Every election has a new party to essentially do what the BNP does.
2010: BNP
2015: UKIP
2017: UKIP
2019: Brexit Party
2024: Reform UK
2029: Tea Party UK?
The far-right voter base moves between these, and each of these parties tries to paint themselves as something refreshing and new. Remember when Nick Griffin went on Question Time and said his Holocaust denial was “mainly just about the numbers”? They’ve learned a bit more about dogwhistling since then.
Wanting the NHS to remain in public hands isn’t a middle-class opinion, it’s a left-wing one. The reason he uses the word “middle-class” is to characterise that argument as one that can only be made by someone in an ivory tower, insulated from the real problems of the world where we have to use private providers. And I disagree with that characterisation: I think that our use of private providers to fill gaps in the NHS has massively increased the cost and only served to enrich the private medical industry. But making that point makes me a middle-class luvvy who doesn’t know the real world, unlike Wes Streeting who has worked in student politics, think tanks and political parties his entire life (apart from that time he was at PwC as a public sector consultant, helping these companies get more of those lucrative contracts).
Don’t get me wrong I like those policies, and hope Labour win, but the messaging for the past few years has been very alienating to anyone on the left. When Labour frontbenchers are going out and calling Margaret Thatcher a “visionary leader”, or Wes Streeting blaming “middle-class lefties” for opposing NHS privatisation then it makes you think “maybe they’re not the party I was hoping they were”. These aren’t gaffes, they’re part of a coordinated strategy to target more naturally right-wing voters. Because they don’t think the left have anywhere to go (and they’re right, but they might stay home).
But of a change in message from “we don’t need you lefties, fuck off and vote Green or whatever”
In a leaked video published by The Times, students can be seen dancing and laughing to the song before one member spots the camera and says: “Don’t film!”
“You’re not supposed to say that Darrell, you know you’re not supposed to say that”
Yeah you can already see how they’re trying to rewrite the last 14 years. Everything was going fine until Johnson and Truss ruined everything. Never mind that austerity stripped our public services to the bone so we were unprepared for anything, let alone a global pandemic.
There’s also a lack of funding for the regulator which means the BBC is the one finding these spills, not the agency that’s responsible for tracking then.
We’ve been spending much more per capita in the NHS in recent years than we used to. Part of that is the aging population and Covid, but a big part is probably the increase in privatisation. Paying agency workers to fill up chronic staffing shortages etc
I think part of it is not wanting to be mugged off. Even though it doesn’t materially affect you, having someone come in everyday and nick stuff in front of you would probably wear you down. No excuse for violence of course but I can see how it comes to this.
I think the point is that Elphicke’s criticisms of Tory immigration policy are very different from what most Labour voters would like to see. I’d like to see a processing centre in Calais to make it easier to seek legal refugee status. She just wants to pull up the drawbridge. By saying this, Keir is condoning her messaging on immigration and I don’t like that.
Could just be trying to save face. I’m not sure what his plans are, but leaving a moribund party is a good idea no matter who you are, it says nothing about Labour being different or having any fresh ideas.
If they’re all the same, why bother leaving?
Because the party he’s leaving is about to face electoral annihilation after being in power for 14 years.
Instead of phoning 999 you just shout “medic!”
Well yeah. There are other visionaries that haven’t damaged the UK as much as Thatcher, he could have mentioned them instead. But he didn’t - he made the decision to call Thatcher a visionary, same as Rachel Reeves did. It’s not just some arbitrary name he pulled out of a hat.
BELLEND?
Sometimes foreign policy involves stating a position, even if we can’t unilaterally make it happen. Macron has done this, which paved the way for other leaders to do it as well.
If Starmer wants to be prime minister, he has to realise that he will eventually have to take positions on world events. In my opinion, just following America has been disastrous for us, and I’d like us to change that.
At some point you’ve got to balance the interests of destroying your enemies and trying to minimise civilian casualties. Israel is only doing the former. Even if they destroy Hamas, their actions will cause more people to take up arms against them. Remember that 20-year-long war on terror we just finished? Didn’t work, did it?
If it doesn’t affect anything, why didn’t Starmer give a free vote?
The US just signed a bill to increase military aid to Israel. Seems like a roundabout way to convince them to cease hostilities.
Nobody’s asking for worse outcomes - it’s a difference of opinion of what will actually work. Saying people want everyone to suffer so they can have their way is just being disingenuous.