[Politics] Tony Blair doubts Labour can be 'taken back by moderates'

[drew]

Centrists such as myself are completely unrepresented in Westminster.

Centralism and Capitalism as we know it have not provided the answer for well over half of the worlds population, We are living through a period of immense political and social change and new ideas are needed to bring that change

Are you saying that socialism or something even further to the left has the answers? If so, you can only implement them if you have power and in this country, to do that, you need to be elected, and, ergo, you need to be electable!

I agree though that there has to be a better distribution of the world's wealth.

 

[beorhthelm]

Another load of rubbish , you haven't a clue.

a concise reply, would you care to give some more indepth analysis?

 

[Ernest]

I sincerely hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I will be

 

[Chicken Run]

I will be

Imagine how grim your life will be when Corbyn ****s up the next GE pmsl!

 

[Blue3]

Are you saying that socialism or something even further to the left has the answers? If so, you can only implement them if you have power and in this country, to do that, you need to be elected, and, ergo, you need to be electable!

I agree though that there has to be a better distribution of the world's wealth.

The right and left of British politics have both been centralist for the past 30 years and in that time it has not reduced equality in fact quite the reverse the differance between minimum average wage and maximum average wage was seven times in the 1970s it's now fourteen times.

The current Labour Party are slightly left of centre but only slightly, we have no idea what a Socialist Britain would look like as it's never been tried and unlikely to be either as the current Labour Party knows that's why the ideas floating around are in reality not that far removed from what we have now.

While I support Labour as the best of what's on offer For real change something much bigger and bolder is required

 

[drew]

The right and left of British politics have both been centralist for the past 30 years and in that time it has not reduced equality in fact quite the reverse the differance between minimum average wage and maximum average wage was seven times in the 1970s it's now fourteen times.

The current Labour Party are slightly left of centre but only slightly, we have no idea what a Socialist Britain would look like as it's never been tried and unlikely to be either as the current Labour Party knows that's why the ideas floating around are in reality not that far removed from what we have now.

While I support Labour as the best of what's on offer For real change something much bigger and bolder is required

I would argue that the current labour party are far from slightly left of centre. A large proportion of their MPs might be but the party itself isn't and heading further and further to the left. To get elected you have to appeal to the middle ground and you won't do that if those in that demographic think they will lose a lot. Yes there are plenty that would accept higher taxes for a better society but not to the extent that their status will go considerably downhill.

Socialism is about work controlled management of production and social ownership. What I want to see is a party that harnesses a capitalist economy (which we have) for the benefit of society.

 

[Blue3]

I would argue that the current labour party are far from slightly left of centre. A large proportion of their MPs might be but the party itself isn't and heading further and further to the left. To get elected you have to appeal to the middle ground and you won't do that if those in that demographic think they will lose a lot. Yes there are plenty that would accept higher taxes for a better society but not to the extent that their status will go considerably downhill.

Socialism is about work controlled management of production and social ownership. What I want to see is a party that harnesses a capitalist economy (which we have) for the benefit of society.

The Labour party has in the past implemented broadly socialist policies: the welfare state, National Health Service, nationalising key industries, progressive income tax policy, minimum wage, equality legislation.

All those things suggest it has in the past been a party with socialist values. But it has never advocated or implemented an economy-wide move towards common ownership of the means of production. And it has always taken the parliamentary route to reform rather than a revolutionary route to socialism.

Also, its electoral manifestos had not contained the word “socialism” since 1992, before Corbyn and his supporters started using the term a bit more (though he and his allies in Parliament call themselves “democratic socialists”).

“The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.”

So now, the Labour party is less socialist. “Social democrats” are usually how more centrist left wing politicians in western democracies are described – and how most Labour MPs would identify. But Corbyn and his allies often use the description: “democratic socialist”.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Commies and the SWP...……….don't you just love them
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

1.6million have changed their minds to remain according to the latest you.gov figures.

wakey, wakey, time to get a grip on reality
regards
DR

 

[Leekbrookgull]

Mostly right, but I'd say partly responsible for the illegal war by giving the appalling George W Bush support that he didn't really need. His fawning over Dubya was nauseating.. The tragedy is that his landslide victory in 1997 was a mandate for a proper socialist programme, but all we got was Conservatism Lite.

