The Last Labour government EVER?
- Thread starter articul8
- Start date
taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
Cheers butchers.
I'm fairly certain that the Tories getting back in will accelerate Scotland and Wales' movements towards Independence/more autonomy leaving a very tory England. I can't see the Libdems (or anyone else for that matter) getting into a position where they can push PR in, all very worrying
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
more likely to be the other way around - Labour will shift a little to the left in opposition because it needs to. The Tories will go right, because they don't.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
in opposition? how long do you think a cash-strapped party with a fucking £27m overdraft is going to last? and not just that, a cash-strapped party which has spent the last dozen years fucking up the country? i wouldn't be particularly surprised if, come the next election, there were as many labour mps as there are lib dems, scot nats, dup & plaid cymru put together. they're going to get (sadly only electorally) slaughtered.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
that's what my OP was getting at. Will the last one out of England turn off the lights?
JHE
.
The Labour Party will probably go through a crisis after being kicked out of office. Cruddas is already talking to Labour audiences about the unfortunate fact that the Labour Party doesn't know what it is for any more. I find it difficult to imagine the Labour Party shifting to the left as it did after getting thrown out in 79, but I'm not sure how it will go. Without a big change in the electoral system, I doubt it will fall apart completely.
We should not imagine that the Tories are doing very well. They are ahead in the polls and will probably win the next election, but their best %age in the polls seems to be in the low 40s, which is a lot lower than Labour in the period before the 97 election and there might be a hung parliament after the next general election.
Both the big parties have been in slow long-term decline for decades.
If a decent system of PR were introduced (I mean proper PR, not some nasty little fix to favour the bland and middle-of-the-road), things might develop in more interesting and even hope-inducing ways, but I don't suppose that will happen.
We should not imagine that the Tories are doing very well. They are ahead in the polls and will probably win the next election, but their best %age in the polls seems to be in the low 40s, which is a lot lower than Labour in the period before the 97 election and there might be a hung parliament after the next general election.
Both the big parties have been in slow long-term decline for decades.
If a decent system of PR were introduced (I mean proper PR, not some nasty little fix to favour the bland and middle-of-the-road), things might develop in more interesting and even hope-inducing ways, but I don't suppose that will happen.
JHE
.
That's highly unlikely
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
The worst possible thing for Labour would be to win the next election. The government is begging to be put out of its misery, and a term from Mr Cameron's Old Etonian Club would sooth ill-feeling and allow the party to rebuild. Just think where the Tories would be now if they'd lost in 1992.
But if Labour win, they'll continue to disintegrate, and worse (for them) the Conservative Party could implode. Without this bogeyman to scare supporters (which now agrees with them on pretty much everything) Labour could well fall apart themselves.
But if Labour win, they'll continue to disintegrate, and worse (for them) the Conservative Party could implode. Without this bogeyman to scare supporters (which now agrees with them on pretty much everything) Labour could well fall apart themselves.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Endless centre-left government, probably comprising Lib-Lab coalitions, but with the occasional Lib-Con coalition. I suppose it could be called interesting if you want to punt on which obscure little party will become kingmaker, but in all other respects it would combine boredom with irrelevance.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
This isn't Texas. I doubt the Conservatives' "gerrymandering" will go too far.
This might hurt, although the Tories would probably introduce public funding, which would do Labour no harm.
[/quote]
This could happen regardless of who wins the election.
JHE
.
I certainly agree we could in those circumstances expect coalition governments - and that's no bad thing, IMO - but I think what you are missing is that both the big parties are coalitions held together by a need or wish to take advantage of the current crap electoral system. With a better electoral system, I would expect both to split.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
as opposed to endless Con govt and fuck the rest. Now let's me see..
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Of course Labour and the Tories are coalitions. Difference is they form openly before the election, and voters know what they're getting.
That's why I think the Tories will implode: the party's a seething bed of hatred, full of factions who despise one another. Europhiles vs "Eurosceptics". Grammar schools vs "I'm alright jack, comprehensives for the proles". Market fanatics vs moral conservatives.
Labour has similar divisions. Right now the two parties are propping each other up like two rickety shacks. I'd like to see them both collapse and be replaced with parties that represent the real divisions in society. Since PR will lead us with even remoter coalitions, I doubt it'll succeed.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Given that we're got two vaguely social democratic parties vying for power, I'm not sure where this endless conservative government will come from!
