What now for Labour? (Part 2)

First topic message reminder :

Phil Hornby wrote:I feel that Corbyn is sincere, polite, interesting and likeable - so are my neighbours but, like them, he isn't electable as Prime Minister.

In which case, why should we pay some phoney twicer to be something else?

Wise words from Tony Benn, albeit somewhat defeatist. The right-wing forces that smothered him with mockery will be pleased to see them being repeated in the context of Cutting Edge. A reminder to us little people that Resistance is Futile.

The belittling technique continues of course against Jeremy Corbyn for similar reasons, but the choice is ours whether we are willing to be intimidated for a second time.

It can't be a good idea to abandon the democratic process simply because that's been hijacked by the class enemy.

boatlady wrote:This twin track approach - extra parliamentary resistance and cross party co-operation, have the best chance of dislodging this vile Government of oligarchy facilitators.


I think you may be right - and there is a long struggle ahead, Chas Peeps

cross party co operation? Like the coalition? Or like the Labour party who can't even keep it together within their own ranks? Good luck with that.

Do we perhaps need another emojee signifying  "snort of disgust"?



(To save space)

oftenwrong wrote:Wise words from Tony Benn, albeit somewhat defeatist. The right-wing forces that smothered him with mockery will be pleased to see them being repeated in the context of Cutting Edge. A reminder to us little people that Resistance is Futile.

The belittling technique continues of course against Jeremy Corbyn for similar reasons, but the choice is ours whether we are willing to be intimidated for a second time.

It can't be a good idea to abandon the democratic process simply because that's been hijacked by the class enemy.

what democratic process? there isn't one.

Difficult one. Should we forget our contempt for the Lib Dems - who handed the keys to Downing Street to Cameron and spent five years as Tory enablers - so that we might at least rid Parliament of the racist Goldsmith and reduce dictator May’s majority by two? I think so. If the Tories are not putting up a candidate in a seat that they won, why should Labour put one up in a seat they can’t possibly win?  It was Bismarck who first told us that “politics is the art of the possible”.

Labour frontbenchers urge party not to contest Richmond Park by-election

From an article by Jessica Elgot:-

Labour frontbenchers have called on the party not to put forward a candidate to run against Zac Goldsmith in the forthcoming Richmond Park by-election, to give the Liberal Democrats a clear path to try to snatch the seat.

Clive Lewis, the shadow business secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, the shadow City minister, and Lisa Nandy, a former shadow cabinet minister, said Labour should “put the national interest first” by doing what it could to reduce the Conservatives’ majority.

They also said Goldsmith had run “a nasty, racially divisive campaign” for mayor of London against Labour’s Sadiq Khan. “If there is any chance of kicking Goldsmith out of Parliament, the vote against him must not be split. That’s why we think Labour should consider not standing a candidate in this by-election”, the three MPs wrote in an article for Labour List.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/26/labour-frontbenchers-urge-party-not-to-contest-richmond-park-byelection

Speaking of Lib Dems, the Richmond Park faux-election may as well be another practice run for them at coming second. Who better?

Most posters will be aware that there are a handful of polling websites which examine and translate what all the opinion polls are doing, the most notable ones been Electoral Calculus and UK Polling Report.

Looking firstly at Electoral Calculus, their September predictions based upon all polls and samples suggests that an election would result in an increased Tory majority of about 80, and Labour possibly having fewer than 200 seats.

But the worrying aspect for Labour is the continuing trend into October, with three major pollsters giving Tory leads of 14 - 17 and 18 points, and these polls cannot simply be dismissed or argued away as been wrong or inaccurate, they very well could be inaccurate, or out by a certain degree, but they are all telling you the same thing.

According to surveys of the public, the NHS is now the number one concern, and its easy to see why with severe staff and recruitment problems, rationing of services, accumulating debt and growing waiting lists, yet no one in Labour appears to be shouting about it, and an election tomorrow would almost certainly see a humiliating defeat for Labour and a vastly increased majority for the Tories.

It is this that angers me, the traditional left with their socialist agenda are adamant that they are right, that their principles, their ideas and ideals are the right ones, they actually believe that the old fashioned style working class socialism will defeat the Tories and undo the damage been done to the NHS and other public services.

