Why the Left will not regain power anytime soon

[Andy the Don]

The hard left with their command economy centralist ideology will never gain power because they do not address the populations need for betterment. Also the command economy cannot give the population the betterment it wants. That is not to say that todays neo-liberal economy is providing it. My generation is the first generation for over 150 years which will have a lower standard of living than our parents. There is a very good chance that the generation after us will have any even lower standard of living. As the environment degrades, oil peaks & capitalism becomes even more "red in tooth & claw" with further government reduction of regulations.
That is not to say that there cannot be a market economy without "left" ideals. Government has been the driving force of teh economy in the past, think the "New Deal" in 1930's America or the Social Democrats of the Scandinavian countries. Current government must reign in the worst excess of neo-liberal capitalism. There is no written law which states that profit must come before ethics or the environment. Or that the private sector cannot make viable profits without degrading the environment or human ethics.

 

[october_lost]

After browsing through a few of the threads on this forum such as "what sort of socailism do you want?" and the thread about formulating strategies against the BNP, it occured to me that whilst I am sympathetic to left wing ideals, there is simply no chance of a traditional socialist party gaining power because of a lack of solid and workable economic policy.

Personally I think we need less threads about the innate failures of the left and more discussion about the required social needs of our class and how we can organise to that effect. Time to reflect on tactics is important but christ the political sects have had literally a hundred years to adapt and still havent changed much or learnt very much.

Carry on regardless is all I can say

 

[poster342002]

Perhaps if the left stopped supporting fuckwitted policies that negatively affect the poor (such as fortnightly bin collections or fines for putting something in the wrong bin, FFS ), they might stem soem of the haemorrage of support from what ought to be their natuaral constituency.

 

[nino_savatte]

Perhaps if the left stopped supporting fuckwitted policies that negatively affect the poor (such as fortnightly bin collections or fines for putting something in the wrong bin, FFS ), they might stem soem of the haemorrage of support from what ought to be their natuaral constituency.

Are you talking about the "Left" as a whole or are you referring to Labour councils? It's the NL government and the local authorities who have decided upon this not the "left" as some sort of homogenous whole.

 

[poster342002]

Are you talking about the "Left" as a whole or are you referring to Labour councils? It's the NL government and the local authorities who have decided upon this not the "left" as some sort of homogenous whole.

The left as a whole is remaining very quiet over the issue, though, are they not? Not a great deal of condemnation of it, is there? Time was the left would have been angrilly jumping all over this (in Ireland the left launched the "bintifada" against rubbish taxes - can you seriously imagien that happening in the here?). Their current silence speaks volumes.

Most of the left does not dare say "boo" to this perticular goose for fear of alienating their new-found mates in the environmentalist movement.

 

[nino_savatte]

The left as a whole is remaining very quiet over the issue, though, are they not? Not a great deal of condemnation of it, is there? Time was the left would have been angrilly jumping all over this (in Ireland the left launched the "bintifada" against rubbish taxes - can you seriously imagien that happening in the here?). Their current silence speaks volumes.

Most of the left does not dare say "boo" to this perticular goose for fear of alienating their new-found mates in the environmentalist movement.

FFS, looks like we've got another one here....nurse, the screns!

 

[poster342002]

FFS, looks like we've got another one here....nurse, the screns!

... an in-depth, analytical and logical demolition of my argument, there.

 

[nino_savatte]

... an in-depth, analytical and logical demolition of my argument, there.

What? You mean like your blanket excoriation of anything that doesn't lie on the right side? Do you seriously think that Nu Labour is left wing?

Oh and what "argument"? All you have done is lay into bin collection which, in my mind, has fuck all to do with achieving power.

 

[poster342002]

What? You mean like your blanket excoriation of anything that doesn't lie on the right side? Do you seriously think that Nu Labour is left wing?

Oh and what "argument"? All you have done is lay into bin collection which, in my mind, has fuck all to do with achieving power.

1. No, I don't cosider NuLab to be left wing. However, the rest of the left has been strangely silent on this issue and very slow on condemnation of it. In fact, as far as I know, we're still waiting.

2. I used the bin example as a classic reason as to WHY the left is not acheiving power (or, indeed, any sort of popularity) with what should be it's ideal constiuency: the poor, the marginalised and the working class. The reasons being that it is now often seen as being part of the same establishment that's giving them grief.

 

[october_lost]

Its one of them

 

[becky p]

The hard left with their command economy centralist ideology will never gain power because they do not address the populations need for betterment. Also the command economy cannot give the population the betterment it wants. That is not to say that todays neo-liberal economy is providing it. My generation is the first generation for over 150 years which will have a lower standard of living than our parents. There is a very good chance that the generation after us will have any even lower standard of living. As the environment degrades, oil peaks & capitalism becomes even more "red in tooth & claw" with further government reduction of regulations.
That is not to say that there cannot be a market economy without "left" ideals. Government has been the driving force of teh economy in the past, think the "New Deal" in 1930's America or the Social Democrats of the Scandinavian countries. Current government must reign in the worst excess of neo-liberal capitalism. There is no written law which states that profit must come before ethics or the environment. Or that the private sector cannot make viable profits without degrading the environment or human ethics.