Rod Sleeves
New Member
The Tories will not cut the number of MPs, and Scotland will not vote for independence. The Labour Party will survive, but there will probably be a two or three year post election civil war, allowing the Tories to act as if they have a bigger majority than they actually will, I think we will see a continuing collapse in Labour membership, and a speeding up of Tory decline after about a year of Cameron government as it fails to live up to expectations. Labour will not move much to the left in opposition, but it may actually become more liberal at least in rhetoric, especially when the Tories decide attacking civil liberties is a good thing when you're in government.
That's assuming Labour lose the next election, I'm not sure that is actually guaranteed yet, it was, but things change... The Tories are not exactly popular.
That's assuming Labour lose the next election, I'm not sure that is actually guaranteed yet, it was, but things change... The Tories are not exactly popular.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
The above sounds plausible, especially the prediction about the Tories attacking civil liberties. Since, like Labour, they've incapable of being really tough on crime (restoring hanging for the worst murderers, introducing hard labour, ending automatic early release, etc) they'll attack due process to con the electorate. Always the mark of weak people posing as strong ones.
Not sure if Labour will go more liberal, but they might start taking account of grass-roots working and lower-middle class anger. Mr Cruddas is likely to become a major figure in an opposition Labour Party.
We'll end up with a remote, useless Tory government replaced with a marginally less remote Labour one. The vague social democratic consensus will rumble ever onwards. Not, in my view, a good thing.
Not sure if Labour will go more liberal, but they might start taking account of grass-roots working and lower-middle class anger. Mr Cruddas is likely to become a major figure in an opposition Labour Party.
We'll end up with a remote, useless Tory government replaced with a marginally less remote Labour one. The vague social democratic consensus will rumble ever onwards. Not, in my view, a good thing.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Labour came in promising to turn over lots of things to the free market, which they've done. (PFI, anyone?) They've also been socially liberal, albeit with a bit of backtracking when they went too far with the cannabis fiasco. Add in tossing money at the NHS and education, and being "tough on crime" (while being anything but tough on criminals) I think they've done pretty much what they said on the manifesto.
The last Labour government was the 1964 Wilson government. They were a bit to the right of centre as well, with Wilson being frightened of the unions and fighting to ensure that they lost some of their influence in the party.
Callaghan was the first Prime Minister to introduce monetarist policies as a result of the unnecessary appeal to the IMF after the Treasury gave him false information about the state of the economy (See Healey's autobiography). Callaghan was famous for the phrase 'You cannot spend your way out of recession'. Of course he was wrong. Spending is the only way out of recession. Callaghan and Healey the Chancellor cleared the way for Thatcherism, Blairism and the present crap that we now have to live with.
Gordon Brown realised that spending is the only way out of recession but spent the money on the banks who were the very people who created the problems we now have. They of course just grabbed the money to protect their profits and didn't lend it out to stimulate the economy. Brown got it wrong, not realising that it was public spending the was needed. If only he had read Keynes properly.
There hasn't been a 'Labour government' for over 40 years. Why do people still use that phrase?
Callaghan was the first Prime Minister to introduce monetarist policies as a result of the unnecessary appeal to the IMF after the Treasury gave him false information about the state of the economy (See Healey's autobiography). Callaghan was famous for the phrase 'You cannot spend your way out of recession'. Of course he was wrong. Spending is the only way out of recession. Callaghan and Healey the Chancellor cleared the way for Thatcherism, Blairism and the present crap that we now have to live with.
Gordon Brown realised that spending is the only way out of recession but spent the money on the banks who were the very people who created the problems we now have. They of course just grabbed the money to protect their profits and didn't lend it out to stimulate the economy. Brown got it wrong, not realising that it was public spending the was needed. If only he had read Keynes properly.
There hasn't been a 'Labour government' for over 40 years. Why do people still use that phrase?
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Probably because they don't define "labour" in narrow economic terms. It's a worldview, and it doesn't rise or fall depending on its holder's willingness to rush around nationalising everything from steel to Toys'R'Us.
The Labour leadership remain fanatical egalitarians (except when it comes to their own comfort, naturally) and wreckers, who detest history, tradition, and diversity. When they abandon their hatred of selective education and our institutions, then perhaps "labour" would be inappropriate.