The old style socialist left are prolonging the days of Tory rule, and Corbyn & Co are guilty in the first degree of destroying the NHS, destroying public services, because if they were honest with themselves, if they were pragmatic, they would own up to the reality facing them - they are not going to run this country.

I am equally as angry with Corbyn & Co as I am with the Tories, because while the NHS is been harmed and sold off, there is effectively no opposition.

It is not simply about the direction of Labour, it is also about highlighting what the Tories are doing, Corbyn had no fire in his belly, he is probably a nice guy, pleasant, believes in what he believes, but he is not pointing the figure and shouting at the Tories, he is not banging his fist and accusing the Tories, he does not resonate with people, he does not excite people.

Daily I bang my head on the table, wondering if all these idealists who insist that Corbynism is the only way, will eventually see the light, will the penny drop sooner rather than later, for the sake of all the people and public services which desperately need a government to actually care, will they drop this silly idealistic march to nowhere.

I am entirely in step with you witchfinder. But you will be called a Blairite for your views( even if they don't actually mention good old Tony!).

So awful is the prospect of a continuing Tory administration beyond 2020 that there needs to be some opposition cobbled together from the left-of-centre parties and their current individual differences need to be put to one side in favour of kicking out the rabid May and her cronies.

Whatever his qualities, Corbyn will never lead a successful Labour party - but there are those who prefer adherence to his 'principles' to actually being in power and leading Britain away from the Tory-imposed brink...

Calling people names is usually unhelpful, though a Labour Party without socialist principles is in possible breach of the Trade Descriptions Act.

Many observers (hacks if you prefer) seem to think that current government Policy is heading towards bankruptcy for the nation. Maybe that could turn out to be a good thing in the end. The catharsis for Britons finding themselves with the international credit-rating of a Balkan goatherd may be precisely what pops the Tory bubble of assumed omniscience and omnipotence.

Until such time, those members of the PLP who think Mr Corbyn unelectable might perhaps devote their efforts towards creating a vessel in which to demonstrate the alternatives.

If people sabotage the elected leadership as the MPs have done, can they then blame that leader for the results of their treachery? Are they electable?

"..the international credit-rating of a Balkan goatherd ..."

You've got to love the power of words...!

Penderyn wrote:If people sabotage the elected leadership as the MPs have done, can they then blame that leader for the results of their treachery?   Are they electable?  

The standing in the polls and the disaster facing the party has nothing to do with the PLP, it is entirely due to the leader, regardless of whether he was elected by the so called "membership", and also due to the very different direction that the party has headed since Corbyn's election.

What the old left need to understand is that the PLP are more in step with the electorate than the leadership and all the new members who have suddenly appeared from wherever they came from; further more, all Labour MPs were elected on a policy platform as it stood in April 2015 under the leadership of Ed Miliband, and not on the altered or changed platform of Jeremy Corbyn, the PLP are mandated by the electorate, Jeremy Corbyns policies are not.

"Fings ain't wot they used to be"

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=fings+aint+what+they+used+to+be+musical&view=detail&mid=6414B6925942D21AB6356414B6925942D21AB635&FORM=VIRE

witchfinder wrote:What the old left need to understand is that the PLP are more in step with the electorate than the leadership and all the new members who have suddenly appeared from wherever they came from; further more, all Labour MPs were elected on a policy platform as it stood in April 2015 under the leadership of Ed Miliband, and not on the altered or changed platform of Jeremy Corbyn, the PLP are mandated by the electorate, Jeremy Corbyns policies are not.

You mean they are more in tune with the Noise Machine and are they matey with its hacks?   We knew that?   The question is whether they are in tune with the Labour Movement, which was founded to change this smelly system for the benefit of working people (the vast majority).    Those who are not are tories, so why should working people who are not drunk support them?

Some of us do fully respect the foundations of the Labour Party, Kier Hardy, the introduction of the welfare state and the NHS, and taking consideration of people over profits.

But this is the 21st century, and the socialist message of yesteryear belongs in the past, the idea of "the people" owning the means of production and wealth is well outdated, and in actual fact is not a popular idea, in fact it wasent that popular in the 1970s.

