-
Also, in spite of declaring that Blairism won't work, what you describe in terms of severing the ties with the unions, diminishing member democracy, talking about meritocracy, crime and antisocial behaviour is absolutely straight out of the Blairite textbook!
bens0n-
Also, in spite of declaring that Blairism won't work, what you describe in terms of severing the ties with the unions, diminishing member democracy, talking about meritocracy, crime and antisocial behaviour is absolutely straight out of the Blairite textbook!
It is. And the commitment to social justice is straight out of Corbyn's. Zero tolerance for antisemitism (which I didn't put in but feel strongly about) would be out of Starmer's. There's zero point going backwards, any future Labour party is going to need to take elements of previous successful administrations and some original ideas to create something new.
Mandleson's point (that our last ten elections went lose lose lose lose blair blair blair lose lose lose) is crude but effective. Labour cannot win by going backwards but we'd be stupid to ignore history altogether.
ReekBlefs
Short answer, no. But there's also no majority in failing to appeal to anyone outside that bracket too. I think Labour's decline is terminal and they need to arrest it fast by changing the way the party is run. Bin off the member democracy. Bin off the unions. Bin off the Corbynites. Bin off the flag chat.
Start talking about meritocracy. Start talking about roads / crime / antisocial behaviour / housing / the damage of Brexit. Openly argue for social justice. Make electoral pacts with the Greens, Lib Dems, SNP. Create a progressive alliance.
I do appreciate that I'm speaking a bit fast and loose and from frustration but I do think this weekend's results show that a significant change in approach is required. Blairism won't work. Corbynism won't work. And the first attempt at Starmerism hasn't worked.