More prosaically, "Labour" is the party's name.
nightbreed
Im Bored
They are called, all together now, the Tory Party. There, wasnt hard wasnt it?
lewislewis
Lumumba Cymru
In his last speech Cruddas said the Labour's only hope was to adopt Raymond Williams' vision.
Of course, Williams was a Plaid member, which begs the question, what is the point of having a Labour party in Wales anymore, seeing as Plaid is now carrying the torch of the values of the labour movement.
I think it is very difficult to suggest the political trajectory of either the next government or the country as a whole - the chief determining factor being the economy.
However, I think we can say that - given the oncoming energy crisis, the international climate change imperatives, the state of public finances, and the likely "warming up" of international relations with a more assertive China and Russia (and an America in serious problems) - it is unlikely that we would see "50 years" of rule by anything resembling the current fragile coalition that is the Tory Party. At some stage they will have their "night of the long knives" one way or another.
If the Tory right are successful in launching their own version of social engineering (based on the rather silly idea that people are only radical, liberal or socialist because they work in the public sector, rather than a minor correlation in the other direction) then it might have unintended consequences. Like all reactionaries they see the outward form of their "enemies" without recognising the underlying cause of resistance and opposition. They think that in the defeat of Labour and reduction of the unions they will see the removal of opposition to the capitalist status quo, when in fact they may act as midwives to movements far more dangerous to the establishment, in that they are more adapted to, and born of current social and economic conditions. It is significant that many of the most significant workplace struggles over the last year have originated either in relatively unorganised workplaces or places where stewards and reps felt at liberty to stick two fingers up to union bureaucrats and labour laws.
If economic conditions become significantly worse than today we can expect significant developments on what are seen as the "political fringes", with all that implies for social and political conflict. The effect of this will be multiplied in proportion to the lack of reform and flexibility in the political system. We can see that in many European countries the rise of potentially "dangerous" movements of a far right, far left or radical green character has been curtailed largely through the incorporation of representatives of these currents into the political establishment - leading to the watering down, discrediting and neutralising of the original threat. It will be interesting to see what happens in a country where the political class seems resolutely opposed to this strategy, especially if as seems likely, the appropriate conditions mature.......
However, I think we can say that - given the oncoming energy crisis, the international climate change imperatives, the state of public finances, and the likely "warming up" of international relations with a more assertive China and Russia (and an America in serious problems) - it is unlikely that we would see "50 years" of rule by anything resembling the current fragile coalition that is the Tory Party. At some stage they will have their "night of the long knives" one way or another.
If the Tory right are successful in launching their own version of social engineering (based on the rather silly idea that people are only radical, liberal or socialist because they work in the public sector, rather than a minor correlation in the other direction) then it might have unintended consequences. Like all reactionaries they see the outward form of their "enemies" without recognising the underlying cause of resistance and opposition. They think that in the defeat of Labour and reduction of the unions they will see the removal of opposition to the capitalist status quo, when in fact they may act as midwives to movements far more dangerous to the establishment, in that they are more adapted to, and born of current social and economic conditions. It is significant that many of the most significant workplace struggles over the last year have originated either in relatively unorganised workplaces or places where stewards and reps felt at liberty to stick two fingers up to union bureaucrats and labour laws.
If economic conditions become significantly worse than today we can expect significant developments on what are seen as the "political fringes", with all that implies for social and political conflict. The effect of this will be multiplied in proportion to the lack of reform and flexibility in the political system. We can see that in many European countries the rise of potentially "dangerous" movements of a far right, far left or radical green character has been curtailed largely through the incorporation of representatives of these currents into the political establishment - leading to the watering down, discrediting and neutralising of the original threat. It will be interesting to see what happens in a country where the political class seems resolutely opposed to this strategy, especially if as seems likely, the appropriate conditions mature.......
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
This is where the left/right model breaks down completely. What makes the market fundamentalist brand of Tory more right-wing than the One Nation paternalist kind? Nothing substantial that I can see.
One Nation conservatism, which seeks balance and unity based on compromise, would be ideal for a period of economic upheaval. If Mr Cameron's tofu-revolution flops, there's a chance it may be reconsidered.
jiggajagga
Judge_Mental
Well said mate!
My village STILL hasn't recovered from the 80s under Maggies regime.
Be careful what you ask for people, you just might get it!!
Similar threads
