5 ms·

Very interesting you have that point of view. What country are you from. The government demonstrably does not pander to the “far right” - whatever that means. T

Very interesting you have that point of view. What country are you from. The government demonstrably does not pander to the “far right” - whatever that means. The “far right” is anything other than what Kier agrees with. — e.g. you can not speak out against immigration without being anti immigrant (racist - illegal). You can’t be anti same sex areas without being transphobic (also illegal). You can’t be anti {non Christian rooted religion} without being an extremist (illegal). You can’t not speak out against the war in Ukraine or Gaza. Flying a Union flag gets you interest from the police now as it is becoming a symbol of “far right” nationalism This is not hyperbole. Against the rules to talk about politics here. But I am interested

gambiting 2y ago
I am British, living in Britain, voted labour in last election and I agree with what OP said - it feels like labour is constantly pandering to right wing ideas just to make sure that part of electorate doesn't go to Reform. >>is anything other than what Kier agrees with. Proposed changes to the the citizenship process for asylum seekers isn't a far right idea? Initially being supportive of trans rights and then walking back on it isn't a far right idea? Kier constantly flip flopping on every issue depending on how the wind blows isn't something that strenghtens the right wing parties all the time? People don't call labour "tories lite" for no reason.
- clessed 2y ago
  Neither of those policy positions are far right. Arguments for stricter controls on immigration are made from across the political spectrum. The left-wing view is mainly because the cheap labour migrants provide mean that not only are they often heavily exploited, but this also drives down average wages for everybody else and increases competition for jobs. Similarly the left-wing opposition to trans policy is driven by feminist principles and preventing harm to children. Once people see the clash of rights and how policy that favours gender identity over sex disadvantages women and girls, walking back support for it is the obvious next step. None of this requires any adherence to far right beliefs.
  - gambiting 2y ago
    >>Arguments for stricter controls on immigration are made from across the political spectrum. This isn't an argument about immigration - it's an argument about citizenship, and the current proposed implementation contravenes various pacts that UK is the signatory of - namely that asylum seekers shouldn't have their path to citizenship hindered in any way because of the way they applied for asylum. This isn't going to stop anyone from coming over here either, or I think it's extremely naive to think so. Someone getting here from Afganistan to escape the taliban isn't going to think "oh I would go to the UK, but 6 years from now they won't grant me citizenship so I won't". The citizenship application is already extremely thorough and investigates you from every possible angle, the "good character" requirement being tied to being how you arrived here is.................a right wing idea, because it punishes people who would have been otherwise elligable for a citizenship(so you know, live here legally, pay their taxes, never had any problems with the law) but now they won't because of how they arrived here. >>ls, walking back support for it is the obvious next step. If it's so obvious, why was this explicitly part of Kier's campaign promises? Because I'll be honest with you - right now I feel like a right melon for voting for him. All the things that were important to me that he highlighted in his campaign he has walked back on(well, almost everything) - so if these changes are so obvious, am I an idiot for believing what was promised? Again, from my point of view - he(and Labour) are making those changes to not anger certain parts of the electorate. We can disagree on this point, but that's my view on it. >>None of this requires any adherence to far right beliefs. To be clear - I don't think Kier Starmer has right wing beliefs himself. But I can definitely see what I'd call "pandering" to those ideas by his party.
    - zimpenfish 2y ago
      > right now I feel like a right melon for voting for him Balance that with "keeping the Tories in power would have been far, far, far worse than the mild-right Labour of Starmer, especially now the US has gone for the second series of Lunatics In Power."
    - me_me_me 2y ago
      You have politicians in UK arguing first cousin marriage to be ok. Welcome back to 14th century The fact that politicians had to add law to ban it in the first place is ridiculous on its own. Everyone knows its an insets and it causes birth defects etc. What next ban sticking fork in a socket. Ban drinking bleach?
pwatsonwailes 2y ago
In the UK in particular, it makes more sense to think of things in terms of working class Vs middle class, rather than left Vs right. The working class used to be more left wing as a block, now it's more right wing as a block. Equally the chattering classes were more right, now they're more left. That's why Labour is worried about reform - they're confusing their historical voter base with "people who agree with our policies". They're looking for more votes, seeing Reform's numbers increase where they used to be, and working out how they can become more right ring, rather than how can we get more center and left leaning voters to vote for us. It's the trap the Tories occasionally fall into. Mostly the Tories are a bunch of different parties united by a few specific ideas. It's why they have so much infighting when they're in power - they aren't coherent about what they stand for. Traditionally Labour were clear on what they are, but that seems to be fracturing in the current political climate. A lot of this got predicted back when Labour became far more center ground in the 90s, at the same time as the traditional power structures of the left waned in influence. What'll be interesting is whether the right cede Reform voters to the left and let them proceed to fight amongst themselves to appease two ideologically opposed voter bases, and become a far more center right party (probably after getting rid of Kemi), or fight for reform voters and leave Labour stronger. Tune in in 2028 to find out what happens next I guess.
- drcongo 2y ago
  I thought I was going to disagree with this post when I read the opening sentence, but actually it's bang on. When the Blue Labour coup installed Starmer as leader I vowed never to vote Labour again as it essentially turned the UK into a two party system with both of those parties right of centre, which in turn has moved the Overton window far enough to the right that Reform now have dangerous levels of influence over policy.
- flir 2y ago
  I'm a big fan of Electoral Calculus' Tribes model: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/pol3d_main.html https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/pol3d_main.html Bearing in mind all models are wrong but some models are useful, I think that one's more useful than left/right, class, or politicalcompass models.

