As always, the only sensible response to claims like these is: maybe.
Labour need to do more to give left-leaning voters a reason to vote for them! And, to be clear, by ‘do more’ I mean ‘Let Ed Miliband run the government’.
Frank, let me be frank. Labour is dead. You’re clearly a strong Labour supporter from what I’ve seen of your activity on here but it’s time to move on.
Labour has been taken over by the very thing Labour was created to oppose.
To continue to waste time and resources trying to make Labour more left only gives power to the right. It splits the left vote and hinders our aims.
Back the Greens, and if it manages to get itself sorted out, Your Party. Forget Labour and forget the Lib Dems, they are nothing but “nice” Tories now.
Firstly, thank you for taking my views at face value. I talk to a lot of people here who seem to think I’m some sort of mindless centrist/closet Tory, and you obviously have read the things I actually say and taken them seriously. I genuinely appreciate that!
Respectfully, I disagree with your assessment. What I believe in fundamentally is the organised workers’ movement (first) and the co-operative movement (close second). Those organisations are and should be diverse in their views, but they still back the Labour party and with good reason: both the Renters’ Rights Bill, which has just passed, and the Employment Rights Bill (now in its final stages), in particular, show that the party is still serving the interests of the working class. The specific approach being taken to environmental matters is also in line with labour (and Labour) values: a focus not just on green energy but on job creation and keeping bills lower is the exact right approach.
The Greens’ approach is flawed because it doesn’t have that link with the workers’ movement to keep it on track. This is why they have so often ended up, both at the local level and through their MPs, as a glorified NIMBY party, opposing green infrastructure for spurious reasons: they serve an essentially bourgeois constituency. I don’t mean bourgeois as a pejorative, I mean literally: the Greens represent people who don’t mind seeing their bills go up in order to get more green energy, but who also want their capital assets - primarily their house value - protected. Hence the NIMBYism. Again, I’m not speaking pejoratively, here: it’s entirely understandable to act this way, but it doesn’t represent the values I think are most important.
As for Your Party, I have many serious ideological differences with them - but also much in common. If they create a union link and win the backing of especially the more radical unions (or my current union), I will have to seriously consider them. But I don’t think that’s going to happen.
but who also want their capital assets - primarily their house value - protected.
But the Green party’s primary support is from young people in urban areas, generally not people with assets. While the party certainly has had a Tory element in its electorate who matches what you say, it’s pretty reductive to say they’re the parties primary supports. There’s a reason the only MP the Greens had for over a decade was Brighton Pavilion.
Sorry, I should’ve said that I was referring to the membership of the Greens rather than the voters. All parties’ memberships are very middle class, including Labour’s (Exhibit A: me!) - but that’s exactly why Labour having the union link is absolutely vital. However weakened it’s been over the years (for various reasons, some going back decades), that link is still there and I think it genuinely shows in the policies I’ve cited above and elsewhere.
Fair enough, the Green party certainly has a strong conservationism-above-all-else element that like you describe and has been very influential in the party, with the other side being a progressive socdem/demsoc element. It’ll be interesting to see how this changes now the Greens have nearly tripled their members, most of whom are on the demsoc side of the party. Hell, I’m one of them and I certainly can’t be described as a NIMBY.
You’d think given how many voters they’re losing to the Greens, they’d make more noise about the (pretty good, bar the carbon capture stuff) new carbon budget plan. But alas, this government seemingly can’t do comms.
As always, the only sensible response to claims like these is: maybe.
Labour need to do more to give left-leaning voters a reason to vote for them! And, to be clear, by ‘do more’ I mean ‘Let Ed Miliband run the government’.
Labour has been taken over by Zionists. Its a lost cause.
Frank, let me be frank. Labour is dead. You’re clearly a strong Labour supporter from what I’ve seen of your activity on here but it’s time to move on.
Labour has been taken over by the very thing Labour was created to oppose.
To continue to waste time and resources trying to make Labour more left only gives power to the right. It splits the left vote and hinders our aims.
Back the Greens, and if it manages to get itself sorted out, Your Party. Forget Labour and forget the Lib Dems, they are nothing but “nice” Tories now.
Firstly, thank you for taking my views at face value. I talk to a lot of people here who seem to think I’m some sort of mindless centrist/closet Tory, and you obviously have read the things I actually say and taken them seriously. I genuinely appreciate that!
Respectfully, I disagree with your assessment. What I believe in fundamentally is the organised workers’ movement (first) and the co-operative movement (close second). Those organisations are and should be diverse in their views, but they still back the Labour party and with good reason: both the Renters’ Rights Bill, which has just passed, and the Employment Rights Bill (now in its final stages), in particular, show that the party is still serving the interests of the working class. The specific approach being taken to environmental matters is also in line with labour (and Labour) values: a focus not just on green energy but on job creation and keeping bills lower is the exact right approach.
The Greens’ approach is flawed because it doesn’t have that link with the workers’ movement to keep it on track. This is why they have so often ended up, both at the local level and through their MPs, as a glorified NIMBY party, opposing green infrastructure for spurious reasons: they serve an essentially bourgeois constituency. I don’t mean bourgeois as a pejorative, I mean literally: the Greens represent people who don’t mind seeing their bills go up in order to get more green energy, but who also want their capital assets - primarily their house value - protected. Hence the NIMBYism. Again, I’m not speaking pejoratively, here: it’s entirely understandable to act this way, but it doesn’t represent the values I think are most important.
As for Your Party, I have many serious ideological differences with them - but also much in common. If they create a union link and win the backing of especially the more radical unions (or my current union), I will have to seriously consider them. But I don’t think that’s going to happen.
But the Green party’s primary support is from young people in urban areas, generally not people with assets. While the party certainly has had a Tory element in its electorate who matches what you say, it’s pretty reductive to say they’re the parties primary supports. There’s a reason the only MP the Greens had for over a decade was Brighton Pavilion.
Sorry, I should’ve said that I was referring to the membership of the Greens rather than the voters. All parties’ memberships are very middle class, including Labour’s (Exhibit A: me!) - but that’s exactly why Labour having the union link is absolutely vital. However weakened it’s been over the years (for various reasons, some going back decades), that link is still there and I think it genuinely shows in the policies I’ve cited above and elsewhere.
Fair enough, the Green party certainly has a strong conservationism-above-all-else element that like you describe and has been very influential in the party, with the other side being a progressive socdem/demsoc element. It’ll be interesting to see how this changes now the Greens have nearly tripled their members, most of whom are on the demsoc side of the party. Hell, I’m one of them and I certainly can’t be described as a NIMBY.
You’d think given how many voters they’re losing to the Greens, they’d make more noise about the (pretty good, bar the carbon capture stuff) new carbon budget plan. But alas, this government seemingly can’t do comms.