The problem with vast numbers of the Labour Party membership is that they believe in an alternative to capitalism, and there is isent one, because capitalism is based on a basic human instinct of you have something that I want or need, so lets trade.

Many people in 2015 said that the Labour Party under Corbyn would become a pressure group instead of a serious political party with genuine aspiration for power, and that is precisely what has happened, I call it a party of idealists, dreamers - but please tell me ?, what use is political movement that has no chance of government ?, while the NHS is been vandalised, what can Labour do about it except complain.

For anyone who might be interested, I understand there is a course of study which teaches how to bend the knee, tug the forelock, knuckle the forehead, bow, doff the cap, genuflect, show deference, accept one's lot, smile in adversity, kow-tow and generally behave so as not to offend our Betters.

Might be a good idea, in the circs.

Wonderful how Witchfinder manages to sound more pessimistic than the Liberal Unionists back in the 1870s.   Why does he bother to stay alive, I wonder.   As he knows very well, all the problems of the Labour Party are caused by the treacherous MPs and no-one else.

At the moment, we seem to have a very divided Labour party, and the divisions are copiously reported on a daily basis, not to mention Labour politicians continuing to publicly criticise the party leader.

I'm sure those factors, rather than the policies proposed by Corbyn and his shadow cabinet, are what is keeping the polls so negative.

Actually, I believe people do want some proper socialism and for the pendulum to swing back in favour of ordinary people and fairness - the noise of the PLP constantly whingeing about Corbyn prevents the message getting through.

Actually, I believe people do want some proper socialism.
===================================

Any electoral evidence or is democracy meaningless in your brave new world?

Corbyn isn't a socialist. At best he's a social democrat. He doesn't have policies that address or offer socialism.

He's a reformist and a capitulator. I'm sure, at heart he's a decent guy, but he will never get anywhere near close to anything vaguely radical because the PLP will hobble him

The poll ratings are a concern, but that's because the media and the Tories have convinced the public that he, like the rest of the 'socialist' labour party cannot be trusted with 'your' money. Labour has done nothing to fight this narrative since giving up the ghost after 2010. They have failed to even capitulate before capital. There is no hope with Labour, they will not win. These numbers come in light of the fact that people don't like the tory policies, they dont' like austerity and they don't like losing their NHS (too late, it went in 2012). Now they are losing their pharmacies.

This country is effed, quite honestly. There is no stomach for change. The Brexit has shown the depth of divisions in this nation all exacerbated and based on propaganda and tropes spread by the media, about whom Corbyn offers nothing.

Labour has commtted suicide.

boatlady wrote:At the moment, we seem to have a very divided Labour party, and the divisions are copiously reported on a daily basis, not to mention Labour politicians continuing to publicly criticise the party leader.

I'm sure those factors, rather than the policies proposed by Corbyn and his shadow cabinet, are what is keeping the polls so negative.

Actually, I believe people do want some proper socialism and for the pendulum to swing back in favour of ordinary people and fairness - the noise of the PLP constantly whingeing about Corbyn prevents the message getting through.

The divisions within the party are caused not by the PLP, but by a fundamental shift in direction of the party, a shift that many have warned will make the party unelectable, and I agree with them. When weighing the situation up pragmatically, you need to bare in mind that every Labour MP was elected on the policies and platform of the party as it stood in April 2015 - opposed to unilateral disarmament, business and enterprise friendly, reaching out to not only the so called "working classes", but also the middle classes and the aspirational, the one man bands of the self employed.

As for the media, well even The Guardian, The Independent, The Daily Mirror and Huffington Post have been critical of Jeremy Corbyn and his ideas, not exactly bastions of right wing opinion.

I would say that the vast majority of people vote for what they believe, not what the papers have them believe, which is why so many supporters of far left groups have now jumped into the Labour Party in the knowledge that JC might bring the party over to a more radical, more left wing stance.

I understand Mr Corbyns enthusiasm, I understand the ideals of Momentum and the more traditional Socialists, but you see I also understand the electorate, and more than anything else I would really love to see the defeat of the Tories in three and a half years from now.