Do you really think that its true "that my generation will be the first in 150 years to have a lower standard of living than our parents"?

 

[october_lost]

Im paying a debt that I incurred four or more years ago from being a student and its not being shifted fast and getting a mortgage together would be near on impossible in my position, and I dont think Im alone. Inflation is rising in most cases faster than our wages, social services, pensions etc are in fast retreat and I can leave housing prices to your imagination.

 

[Andy the Don]

Do you really think that its true "that my generation will be the first in 150 years to have a lower standard of living than our parents"?

Yes, our parents generation "the baby boomer's" have devoured any financial surplus & are now well into retirement.They expect the same standard of living & care as they did when they were working. The baby boomer's wanted it to all hang out in the 60's, they wanted to be radical in the 70's & a low tax economy in the 80's. Now they want full pensions. The tax/funding surplus is empty & it is us who are paying for their indulgence with increase tax burden. We are now paying for that through a ridiculously inflated housing market. It now takes two people working to cover the mortgage. When I was growing up it was my father who worked. He had a lower (relatively) paying job than both my wife & I & when growing up we lived in a nicer house/area than we do now. My father worked shorter hours, I can never remember him having to work weekends & there was never the fear of downsizing. My generation constantly lives above their means & pay greater tax for lower public services & a worse public infrastructure. True in my parents day there was never anything as stupid as PPP/PFI which is basically the taxpayer paying for private profit.

In Britain there has been a constant increase in wealth & opportunities between the generations. Since the emergence of the middle classes in the mid 18th century. Some of these increases in standard of living have been due to government legislation, the Liberal National Assistance Scheme of 1906, the Welfare State in 1945. Mainly it has been due to greater economic prosperity. We are now for the first time seeing a reversal of this standard of living, do not equate increased property prices with a higher standard of living. As oil peaks & the environment degrades standard of living will decrease for my children's generation. Again due to the selfishness of the baby boomer's. The generation which the government is afraid to face down due to them making the bulk of the voting public & the current young persons being politically apathetic.

 

[nino_savatte]

Its one of them

Innit?

 

[treelover]

Whats that meant to mean, anyone who disagrees with Nino and his cronies is ridiculed, though its like as someone once said, being mauled by a dead sheep!

 

[Fruitloop]

Yes, our parents generation "the baby boomer's" have devoured any financial surplus & are now well into retirement.They expect the same standard of living & care as they did when they were working. The baby boomer's wanted it to all hang out in the 60's, they wanted to be radical in the 70's & a low tax economy in the 80's. Now they want full pensions. The tax/funding surplus is empty & it is us who are paying for their indulgence with increase tax burden. We are now paying for that through a ridiculously inflated housing market. It now takes two people working to cover the mortgage. When I was growing up it was my father who worked. He had a lower (relatively) paying job than both my wife & I & when growing up we lived in a nicer house/area than we do now. My father worked shorter hours, I can never remember him having to work weekends & there was never the fear of downsizing. My generation constantly lives above their means & pay greater tax for lower public services & a worse public infrastructure. True in my parents day there was never anything as stupid as PPP/PFI which is basically the taxpayer paying for private profit.

In Britain there has been a constant increase in wealth & opportunities between the generations. Since the emergence of the middle classes in the mid 18th century. Some of these increases in standard of living have been due to government legislation, the Liberal National Assistance Scheme of 1906, the Welfare State in 1945. Mainly it has been due to greater economic prosperity. We are now for the first time seeing a reversal of this standard of living, do not equate increased property prices with a higher standard of living. As oil peaks & the environment degrades standard of living will decrease for my children's generation. Again due to the selfishness of the baby boomer's. The generation which the government is afraid to face down due to them making the bulk of the voting public & the current young persons being politically apathetic.

Good post.

 

[nino_savatte]

the selfishness of the baby boomer's

I'm a baby boomer and I'm not "selfish". Whereas today's yoof want it all now. They all want fame without having to graft for it.

 

[lights.out.london]

At this point I'm sure a lot of you are making this sort of face. Of course the left has a long tradition of indepth economic analysis, a lot of which is invaluable to even to those on the right. However, the basis of traditional labour economics in this country, i.e Keynsianism, has been proven to cause more damage than good. The 1970's gave us millions unemployed, double digit inflation and the Bay City Rollers (alright, maybe thats not the fault of Keynes). Today we have, for better or worse, lower unemployment and lower inflation and a generally better standard of living.

