That Starmer fella...

Who does?

I think they are arguing that New Labour took its 'traditional vote' for granted and that the party is currently paying the price for that. See below for what Mandelson allegedly said, for instance:

I think this is an issue the tories will have with their traditional base in time as well - some signs of that in the elections (poor results in affluent south east like Tunbridge Wells).

In policy terms though, what did new labour do that abandoned those people?

Labour is fucked.
The party is an opposition to the shitness of the world. It was set up to protect workers right?
It needs to redefine itself as "we are against this. and this is what we're for", the problem is, it's harder to include all the people without many conflicting issues.

What exactly is the traditional Labour vote? Those that voted Labour in 1983 are they them? Is it someone else, if so who?

The 83 election was Labour's worst ever electoral defeat and the view at the time was that the policies were too left-wing.

This is a circular argument- what needs to happen is that Labour need to define what they are for.

I don't see this as a circular argument at all. Knowing where you have come from, is the basis for moving forward.

While Labour continues its weird retelling of the past, it's compromised. It needs to understand where and why it lost votes and readdress these points with a clear and consistent vision for the future of the British people under a Labour govt.

As an aside, I do not believe that the collapse of the Labour vote in the red wall has much to do with the Iraq War.

Red wall left because "you've done fuck all for us" and have gone Brexit / Tory.

BLiar mob left and probably went libbdem/Tory

Blair did wrong went green. After libbdem dalliance.

Or has red wall left because connection to grassroots/unionism has been lost and the memory of Thatcher has faded enough that the stigma of voting blue has been removed?

Also the misplaced belief that "you've done fuck all for us" by not preventing austerity

I don't see this as a circular argument at all. Knowing where you have come from, is the basis for moving forward.

I think citing Labour's tribal rewriting of history as its major problem while arguing for a return to Blairism because red wall voters don't care about the Iraq War is quite circular, and most certainly not moving forward.

Brexit taught a lot of voters that Mandelson was wrong, they did have somewhere to go, and now they're window shopping all over the place. That's quite a fundamental shift from the Blair years.

Stigma of voting blue. My arse.

People vote for what motivates them. Caring about people, thinking about how to make the world better for all, having a more caring society which looks after you. It's not an easy sell in to an environment where it looks like nobody cares.

Labour continually fighting among itself while trying to hold on to votes it already has but is going to lose them as soon as they say something to annoy those voters ("leave", "remain", "trans rights are human rights", "environment", "working class").

Conservative message: "we'll leave you alone to live your own life, you might get rich/better off. If you don't get rich / better off, it's those people over there who are making your life worse"

Stigma of voting blue. My arse.

I'd say this used to be huge thing, hence the upsurge in UKIP and the like offering none Thatcher right wing options. I think Brexit has broken it though.

It's for this reason I quit the party last week. Fuck the lot of them, after a lifetime of voting Labour I've had it with them.

I was particularly annoyed by the comment after the London Mayoral vote that essentially people were complacent with their vote by using their first pref for other parties, Sadiq Khan didn't really give any real reason to vote for him for a second term, other than he wasn't Shawn Bailey and that isn't going to cut it as a party strategy.

I'm fed up that it has become such a liner thing between the two factions. I sit on the left on most things, I might move more towards the centre on others, but I am realistic enough that both party factions need to work together to have any success, and neither side seem to be able to grasp this.

What do Labour stand for anymore, it's actually depressing, we are staring at years of Tory rule, and we have two sides of the party that would rather have stupid internal battles that don't matter at all to the general voting population.

I have hung on for a while, but I don't feel like its worth it anymore, if the party carries on like this it's not going to have any electoral success anyway, so I'm going to route my energies towards supporting smaller more progressive parties to have an impact at a local level, I'm sure I'll still vote Labour in the nationals but I am no longer willing to be part of such a basket case.

I don't think I'm arguing for a return to Blairism, but I'd like to understand why it is so vilified when I don't really see it that way. However my experiences are my own and I'm certainly not a red waller.

You're no longer going to get disowned by your Union man Dad or Grandad, because he worked a hard job all his life and is dead now and if you're much under 35 snatching milk won't be something that jogs bad memories.

I see this kind of sentiment fairly regularly. Rightly or wrongly, Labour are viewed as the "woke" party now.

1 Attachment

Conservative message: "we'll leave you alone to live your own life, you might get rich/better off. If you don't get rich / better off, it's those people over there who are making your life worse"

I agree with that analysis. It's worth remembering that the UK is, at heart, quite a classically liberal/small-c conservative country.

What's really annoying is the apparent lack of traction for the argument that the population isn't being "left alone" by the government (nor can or should it be). It's our jobs that the Tories are endangering through a hardcore Brexit plan, it's our NHS/schools/care they're underfunding, it's our money that they're diverting to their mates (and/or mistresses). People seem to be unwilling to factor this in (or they just don't care).

"I never cared that you were gay... until you started SHOVING it down my throat"

the centre ground doesn't really exist except as a pundit fiction. a lot of people mix up 'policies that attract floating voters' with 'centrism'. brexit has to be one of the most successful pieces of divide-and-rule ever

the centre ground doesn't really exist except as a pundit fiction.

So what is a floating voter? How would you describe people who are floating voters on many core issues?

it's our NHS/schools/care they're turning into "for profit" businesses.

Ftfy.

pretty sure i saw the same awful meme on a MAGA subreddit.

Why is this stuff seen as "extreme Left" and not Liberal?

Also I can't believe anyone British would write like that.

Iraq War

I was actively avoiding trying to play Blairite Bingo – but Ok.

Blair did next to fuck all to rebuild after the destructive anti-statism of Thatcher and Major years and ended up propelling many areas of Thatcherite / neoliberal policy.

It is interesting looking back, and seeing that Blair chiefly maintained popularity through a) public spending (which in some ways was commendable, if not slap dash and superficial in some regions; eg Tyneside regeneration) and b) spouting the racist and anti-working-class rhetoric that they thought middle england wanted to hear, all the while continuing to dig the ground from underneath the most deprived in British society.

Increased privatisation of key services and continued "shrinking the state", the introduction of tuition fees (then tripling them), complete failure to effectively shape housing policy in the wake of Thatchers "Right to Buy revolution" which is tied to increased landlordism and precariousness in the (increased) rental sector, inability to deal with regional social or employment issues giving rise to overt anti-immigrant sentiment which the Blair government leant into, heavily.

Hopefully I shouldn't need to tell you why these are all bad things that increased social and cultural divides across the country, and affected deprived areas disproportionately.

One of the most clappable successes of Blair's tenure was greater regionally devolved powers, and even that was a fully unrealised project (that Blair himself wasn't convinced by).

I'm not blind to the successes of the Blair years, but to claim it's something to return to or take-away from in building a viable, progressive opposition ignores the reality of Blairs politics and any political shifts that have occured in the last decade.