Toshmanta wrote:Any electoral evidence or is democracy meaningless in your brave new world?

What democracy

What democracy is that then in your smelly old Murdoch world?

witchfinder wrote:The divisions within the party are caused not by the PLP, but by a fundamental shift in direction of the party, a shift that many have warned will make the party unelectable, and I agree with them. When weighing the situation up pragmatically, you need to bare in mind that every Labour MP was elected on the policies and platform of the party as it stood in April 2015 - opposed to unilateral disarmament, business and enterprise friendly, reaching out to not only the so called "working classes", but also the middle classes and the aspirational, the one man bands of the self employed.

I would say that the vast majority of people vote for what they believe, not what the papers have them believe, which is why so many supporters of far left groups have now jumped into the Labour Party in the knowledge that JC might bring the party over to a more radical, more left wing stance.

It has shifted back to being the Labour Party after the Tory take-over, as you know, whereas the MPs still serve the total-right-wing press and its rich owners.

The division is caused by the PLP.

They are responsible for the recent debacle because they do not want Corbyn.

THis is the problem he will carry forever going forward. They aren't going to relent.

witchfinder. Some things have changed. The days when most people voted along class lines – Labour for the working class, the Tories for the middle class – have long since gone. That was partly because of the decimation of the industrial and manufacturing base of this country from the 1980s onwards, and partly because the Labour Party wasn’t perceived to represent the working class any longer. The Tory Party no longer accepts the post-war social democratic consensus of a mixed economy, and all the things we once took for granted – such as nationalised railways, a cradle-to-the-grave welfare state, and even the NHS – are no longer part of that mythical ‘centre ground’, something which the Tories now claim to occupy with their xenophobia.

Another thing that’s changed is that social democracy has lost its raison d'être. Governments and corporations saw it as a safety valve for the excesses of capitalism when there was a chance that working people might choose another alternative – the state capitalism offered by the Soviet Union and its satellite countries. I doubt if many of us would condone a system where people were shot trying to move from one part of Germany to another, as happened with the Berlin Wall. I’m damn sure that a pacifist like Jeremy Corbyn would never have condoned such an abomination. However, once the Soviet bloc had collapsed between 1989 and 1991, the restraints were off for right-wingers. Anyone who has read ‘The Shock Doctrine’ by Naomi Klein (reviewed on this forum) will be aware that the agenda soon became to restore the pre-1929 Wall Street Crash model of unrestricted private enterprise - Milton Friedman's dream, which Pinochet, Thatcher and Reagan had already made a good start towards making come true in the 1980s.

I’m afraid your recent posts contain factual inaccuracies and show that you’ve swallowed hook, line and sinker the neoliberal agenda which is forever being peddled by the Tory press. ‘The Guardian’ supported the Lib Dems in 2010, and ‘The Independent’ betrayed its name and recommended a Tory vote in 2015. Labour fought the 2010 and 2015 elections on what you would probably call ‘moderate’ manifestos, and it lost both of them, so what makes you think that the same formula would fare any better next time? After two successive failures, many people who had put up with what they felt was a Labour Party that didn’t represent them became very angry, and they saw their chance to be heard for once when Jeremy Corbyn stood for the leadership. Had you attended some branch meetings instead of leaving the Labour Party, you would know the vast majority of new members aren’t Trotskyites, entryists or whatever smear the tabloids want to throw at them and which you seem happy to repeat. As for suggesting that “Corbyn and co are guilty in the first degree of destroying the NHS and public services”, that's just too absurd to merit a response.

Of course the PLP is responsible for much of Labour’s poor poll rating. The voters don’t like divided parties, and if MPs are constantly undermining their leader they are culpable. The system which has twice seen enormous mandates for Jeremy Corbyn was brought in to reduce the influence of the trade unions and make it easier for your so-called ‘moderates’ to have more say; Blair himself described it as “a long overdue reform that I should have done myself”. If Labour MPs can’t accept the overwhelming mandate which Corbyn has received, they should be deselected before the next election. They may have received the endorsement of the electorate, but not one of them would have had the chance to seek it had they not been chosen by local members, and it’s high time they remembered that.