You have to remember Blair's first goal was to get New Labour a second term in office plus Ken Clarke the out going chancellor had been rather clever with his spending plans for any incoming Labour government. However i may well be wrong ?

 

[Insel affe]

This

 

[drew]

The Labour party has in the past implemented broadly socialist policies: the welfare state, National Health Service, nationalising key industries, progressive income tax policy, minimum wage, equality legislation.

All those things suggest it has in the past been a party with socialist values. But it has never advocated or implemented an economy-wide move towards common ownership of the means of production. And it has always taken the parliamentary route to reform rather than a revolutionary route to socialism.

Also, its electoral manifestos had not contained the word “socialism” since 1992, before Corbyn and his supporters started using the term a bit more (though he and his allies in Parliament call themselves “democratic socialists”).

“The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.”

So now, the Labour party is less socialist. “Social democrats” are usually how more centrist left wing politicians in western democracies are described – and how most Labour MPs would identify. But Corbyn and his allies often use the description: “democratic socialist”.

They aren't and pretty much never have been, advocating all out socialism though. It's all done on the back of a capitalist economy. And if they want to be elected they will have to stay close to that path. You were crying out for new ideas and I was merely pointing out that that won't get them elected.

Referring to your first sentence, progressive taxation was introduced by William Pitt the Younger, a Tory! The Tories will also claim other social reforms, education acts, Factory Acts etc etc. The point however is that what Labour have introduced had been done on the back of having a capitalist based economy. Socialism would surely remove that crutch as it puts in the hands or workers the control of production. That means in reality, in the hands of a minority of Union leaders. The party is therefore not 'less' left but is heading that way. The last experiment along those lines with Foot was a roaring success!!

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

You have to remember Blair's first goal was to get New Labour a second term in office plus Ken Clarke the out going chancellor had been rather clever with his spending plans for any incoming Labour government. However i may well be wrong ?

But with such a large majority and the Tories in complete disarray it wouldn't have been too much of an electoral risk.

 

[Barnet Seagull]

How is it that any of us can support a society and democracy where food banks and homelessness exist and are deemed acceptable? How can we also support the same society where the leader of a business can potentially take home a £29 million bonus?
I don't see any political party willing to actually reform for the good of society.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

They aren't and pretty much never have been, advocating all out socialism though. It's all done on the back of a capitalist economy. And if they want to be elected they will have to stay close to that path. You were crying out for new ideas and I was merely pointing out that that won't get them elected.

Referring to your first sentence, progressive taxation was introduced by William Pitt the Younger, a Tory! The Tories will also claim other social reforms, education acts, Factory Acts etc etc. The point however is that what Labour have introduced had been done on the back of having a capitalist based economy. Socialism would surely remove that crutch as it puts in the hands or workers the control of production. That means in reality, in the hands of a minority of Union leaders. The party is therefore not 'less' left but is heading that way. The last experiment along those lines with Foot was a roaring success!!

'progressive taxation'? Is that earn 10 pay 1, earn 100 pay 10, or is it earn 10 pay 1, earn 100 pay 20?

The trouble with a lot of faux socialists, like my brother, they studied liberal arts and are innumerate.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This

Not this, though, actually. No.

 

[beorhthelm]

This

really. as humorous as it is, is Blair's actions to go into a war against a nasty mass murdering dictator really making Milosevic look good? rather devalues the accusation against him.

 

[drew]

'progressive taxation'? Is that earn 10 pay 1, earn 100 pay 10, or is it earn 10 pay 1, earn 100 pay 20?

The trouble with a lot of faux socialists, like my brother, they studied liberal arts and are innumerate.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

But with such a large majority and the Tories in complete disarray it wouldn't have been too much of an electoral risk.

Second term and Ken Clarke nailing down Browns options. Remember he was sold as the Iron Chancellor.

 

[Biscuit]

Does anyone care any more what this lying murdering tw4t says, Blood on his hands and I wish him dead rather than our 100's of soldiers who fought in a fabricated war that was instigated by Blair with his head up the Americans arse.

Drop dead Blair.

What a deeply unpleasant post. The tired 'war criminal' line is to be expected: it's an easy 'go-to' for those who don't understand the legalities and aren't intelligent enough to enter a reasoned debate. But wishing a former-PM dead says far more about you than it does Blair. I can only presume you felt as strongly towards Saddam Hussein when he used chemical weapons on his own people?