The future of the Labour Party: Where does it go from here?

[solidified gruel merchant]

At the same time, the left need to own their defeat and learn from it, it's no use blaming everyone else even if the reasons are correct. I also think that some of the hagiography surrounding Corbyn verged on the ridiculous, and didn't exactly help neuter the perception that Momentum was somehow a 'cult'. To continue this posthumously is useless. Obviously Corbyn was unfairly and constantly demonised, so his supporters were naturally inclined to defend him, but now doing so is redundant it is time for frank consideration on how his flaws contributed to his defeat and the lessons to be learned.

I agree that we should learn from our defeat. But it is surely a lesson on how effectively rigged and guarded the system is, and just how many people who do a good job of presenting themselves as reasonable can so easily be turned into doggedly aggressive and manipulative defenders of the state.
The hagiography surrounding corbyn is, as you rightly identify, a reaction to a situation where a man has come out unarmed and waving a white flag only to be gunned down by an army with sub machine guns.
"Look at the cultist scum forming a human shield to protect their biggest hope of social change since the '40's. Look at that! One of them just threw a rock. Brainwashed thugs."

[solidified gruel merchant]

.

[NoSleep]

Can I quote you on that (again)?

EDIT: you edited

[solidified gruel merchant]

Can I quote you on that (again)?

EDIT: you edited

Meant to press 'modify' but hit 'quote'. Fat sausage fingers, unfortunately.

[Petey Pate]

The hagiography surrounding corbyn is, as you rightly identify, a reaction to a situation where a man has come out unarmed and waving a white flag only to be gunned down by an army with sub machine guns.
"Look at the cultist scum forming a human shield to protect their biggest hope of social change since the '40's. Look at that! One of them just threw a rock. Brainwashed thugs."

A fair point. I suspect that people feeling uneasy about the hero worship of Corbyn was not deciding factor in the election, though my from experience it is something that puts people off.

I've seen polls that suggest that the leadership and Brexit were bigger reasons why people didn't vote Labour than their economic policies, but this Another Angry Voice blog post makes some good points on how they could have made a much better case for Keynesian investment than they did.

The Tories lied their way to victory, but Labour did themselves absolutely no favours at all with their election strategy.

I have no idea whose plan it was to launch a load of surprise policies like free broadband, the 33% rail fare reduction, and the repayment of the stolen WASPI money, but doing it as a sequence of surprise announcements was a terrible idea, because it made the party look incredibly irresponsible.

If you want to argue the case for increased public spending and more money in people's pockets, you need to lay the groundwork, you don't just dump it all on people as if it's a load of reckless pre-election bribes.

The majority of people in Britain simply have no idea at all about macroeconomics, because they've never been taught, and it's just not the kind of thing most people would choose to research for themselves.

If you want to switch from austerity extremism to investment economics, you need to develop a clear and simple economic case for doing so.

You need to come up with a few slogans along the lines of "invest now for a prosperous future", "you don't grow a business by cutting it, you invest, so why would you cut a country", or "more money in your pocket is more money in the economy", then you repeat it and repeat it and repeat it until everyone has heard it so many times they're bloody sick of it, but it's in their heads, so when you announce big public investments, or policies to put more money in people's pockets, they can link it to the slogans.

If you fail to do this, they link your pledges to ludicrous economic baby talk nonsense like "no such thing as magic money trees", or "how will they pay for it?", or "the money will run out" and then you're absolutely screwed.

The fact that millions upon millions of people still somehow think about the economy as if its a household budget, with a limited supply of money that can potentially "run out" is the origin of Labour's economic credibility gap, and their failure to establish any kind of simple counter-narrative absolutely did for them.

[NoSleep]

A fair point. I suspect that people feeling uneasy about the hero worship of Corbyn was not deciding factor in the election, though my from experience it is something that puts people off.

I've seen polls that suggest that the leadership and Brexit were bigger reasons why people didn't vote Labour than their economic policies, but this Another Angry Voice blog post makes some good points on how they could have made a much better case for Keynesian investment than they did.

Was this even a thing? Everybody knew he was not the ideal charismatic leader you would have ideally hoped for. He was just the placemarker (and a breath of fresh air) for a lot of previously politically disenfranchised people to gather after a long period out in the wilderness and this, I think, will be confirmed by what happens next, now that he has stood down. It's all those people that have transformed the Labour Party.

