro-British at all, always reaching out to this community and that community, always got his arm around this minority and that minority. "What about us?", they might have thought.
I also think that the manifesto should have been shorter and more realistic. It may have been costed and may have been championed by 163 top economists or whatever, but guess what? British people generally don't have a favourite economist. British people tend to not know any bloody economists! And they tend to think of government spending as "We have X amount of money and that's it." Promising them free this, free that, more of this and more of that, might have been a good idea, but it became too much for people to believe. Every day, a new promise emerged. We're going to give Waspi women £60bn. "What??!! Where's THAT money coming from?" And, as I said earlier, people who pay little attention to politics and do pay attention to soundbites, hear Tory Boy Pierce on GMB sneering about a magic money tree and they nod in agreement!
The takeaway from this election, I feel, is that Labour decided to give people what they thought they wanted. And the lying, racist, homophobic prick that is Boris de feckin Pfeffel Johnson said that he would get Brexit done. 80 million times. That was what they wanted to hear. And that was enough.
Aside from the complete amount of rubbish this guy talks people who say "Like, Share, Subscribe" are annoying, I know what to do if I like something!
Can safely say I'll be staying away from doing any of that to his stuff though.
Not sure if anyone posted this yet, but it’s not surprising that the majority of conservative voters were in the older age brackets.
Labour need to find a way to get more votes, but they need to be careful not to lose the young majority they have.
They're never going to win those older voters and tbh they need to play the long game.
Not sure if anyone posted this yet, but it’s not surprising that the majority of conservative voters were in the older age brackets.
Labour need to find a way to get more votes, but they need to be careful not to lose the young majority they have.
Their time would be better spent mobilising the £15m who didn't vote.
Yeah I agree completely, if possible they really need to get young people more interested.
As @finneh pointed out above, many of the older 'working class' aren't what they used to be anymore.
Not sure if anyone posted this yet, but it’s not surprising that the majority of conservative voters were in the older age brackets.
Labour need to find a way to get more votes, but they need to be careful not to lose the young majority they have.
Not surprising, given Corbyn wanted to raid their children's inheritance (many would be homeowners) or increase tax on those who earned more that £85,000 (Most would be from older age brackets). All without giving them any benefit or recognition?
Last edited:
I'd say they've spent a lot of time and energy on young people and they don't seem to have changed the number voting that much. I'd question the pragmatism of campaigning to them.
FML.
Traveled home for Xmas and inevitably politics came up despite my best attempts to avoid it. When my brother asked me who I voted for and I replied Labour his response was "You what!" *braced myself for borderline racist rant* "They wanted to offer free broadband rather than solve the food bank crisis that they'd created."
Analyse that. I give up.
Traveled home for Xmas and inevitably politics came up despite my best attempts to avoid it. When my brother asked me who I voted for and I replied Labour his response was "You what!" *braced myself for borderline racist rant* "They wanted to offer free broadband rather than solve the food bank crisis that they'd created."
Analyse that. I give up.
Last edited:
One of the wisest and most brilliant people in global advertising once said 'Don't tell people what YOU want to tell them, tell them what they want to hear'.
Corbyn fell into the trap of the former, Boris was smart enough to know it was the latter approach that would help him win.
Can anyone enlighten me, in a summary, why Jeremy Corbyn was considered so absolutely loathable?
I'm no politics fan or follower so explain it to me like a complete novice, which I am really. I honestly dont get it. Labour is supposed to be the party of the 'everyman' and Corbyn looks and acts, for the most part, far more regularly than any politician I've ever seen. Tony Blair was a public school boy representing the working class, for example, even just to look at the bloke. Corbyn looks like a bloke you might work with, and surely that should be a major appeal?
The anti-Semitism stuff etc isn't something I need explaining here, because it appears that he was considered completely unelectable from way back when. I never understood it and I still don't.
I'm no politics fan or follower so explain it to me like a complete novice, which I am really. I honestly dont get it. Labour is supposed to be the party of the 'everyman' and Corbyn looks and acts, for the most part, far more regularly than any politician I've ever seen. Tony Blair was a public school boy representing the working class, for example, even just to look at the bloke. Corbyn looks like a bloke you might work with, and surely that should be a major appeal?
The anti-Semitism stuff etc isn't something I need explaining here, because it appears that he was considered completely unelectable from way back when. I never understood it and I still don't.
He spent his entire political career up to 2015 on the far-left periphery of the Labour Party, engaged in the causes associated with it which inevitably regularly positioned him in direct opposition to the mainstream or ‘establishment’, and by extension broader public opinion (e.g. the Falklands, the IRA, NATO, etc.). This meant that when, on assuming leadership of the party, he was forced to moderate his past positions in an attempt to establish a broader cross-party appeal and consensus, he was vulnerable to charges of dishonesty, insincerity, and hypocrisy - case in point, his inability to clarify his own views on the biggest issue of the day, Brexit.
This obviously isn’t the entire story, since Johnson has his own credibility issues. But it seems to have served as the basis for the multi-pronged attacks on his character throughout the last four years.
Thank you.
Libdems pretty consistent across the board there.
Not sure if anyone posted this yet, but it’s not surprising that the majority of conservative voters were in the older age brackets.
Labour need to find a way to get more votes, but they need to be careful not to lose the young majority they have.
Let this be a lesson. You need to be very careful what you read and believe. It's 100% right to question everything though, just don't let one site or side convince you
Gotcha, cheers mate. Makes a bit more sense now, I guess. Had a history of being too much of a lefty which will repulse the right-slanting voters and even concern left-leaning voters.
Other than their vote falling as you go through the nrs social grades
Ab ...15%
C1....11%
C2......9%
De......7%
Certainly the most consistent trend amongst any of the main 3 parties in this regard
His autobiography will be one of the most amazing life stories written in recent times!
Now now, let's not forget he was pretty shit at getting his views across, he was a known fence sitter on anything he wasn't prepared for (which was pretty much everything not extreme left wing), oh and he also failed utterly to convince people he wasn't anti-semitic. Also, and perhaps most nailing leading up to the vote, he stood face to face with Johnson on live tv and failed to calling him a bloated liar over and over.
And the beard, it's mostly the beard.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I’ve got a lot of time for Ayesha.
They seems to be under the misapprehension that the UK has a Proportional Representation electoral system, with Labour wielding some kind of influence for the last 9 years.
In fact, I think a lot of voters seem to believe the same thing. They blame Labour for all our social failings because they're supposedly the party of social inclusiveness. It's somehow been
been their responsibility to get right, despite having a limited power to do anything about it.
It's a really weird state of affairs, and betrays a massive shortcoming in the way the Labour party message was communicated. It should have been an open-goal to say "everything bad that's happened in the last decade has happened under a Tory government."
Last edited:
Really fascinating interview from 2 months before the election from Jon Lansman, the founder of Momentum. Reminder on how Momentum was created and how it infiltrated the Labour party. Also gives an insight into the conflict between Corbynism and the Labour party prior to his leadership, the foundations of the anti-semitism allegations and many more things.
I never knew Lansbury was Jewish but not zionist. It's a shame he did not communicate these subtleties better during the election when Corbyn was being smeared with the anti semite allegations.
With the hindsight of the election results, its crystal clear what Labours issues were and why Corbyn failed.
I never knew Lansbury was Jewish but not zionist. It's a shame he did not communicate these subtleties better during the election when Corbyn was being smeared with the anti semite allegations.
With the hindsight of the election results, its crystal clear what Labours issues were and why Corbyn failed.
- Status