If you want government by polls, forget Electoral Calculus. I used to use that site regularly, and one month before the 2015 election it told us there was only a 10% chance of a majority Tory government. Sadly, the NHS isn’t people’s top concern, immigration is, and that’s the case across most of the EU. And as the Brexit vote has given legitimacy to xenophobia and racism and resulted in a 41% increase in hate crimes since June, nationalism has reared its ugly head again. The dominant issues at the moment are right-wing ones and the future for the left and centre-left looks bleak. George Orwell said that “whoever is winning at the moment will always seem to be invincible”, but the pendulum will swing again one of these days. Constantly attacking those on your side of the fence won't bring that day any nearer.

Beautifully said, Ivan.

Ivan - I agree whole heartedly that people do not vote along class lines any more, which is why Labour moved towards the centre ground and won, and won again, and again, they won with the biggest landslide for Labour in history, and I do not believe for one second that the political public has changed that much at all since the tremendous victory of almost 20 years ago now.

The 2010 general election produced no overall control of the House of Commons, this was after the worst financial crisis since the 1930s, it was in the aftermath of the banking crisis and a very bad recession, all of which the Tories blamed on Labour, and enough people believed it to deny a Labour victory.

This is the real truth of what really happened, Gordon Brown did not lose that election because he was not left wing enough, and he did not lose it because he was not Socialist enough, he lost that election because the worst financial and economic crisis to hit this country in two generations happened under his watch.

The 2015 election was also not exactly the most resounding of wins for the Tories, winning with a working majority of just 12 MPs.
Once again the reasons why Labour could not go that extra mile is open to speculation, many commentators will tell you a combination of poor leadership combined with the wrong personality, and poor performance on economic policy.

Can you not remember how people were talking about "Red Ed", the dangerous left winger, could it be that enough people believed this rubbish, or do you still feel that it was because Labour are not truly socialist enough - when in reality, most observers see a more left wing Labour Party as been a gift for the Tories.

The dozens upon dozens of decent and loyal Labour politicians who have warned about Corbyn and the new direction, I guess they are all wrong, and many of them are not Blairites, not from the moderate progressive side of the party.

Do you not feel that perhaps there are lots and lots of other voters who feel the same way I do, I never voted Labour when Foot was in charge, I instead voted Lib Dem, and many others voted Tory.
It is precisely because of the many thousands of people who think the same as I do that Labour are languishing in the polls, its not we see a divided party, its because we just dont agree with Corbyn.

For me its more than simply not agreeing with Corbyn, its also about the kind of people who many of his supporters are, the insults and abuse been thrown around, I have had it aimed at me.
When I saw Ken Livingstone state on Question Time that the 7/7 bombings were the fault of Tony Blair, I was enraged, and I still feel Livingstone should have been thrown out of the party for that comment.

Every time I see LIvingstone's smug face on TV, I want to hit it with a baseball bat, and I am sorry to say that if Jeremy is still leader in 2020, I want to see his face when Labour are utterly and thoroughly annihilated in the polls -- mixed feelings, utter frustration at what the new age Militants are doing to the party.

Frustration because they are giving the Tories a free run, they know they can get away with murder while Corbyn is in charge.

witchfinder wrote:Ivan - I agree whole heartedly that people do not vote along class lines any more, which is why Labour moved towards the centre ground and won, and won again, and again, they won with the biggest landslide for Labour in history, and I do not believe for one second that the political public has changed that much at all since the tremendous victory of almost 20 years ago now.

Labour didn't win any elections under Blair, as you know - tories did.   What is the point of having two tory parties?   You believe the Murdochites eh, o ye of simple faith?   If you are a tory, go join that party.

Excellent post, Ivan. Well said.

One of the reasons the NHS isn't top priority is that for the shirefolk who vote Tory, their service has yet to be affected. However with cuts to pharmacies they may think differently, though likely they will continue to blame Labour's reckless spending, even after 6 years.