[colacentral]

This was a freak election where Labour brexit voters stupidly threw their in lot with the Tories, that won't happen next time, especially if Brexit is a disaster. Labour got 32% of the vote. If roughly 12% were lost to voting for Brexit instead of a better society, Labour can probably get them back next time, ie to about 44%

Yes, exactly. I'm disheartened to see so many people here saying we need to change tack and get a good salesman in, even if further right. No. The socialism wasn't the issue.

The media, specifically the BBC, can't continue to hide the reality of the situation we're in. The Tories can't pin it on "paralysis" either. They have a healthy majority, watch what they do with it. We stay along the same lines policy wise and keep saying "we told you so."

The one thing I agree with though is that there was no good reason to push the 2019 manifesto further than 2017. That was foolish. I wonder what Andrew Fisher's wobble was about. Was he pushing it to go further or asking them to dial it back? I feel like it's the latter.

[imitationleather]

The one thing I agree with though is that there was no good reason to push the 2019 manifesto further than 2017. That was foolish.

I agree. Although "the manifesto" isn't listed as a top reason why people didn't vote Labour I think the confusing quantity of policies flowing out of it definitely was one. Barely anyone actually reads them, so it's not a surprise that the manifesto itself isn't being cited when people say why they went Tory/stayed at home. It was overblown and unwieldy, though. I felt like it was saying that so much was going to change that it made the future Labour were proposing seem a bit scary, rather than how good it would be for those who'd been fucked by a decade of the Tories.

[Zetetic]

It speaks to the wider incoherence and lack of focus in the campaign, and the spattering of policy might have reinforced attitudes about Corbyn and Labour.

(In retrospect, of course. It pleased me personally, which is probably as good a sign as any that it wasn't worth much.)

[imitationleather]

I was surprised that after apparently being prepared for this campaign since 2017 there didn't seem to be a tight plan of what to do once it was actually called. Easy for me who did nothing to criticise, obviously. But it did appear chaotic after how well it went last election.

[NoSleep]

It speaks to the wider incoherence and lack of focus in the campaign, and the spattering of policy might have reinforced attitudes about Corbyn and Labour.

(In retrospect, of course. It pleased me personally, which is probably as good a sign as any that it wasn't worth much.)

"Fuck Boris" might have been a more catchy campaign.

[NoSleep]

I was surprised that after apparently being prepared for this campaign since 2017 there didn't seem to be a tight plan of what to do once it was actually called. Easy for me who did nothing to criticise, obviously. But it did appear chaotic after how well it went last election.

Did it? I know that people weren't suckered into protecting the anti-Corbyn members of the PLP like they were in 2017 and got out to the tighter marginals.

I'd say the nightmarish saga that unfolded in the House of Commons post 2017 probably exhausted a lot of people's patience (I feel relieved myself). I think Petey is probably right that there were a lot of Labour abstentions that countered all the new voters and any successes the campaigners were achieving. I think the result could have been a lot worse without the ground troops.

[Replies From View]

Hardly anybody cares about the anti semitism stuff in my experience. It's not raised so much as a shrug, either from the angle of there being substance to it, or it being a cynical lie. Even most Jews seemed barely affected by it. There does appear to be fairly widespread acknowledgement, even from the right, that it was a disingenuous smear campaign being regurgitated and amplified solely in an effort to turn people against the socialists. But even then, nobody seems bothered.

I've just had an extended facebook discussion with an acquaintance who didn't vote Labour because he reckoned he'd done "extensive research" on Corbyn and ascertained that he was antisemitic and the Labour Party is riddled with antisemitism.  And then he messaged me after the election to say that the result proved he was right.  Urgh.

He offered no evidence of course - could say nothing specific - just all the usual stuff and told me I should just google it if I wanted to see the evidence that was out there.  I replied that he'd called this cursory google search "extensive research" a few posts earlier, and also that I'd spent months responding to these transparent political smears with cold facts, so he should feel free to offer anything new if he thinks he has anything.

A deeply frustrating conversation but I ended it by showing him that the US press are beginning to smear the Bernie Sanders campaigners as antisemitic, and suggested that he might join the dots some day.


So yeah - it did stick with people unfortunately.

[imitationleather]

Did it? I know that people weren't suckered into protecting the anti-Corbyn members of the PLP like they were in 2017 and got out to the tighter marginals.

I'd say the nightmarish saga that unfolded in the House of Commons post 2017 probably exhausted a lot of people's patience (I feel relieved myself).

