Brexit deal agreed

Quoted from Maringer

The point is that Blair was way, way to the left of where we see Starmer standing now, and Labour PMs since the 70s have tended to drift rightward when in power. Economically speaking, Starmer and Reeves have clapped the shackles on themselves already with their nonsensical 'fiscal rules' so it will be impossible for them to turn the ship around following the wrecking we've seen since 2010. Starmer simply doesn't understand how the economy works and, unfortunately, he's reliant on Reeves to tell him what's what. She's useless - her BoE background just reinforces why the Bank has made such poor decisions in recent decades. If those in charge think like her (and they do), it's no wonder we're on the rocks without a lifeboat in sight. Even Balls had a bit more awareness and he was useless when push came to shove.

Blair was seriously flawed in many respects, but he (along with Brown) recognised that a lot more public spending would be required to fix the NHS and the other parts of the economy laid waste during the Thatcher/Major years. They spent the money to steady the ship (and not always wisely after continuing the wasteful PFI started under Major), but weren't brave enough to do the necessary things which would help return us to where we were during the post-war consensus - increase taxes, reduce inequality, take utilities back into public hands, try to deal with the broken housing market, etc etc etc. They were just following the neoliberal handbook on the assumption that it was the answer and it certainly wasn't. Thatcher famously said that Blair and New Labour were Thatcherism's greatest achievement. If I was the type of New Labourite currently pulling Starmer's strings, I'd be thinking about that very seriously. Unfortunately, they aren't because, what the New Labour years showed them, is that being in power is all that count, even if you don't achieve anything with it (other than personal benefit, of course). It means we've ended up with an empty shirt such as Starmer as head of the party when he doesn't really have a proper plan to improve things enough when he gets into power. I'm not encouraged by the fact that, unlike Blair, he hasn't even waited until he got into power before starting to break the promises made to Labour Party members when he was trying to become party leader.

Unfortunately, the failure of New Labour to do anything much more than tinker around the edges meant that it was incredibly easy for the Tories (and their inept backers the LibDems during the coalition years), to start to swing the wrecking ball once again and they've not stopped yet. Rocketing inequality, massive falls in living standards and the refrain that, 'We can't afford it', whenever something more than mildly left wing is suggested. Bevan achieved so much in one parliament and it worked so well that it was 30 years before the Tories made serious attempts to start to break down the post-war consensus. To do this, of course, they started with lies, blaming the Labour government for the energy crisis caused by conflict in the Middle East! Just like the Tories blamed New Labour spending for a global financial crisis!

On the assumption that Starmer wins power, in the following election, you can bet your bottom dollar that they will recycle this trick to distract from any gains made, however meagre they might be.

I've never been a member of a political party, but wouldn't touch Labour with a barge pole with this current bunch at the helm. Our broken electoral system means I'll have to vote for the Labour candidate if there is any hope of getting rid of the Tories, but I will have to pinch my nose to do so. And believe me I absolutely flipping hate the Tories. Not the disinterested Tory voter, who backs them because they believe the lies they are told or are alright Jack, but those who run the party for the benefit of the wealthy and think intercourse the rest of us.

Until we get politicians with the courage to stand up to the media narrative and back some solid reforms which would only need to put us back closer to the liberal social democracies we see in most of Europe, the only way is down. Probably down more slowly under a Starmer administration, but down nonetheless.

Quoted from ska face

Starmer’s already said he won’t touch the electoral system, join the single market or a customs union, so you’re already píssing in the wind.

Quoted from Limerick Mariner

By the way - if anyone wants to watch great drama that helps understand our political history try “Our Friends in the North”

Quoted from Maringer

Socially or economically?

Try this to work out where you stand:

https://www.politicalcompass.org/test

The social/economic aspects mean that people often vote against their best interests due to their personal beliefs. This is something that a proportional electoral system would help as you'd end up with parties which were socially conservative but economically liberal and vice versa.