Or they may find that, like my local surgery, their service actually gets cut. Ours, run by people who also run a private 'occupational therapy' (it's actually an unofficial WCA service called 'Work Doctors') service, has been cut by 50%. The surgery is closed in the afternoons. Unfortuiantely noone seems to really care.

why have you posted that link?

Penderyn wrote:Labour didn't win any elections under Blair, as you know - tories did.   What is the point of having two tory parties?   You believe the Murdochites eh, o ye of simple faith?   If you are a tory, go join that party.

As I know - Labour won the 1997 general election with the promise of doing many things that a Tory government would never do, including helping millions of people on low incomes, and rescuing the NHS from 18 years of utter neglect, by helping mothers who want to go out to work, and encouraging kids to stay on at school, doing things that Labour governments should do, helping the many and not the few.

Penderyn - you appear to be typical of the new kind of Labour member who indulges in accusations that that unless you back the new left wing agenda of Corbyn or Momentum, then your a Tory, and that accusation has been thrown at me many times by party members and supporters who believe that a new Syriza style anti capitalist agenda is the way forward.

I am not a Tory, and the Labour government of 1997 - 2007 was not Tory either, it was a modernised, left of centre, social democratic party very much along the lines of several European Social Democratic political parties.

The likes of Blair, Darling, Brown, Balls and many of that that period would never ever have introduced the Bedroom Tax, they would never have given tax cuts to millionaires whilst community centres were been closed down through lack of funds, and the NHS would not wanting for basic funding.

Your suggestion that I am a Tory is rather insulting, your ridiculous suggestion that the Labour government of 2007 - 2010 was in actual fact a Tory government, is a sad reflection of the bitterness and division which now exists within the party.

As things currently stand it is looking increasingly unlikely that there will be another Labour government for a long time, but if as you and many others want, for all the moderate members and supporters to go, for the social democrat wing of the party to leave, then you will never see another Labour government ever again, the party will be finished totally and completely.

Andrew Marr is not often quoted on Cutting Edge, but in reviewing a couple of new books about Brexit, he has something to say about the referendum which many are likely to find to be not very far from their own view.

"I think we voted to leave because so many British people have been left behind culturally and economically for so long, and were furious about it; and because, from the 2008 financial crisis onwards, they had accumulated so much contempt for the political elite. In such circumstances any referendum narrows down to a single question: Are you happy with the way things are?" The answer was "no".

"Contempt" seems to be the right word. To enjoy respect you have to show respect, a quality notably absent from the attitude of our elected politicians towards the people during the past two administrations. Whatever their Party. Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

Well, as with any ruling class, few of them have lived with the rest of us much, and they can't imagine what we think or feel. They therefore tend to assume we don't.

I would say that the vast majority of people vote for what they believe, not what the papers have them believe

Can you not remember how people were talking about "Red Ed", the dangerous left winger, could it be that enough people believed this rubbish

witchfinder. Those two remarks would appear to contradict each other. Either people don’t believe “rubbish” in the tabloids, or they do. I have no doubt that they do, and I agree with this piece of graffiti:-


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwPRBsRWAAACWqC.jpg

What your second comment demonstrates is that it doesn’t matter who leads the Labour Party, he or she will be vilified by the gutter press. Murdoch, Dacre, Rothermere and the Barclay brothers want to see a Tory government, full stop, and if their relentless propaganda didn’t influence people, they wouldn’t bother to keep serving it up. We can thank 43 years of negative stories about the EU for the act of national suicide which occurred on 23 June. How often were articles printed in ‘The Daily Mail’ and ‘The Daily Express’ about the benefits of EU membership, such as the workplace rights, holiday entitlement, cleaner beaches, healthcare on holiday and cheaper phone calls? Probably never.

People’s basic needs – food, clothing, shelter, health and education – don’t change, regardless of which century we are living in. There is nothing “old-fashioned” about building more homes, especially social and affordable ones, as the housing crisis is now worse than at any time since the Second World War, when more than 2 million homes (60% of them in London) were destroyed by German bombs. After 1945, prefabs were erected to alleviate the problem in the short term, while a series of new towns were built, mostly in a 30-mile radius around London. Top-down socialist planning was the answer then, and there’s no reason that it couldn’t be now.