I think you've ignored the oil shock of the mid-70s and euro and petrodollar price movements. It's too simplistic to take one nation's economy in isolation when looking at Keynsian economics in the 70s.

...and we can always talk about what the USA and Milton Friedman did to Chile with their monetarist 'experiment'.

 

[Andy the Don]

I'm a baby boomer and I'm not "selfish". Whereas today's yoof want it all now. They all want fame without having to graft for it.

You are I thought you were a younger Generation X'er like my good self..

 

[Fruitloop]

I don't think either characterisation holds true for 100% of the group in question, but there's plenty of truth to it none the less.

 

[nino_savatte]

You are I thought you were a younger Generation X'er like my good self..

Nope, I'm an auld git.

 

[october_lost]

Whats that meant to mean, anyone who disagrees with Nino and his cronies is ridiculed, though its like as someone once said, being mauled by a dead sheep!

Whose the crony?
The bread and butter thing was a recognition that they were talking about similar problems but from different angles.

 

[becky p]

Yes, our parents generation "the baby boomer's" have devoured any financial surplus & are now well into retirement.They expect the same standard of living & care as they did when they were working. The baby boomer's wanted it to all hang out in the 60's, they wanted to be radical in the 70's & a low tax economy in the 80's. Now they want full pensions. The tax/funding surplus is empty & it is us who are paying for their indulgence with increase tax burden. We are now paying for that through a ridiculously inflated housing market. It now takes two people working to cover the mortgage. When I was growing up it was my father who worked. He had a lower (relatively) paying job than both my wife & I & when growing up we lived in a nicer house/area than we do now. My father worked shorter hours, I can never remember him having to work weekends & there was never the fear of downsizing. My generation constantly lives above their means & pay greater tax for lower public services & a worse public infrastructure. True in my parents day there was never anything as stupid as PPP/PFI which is basically the taxpayer paying for private profit.

In Britain there has been a constant increase in wealth & opportunities between the generations. Since the emergence of the middle classes in the mid 18th century. Some of these increases in standard of living have been due to government legislation, the Liberal National Assistance Scheme of 1906, the Welfare State in 1945. Mainly it has been due to greater economic prosperity. We are now for the first time seeing a reversal of this standard of living, do not equate increased property prices with a higher standard of living. As oil peaks & the environment degrades standard of living will decrease for my children's generation. Again due to the selfishness of the baby boomer's. The generation which the government is afraid to face down due to them making the bulk of the voting public & the current young persons being politically apathetic.

Your gloomy predictions seem to be lacking in substance Andy. Your parents may have been better off than you at your age now.But perhaps they started working and saving earlier. And perhaps you will live longer and inherit more from them, than they ever did.
How many holidays have you had,how many had they had at your age?
20 years ago far fewer people went on holidays,owned cars and other expensive items.

 

[october_lost]

Your gloomy predictions seem to be lacking in substance Andy. Your parents may have been better off than you at your age now.But perhaps they started working and saving earlier. And perhaps you will live longer and inherit more from them, than they ever did.
How many holidays have you had,how many had they had at your age?
20 years ago far fewer people went on holidays,owned cars and other expensive items.

By 2050 the amount of people working to retirement will be 2:1, its now roughly 5:1, welfarism is clearly haemoraging hence the recent assault on our pensions, layoffs of the civil service etc. And technological and mass production does not hide the fact that real wages are declining, infact I heard that they have never reached a high we had in the early 70's.

Personally I think Andy is pretty spot on.

 

[becky p]

By 2050 the amount of people working to retirement will be 2:1, its now roughly 5:1, welfarism is clearly haemoraging hence the recent assault on our pensions, layoffs of the civil service etc. And technological and mass production does not hide the fact that real wages are declining, infact I heard that they have never reached a high we had in the early 70's.

Personally I think Andy is pretty spot on.

So the GDP has been going down over the last 20 years then?

 

[leaf]

I may be wrong here, but is there an assupmtion on this thread that keynesian economics = 'socialist'. The term socialism is so broad but as mentioned by lewislewis, the idea of some huge state aparatus to administer everything for the populous is pretty outdated.
My understanding of socialism is a non-hierarchical society, in which the means of production are democratically controlled.
In answer to the original question 'what does the left have to offer?' i would answer true democracy, security for all (since production will be for need) and greater sustainability.

 

[Andy the Don]

So the GDP has been going down over the last 20 years then?

You are talking in economic terms. Yes GDP is increasing, but how much of that increase is filtering down to "Joe Public", not much. We should not equate GDP a quantitative indicator with quality of life which is a qualitative indicator.

 

[october_lost]

So the GDP has been going down over the last 20 years then?

No. What to wages actually buy?