I'm not talking about the way Momentum approached it. I mean the Labour party itself.

I'll add I think Momentum getting the blame is ridiculous. It lies with the Labour party. Momentum are facilitating people to vote for that. They're not the MPs and people deciding the manifesto!

[BlodwynPig]

A fair point. I suspect that people feeling uneasy about the hero worship of Corbyn was not deciding factor in the election, though my from experience it is something that puts people off.

I've seen polls that suggest that the leadership and Brexit were bigger reasons why people didn't vote Labour than their economic policies, but this Another Angry Voice blog post makes some good points on how they could have made a much better case for Keynesian investment than they did.

Thanks for that text. It's the one bit of good sense I've seen talked in terms of where Labour went 'wrong' - rather than being reactionary or pseudo-intellectual. But I also agree with gruel merchant about white flag waving. We'll be gunned down before we've even hoisted it on the pole.

[BlodwynPig]

I agree. Although "the manifesto" isn't listed as a top reason why people didn't vote Labour I think the confusing quantity of policies flowing out of it definitely was one. Barely anyone actually reads them, so it's not a surprise that the manifesto itself isn't being cited when people say why they went Tory/stayed at home. It was overblown and unwieldy, though. I felt like it was saying that so much was going to change that it made the future Labour were proposing seem a bit scary, rather than how good it would be for those who'd been fucked by a decade of the Tories.

Didn't see much chat along those lines before the result on here. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[BlodwynPig]

I was surprised that after apparently being prepared for this campaign since 2017 there didn't seem to be a tight plan of what to do once it was actually called. Easy for me who did nothing to criticise, obviously. But it did appear chaotic after how well it went last election.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh

[imitationleather]

Ahhhhhhhhhhh

I don't follow?

[BlodwynPig]

I don't follow?

You and others have started to pick apart where it went wrong and the manifesto overload has been picked up on. You gave a decent stab at it, but I heard NOTHING on here before the election result in the same vain. So replied. You then admitted you were not critical until "hindsight", so that neutered my attack

[imitationleather]

You and others have started to pick apart where it went wrong and the manifesto overload has been picked up on. You gave a decent stab at it, but I heard NOTHING on here before the election result in the same vain. So replied. You then admitted you were not critical until "hindsight", so that neutered my attack

Okay I understand. Speaking for myself, I desperately wanted this all to work out. I didn't want any doubts I had to be true and I didn't think voicing and potentially arguing about them on here would be helpful. Because... Why would it be? We needed that election to go right for us. Now it's happened and it went about as bad as it could go I feel that I can say how I felt and I guess people will just have to believe that I'm not trying to appear wise after the fact.

I am truly gutted about all this. Like everyone else on here it's not properly sunk in for me yet. I think all talk about by-elections and Johnson not lasting is futile. He's got the best set-up to last since Labour in '97.

[pigamus]

I think the brutal truth is that we were unusually lucky in 2017. The Tories had lost Cameron and Osborne and gained the most useless Prime Minister in history; Brexit was the dog that didn't really bark, because it was still some way in the future and the Brexiteers were still basking in their sense of victory; and the media was so sure of a Tory victory they didn't even bother going after Corbyn too much. We'll never be that lucky again.

[NoSleep]

I'm not talking about the way Momentum approached it. I mean the Labour party itself.

I'll add I think Momentum getting the blame is ridiculous. It lies with the Labour party. Momentum are facilitating people to vote for that. They're not the MPs and people deciding the manifesto!

Although the internal democracy of Labour means that everyone from the bottom up gets a say in the manifesto or at least the broad shape of it. The manifesto was, at the very least, inspiring for the people on the ground that campaigned for Labour.

I added to my other reply to you, after you replied to it:

I think Petey is probably right that there were a lot of Labour abstentions that countered all the new voters and any successes the campaigners were achieving. I think the result could have been a lot worse without the ground troops.

[Paul Calf]

Hardly anybody cares about the anti semitism stuff in my experience. It's not raised so much as a shrug, either from the angle of there being substance to it, or it being a cynical lie. Even most Jews seemed barely affected by it. There does appear to be fairly widespread acknowledgement, even from the right, that it was a disingenuous smear campaign being regurgitated and amplified solely in an effort to turn people against the socialists. But even then, nobody seems bothered.

I heard it mentioned a lot while door knocking but I suspect it to be a proxy for other issues.

