That Starmer fella...

Ignoring the politics of those who are demanding the unions be cut off, where else is Labour's funding going to come from? Without addressing this question the desire to divorce Labour from both the unions and its members is even more wrongheaded

Unions provide some working people with their only chance to get legal representation when they’re being fucked over by their employers. It doesn’t seem like a very good idea to bin that.

Back on the subject of Starmer, things are not looking good re his supposed electability:

The funding of political parties should come via individual membership and the public exchequer. This would remove significant conflicts of interest.

An examination of 2017

• May doesn't have an ounce of charisma in her entire body.
  
• May was so far ahead in the polls that she decided to put out an actively bad manifesto in order to ram through some unpopular changes. (I guarantee Boris won't make that mistake next election.)
  
• Corbyn managed to hoover up the 48% anti-Brexit votes despite not really being anti-Brexit. That ship has sailed for Labour, they've lost the pro-Brexit voters.
  
• The polling data is pretty ambiguous on whether the "youthquake", if it even existed, had any impact on seats.
  
  

Not sure how relevant this is to Boris v. Starmer

I've said this somewhere on this thread (or a similar one). I think, as nice as it is, the member democracy is a hurdle to being elected. Their concerns often don't seem to match the general electorate's and it sometimes pushes the party in difficult directions.

Agreed. I think the same argument applies to the question about who's going to door knock and volunteer and phone bank and the like - don't get me wrong, those things are important, but members tend to overestimate their input into a win. For the average voter, the leadership and policies are much more important. A large and active membership does not translate into election success, and sometimes actively harms it.

And that argument also applies to the unions. I am still in favour of collective action and I still think worker solidarity has a place in the world. I also recognise that people like Len McClusky are utterly toxic to the electorate, and that our association with people like him cost us votes. I also further recognise that union membership is at an all time low and excludes a significant number of precarious / zero hours workers.

I think unions have done some great things. I also think they have done some terrible things. I want a new model.

EDIT - Blair's Labour was not in hock to the unions. Other funding models are clearly possible.

I want a new model.

Building a new labour movement from scratch? There are huge problems with the existing system but some of the posts here are pure fantasy.

I also agree that the impact of those knocking doors is probably overstated—in any case it's difficult to quantify their effect on elections. I just don't think for one second that a Labour party led entirely from the top down is desirable, sustainable, or a ticket to electoral success.

I think the question is much more ideologically practical. Trade Unionism, or at least increased worker organising / collectivism can be incredibly useful, if not central, in redefining the cultural codes around what it means to be a "working person".

that's the issue -the unions can't get the cunts they are in charge of to vote for them...

That's true. The union movement doesn't do anywhere near as much 'consciousness raising' as it should do, but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I do actually agree with you all on worker organisation. But the unions aren't changing and in their current form are an albatross draped around the neck of the party.

EDIT - Blair's Labour was not in hock to the unions. Other funding models are clearly possible.

All Labour leaders are in hock to the Unions. That's where the money comes from. Prescott was deputy leader for this reason.

So with fewer members and no union funding..........who pays for the party? Rich donors?

wait - is this where the magic money tree comes in?

Len McClusky

Unite have reduced ties with the LP already.

I am still in favour of collective action

How do you organise effectively without Unions?

I also think they have done some terrible things.

What sort of things?

Mandelson knows how to get loans in, doesn't he? He's probably "lads, its fixed"

Corbyn managed to hoover up the 48% anti-Brexit votes despite not really being anti-Brexit. That ship has sailed for Labour, they've lost the pro-Brexit voters.

But.

"Among the 2017 Labour voters, 71% voted Remain and 29% Leave. There’s little change from Labour’s Remain/Leave divide in 2015: 67% and 33%, respectively."

Fuck the past.
Fuck the fucking fucks. Seriously.
I've been to a couple of meetings of my labour party and it got all hot and hectic when poster boy Aaron B came along. But the drudge of going to meetings to discuss shit is, frankly, fucking shit.

The polling data is pretty ambiguous on whether the "youthquake", if it even existed, had any impact on seats.

Also

"Age was even more of a dividing factor than in 2015 (and the biggest we’ve seen since our records began in 1979). All the swing to Labour was among under 44s (and highest of all among 25-34s), while there was a swing to the Conservatives among over 55s. This is the biggest age gap we’ve seen in elections going back to the 1970s. Although (as in previous elections) the swing among women and men overall was similar, there was a difference between young men and young women. Among 18-24 year olds, Labour increased its vote share much more among women than men."

But also

You absolutely cannot bring about change in this environment when the messaging systems are controlled by who they are controlled by.

It doesn't matter who is in charge of labour. They will always fail. They will fail because they don't have control or access to talking to people through MSM or FB/etc.

Add in the fucking twattery that goes on within the organisation, these last few pages are prime examples "no it's Blair's fault!", "Corbo's a dick", "jews", "i'm not racist but".

Honestly, you can piss around the edges saying "what we need to do is include more people" but until "no lighty, no likey" style tv shows communicate the world around them rather than glossing over the deep structural problems of our world then you're all pissing in the wind.

They managed to straddle both sides is what I mean. But the leavers seem to have jumped ship now, as in Hartlepool with that 25% BXP vote share going straight to the Tories

"Yes, but I read a yougov poll that polled these people"
"who have had their entire world view shaped for their entire life by the fucking fucks in charge"

tough morning hun?

Not really sweetcheeks.

Mandelson knows how to get loans in, doesn't he?

Makes a couple of phone calls to Jeffrey Epstein probably