It’s easy to argue that Thatcher and successive Tory governments have done more damage to the fabric of this country than Hitler ever did. However, saving the welfare state won’t be achieved by abstaining when cuts are being made to the budget, as Burnham, Cooper and Kendall did last year. Neither will it be saved by defeatism, by letting the Tories set the agenda as they move further and further to the right and then meekly following them most of the way. There is no ‘centre ground’, it’s an illusion. The Tory governments of Macmillan and Heath in the 60s and 70s would be considered centre-left nowadays. Labour moved to the right under Blair, accepting so much of the Tory way of doing things that Thatcher described New Labour as “her greatest achievement”. What a damning indictment!

There is an old adage that governments lose elections, oppositions don’t win them, and the Tories lost the 1997 election on 16 September 1992. From the day after ‘Black Wednesday, every one of those polls that you like had the Tories trailing heavily, a position from which they never recovered. That was almost two years before Tony Blair became Labour leader. The Tories lost in 1997 because enough voters had grown tired of their corruption and sleaze and because the myth of their economic competence had been shattered for years to come.

The NHS is in a mess. Blame those who vote Tory for that, and blame the Lib Dems for putting Cameron in Downing Street and for allowing the Tories to pass the Health and Social Care Act in 2012. Corbyn wasn’t even Labour leader until just over a year ago, so how you can hold him responsible for the vandalism of Lansley and Hunt beggars belief. But Corbyn is here now and he isn’t going anywhere – he’s won the leadership twice and won big. True Labour supporters will accept that and try to ensure that the party is successful; the rest should go elsewhere. As to Corbyn's policies, perhaps you’d like to tell us which of them you consider ‘extreme’:-


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CrBuSuiWgAAByZ6.jpg

I can’t agree with you that “the public haven’t changed much in 20 years”. Many placed their faith in Tony Blair, and although some decent measures were passed (most of which have been easy for the Tories to unravel or just ignore), he let them down. Most of all that was by getting us involved in an unnecessary war, but also because he failed to do anything to reverse inequality (although it didn’t increase as fast), and his colleague Mandelson opined that “we are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich”. And although many existing properties were brought up to an acceptable standard, Blair’s record on house building was not great. It’s hard not to conclude that those massive parliamentary majorities in 1997 and 2001 were wasted, and that that fed to the disillusionment and anger which is making many people seek more radical policies.

Public opinion has changed substantially in the last six years, with the Tories practising their usual ‘divide and rule’ policies and setting one group against another. When it’s not their anti-union rhetoric, it’s strivers versus scroungers, or the EU and immigrants, while that monster Iain Duncan Smith even attacked Remploy workers as “people who sit around drinking coffee all day”. Hate crimes against immigrants and the disabled have increased, and both the Brexit vote and the Tory Party conference have given encouragement to racism and xenophobia. This country is an uglier place than it was twenty years ago, and for now it’s the right-wing issues of immigration control and resurgent nationalism which predominate.

If people lose hope and are denied solidarity, they turn selfish and spiteful, like Americans. That's why we have to rebuild a socialist Labour Party, and if we don't do that we shall soon be eating grass under the elected dictatorship of some Boris Trump or another, and forgetting what warmth and human decency used to be about.

I asked a friend, who is a member of the Labour party but no longer very active in the CLP, why he thought I'd had hardly any support or advice from CLP officers about my exclusion (that they now say was in fact a suspension, although the letter is very clear)

His reply was 'Well, you're a socialist - they don't want socialists in the Labour party - that, apparently, is what's next for the Labour party - a steady slide to the right so the party will be indistinguishable from the Tories - and then why would ANYONE vote Labour? And they say turkeys won't vote for Christmas

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

Edmund Burke 1770

Trouble is - who do you associate WITH - when the party you thought stood for fairness and the working class turns out not to want socialists?

Now nothing's impossible, I've found for when my chin is on the ground,
I pick myself up, dust myself off, and start all over again.
Don't lose your confidence if you slip, be grateful for a pleasant trip,
And pick yourself up, dust off, start over again.
Work like a soul inspired until the battle of the day is won.

If good people give up, the Murdochs of the World have won.