[colacentral]

You and others have started to pick apart where it went wrong and the manifesto overload has been picked up on. You gave a decent stab at it, but I heard NOTHING on here before the election result in the same vain. So replied. You then admitted you were not critical until "hindsight", so that neutered my attack

I don't know what your point is.

I felt there was no reason to substantially change anything about the 2017 manifesto, and I was surprised by that decision. Unfortunately I don't post every thought that pops into my head on here, so I can't prove that to you, nor do I see why it matters. Where I've had small criticisms I've tended to not post those thoughts as I don't think it's really useful, particularly during an election. We have enough demoralising posts from the trolls.

Edit:

Okay I understand. Speaking for myself, I desperately wanted this all to work out. I didn't want any doubts I had to be true and I didn't think voicing and potentially arguing about them on here would be helpful. Because... Why would it be? We needed that election to go right for us. Now it's happened and it went about as bad as it could go I feel that I can say how I felt and I guess people will just have to believe that I'm not trying to appear wise after the fact.

Yeah, this.

[NoSleep]

I heard it mentioned a lot while door knocking but I suspect it to be a proxy for other issues.

"Corbyn? Where do I start?"

"Please, yes; start."

"Well, you've only got to look at him."

"Look at what?"

etc, etc

[BlodwynPig]

I don't know what your point is.

I felt there was no reason to substantially change anything about the 2017 manifesto, and I was surprised by that decision. Unfortunately I don't post every thought that pops into my head on here, so I can't prove that to you, nor do I see why it matters. Where I've had small criticisms I've tended to not post those thoughts as I don't think it's really useful, particularly during an election. We have enough demoralising posts from the trolls.

Edit:

Yeah, this.

My point was there. Read it. It may not be right of course and, in hindsight, even I agree.

[Replies From View]

"Corbyn? Where do I start?"

"Please, yes; start."

"Well, you've only got to look at him."

"Look at what?"

etc, etc

+1

Dedicated non-thinkers who depend on other people finishing their thoughts for them with "oh I know; I know" and immediately have nothing when you take that away (and indeed had nothing when it was there beyond some kind of looping aphasia).


"You have the space now to think and speak.  Go on."

"Can't do it."

[solidified gruel merchant]

I've just had an extended facebook discussion with an acquaintance who didn't vote Labour because he reckoned he'd done "extensive research" on Corbyn and ascertained that he was antisemitic and the Labour Party is riddled with antisemitism.  And then he messaged me after the election to say that the result proved he was right.  Urgh.

He offered no evidence of course - could say nothing specific - just all the usual stuff and told me I should just google it if I wanted to see the evidence that was out there.  I replied that he'd called this cursory google search "extensive research" a few posts earlier, and also that I'd spent months responding to these transparent political smears with cold facts, so he should feel free to offer anything new if he thinks he has anything.

A deeply frustrating conversation but I ended it by showing him that the US press are beginning to smear the Bernie Sanders campaigners as antisemitic, and suggested that he might join the dots some day.


So yeah - it did stick with people unfortunately.

I heard it mentioned a lot while door knocking but I suspect it to be a proxy for other issues.

Fair enough, I guess it did inevitably have some reach, and the result no doubt justifies everything that was done in the eyes of the right. But certainly in the conversations I've had, anti semitism rarely features above things like Brexit and spending and terrorists. It maybe didn't penetrate in quite the way the obsessive focus would suggest they hoped it would. I realise I'm clutching at straws, at this point.

[colacentral]

+1

Dedicated non-thinkers who depend on other people finishing their thoughts for them with "oh I know; I know" and immediately have nothing when you take that away (and indeed had nothing when it was there).


"You have the space now to think and speak.  Go on."

"Can't do it."

Someone in this thread or another (losing track) shared an anecdote about someone replying "Google it." I work with one of these. "Google it." "No, sorry, the onus is on you to prove what you're saying, not on me to find proof for you." "It's on't internet, Google it."

[pancreas]

Another issue is the appallingly clunky machinery of the party. Some of the election material was fucking dire. Helen Goodman's out cards, jesus wept. The Tories had different leaflets going out day after day, all sorts of different formats, some made to look like little lifestyle magazines. We had just the one set of out cards, designed by a nincompoop.

Labour North needs complete reform. It is stuffed full of useless job-for-life complacent cunts who have no idea how to do anything except run boards. They are more interested in ensuring their Blairite friends end up in the right council seats. Fucking awful.

I agree that the true horror of this has not sunk in properly yet. The world is absolutely fucked.