gambiting 2y ago

I am British, living in Britain, voted labour in last election and I agree with what OP said - it feels like labour is constantly pandering to right wing ideas just to make sure that part of electorate doesn't go to Reform. >>is anything other than what Kier agrees with. Proposed changes to the the citizenship process for asylum seekers isn't a far right idea? Initially being supportive of trans rights and then walking back on it isn't a far right idea? Kier constantly flip flopping on every issue depending on how the wind blows isn't something that strenghtens the right wing parties all the time? People don't call labour "tories lite" for no reason.

clessed 2y ago
Neither of those policy positions are far right. Arguments for stricter controls on immigration are made from across the political spectrum. The left-wing view is mainly because the cheap labour migrants provide mean that not only are they often heavily exploited, but this also drives down average wages for everybody else and increases competition for jobs. Similarly the left-wing opposition to trans policy is driven by feminist principles and preventing harm to children. Once people see the clash of rights and how policy that favours gender identity over sex disadvantages women and girls, walking back support for it is the obvious next step. None of this requires any adherence to far right beliefs.
- gambiting 2y ago
  >>Arguments for stricter controls on immigration are made from across the political spectrum. This isn't an argument about immigration - it's an argument about citizenship, and the current proposed implementation contravenes various pacts that UK is the signatory of - namely that asylum seekers shouldn't have their path to citizenship hindered in any way because of the way they applied for asylum. This isn't going to stop anyone from coming over here either, or I think it's extremely naive to think so. Someone getting here from Afganistan to escape the taliban isn't going to think "oh I would go to the UK, but 6 years from now they won't grant me citizenship so I won't". The citizenship application is already extremely thorough and investigates you from every possible angle, the "good character" requirement being tied to being how you arrived here is.................a right wing idea, because it punishes people who would have been otherwise elligable for a citizenship(so you know, live here legally, pay their taxes, never had any problems with the law) but now they won't because of how they arrived here. >>ls, walking back support for it is the obvious next step. If it's so obvious, why was this explicitly part of Kier's campaign promises? Because I'll be honest with you - right now I feel like a right melon for voting for him. All the things that were important to me that he highlighted in his campaign he has walked back on(well, almost everything) - so if these changes are so obvious, am I an idiot for believing what was promised? Again, from my point of view - he(and Labour) are making those changes to not anger certain parts of the electorate. We can disagree on this point, but that's my view on it. >>None of this requires any adherence to far right beliefs. To be clear - I don't think Kier Starmer has right wing beliefs himself. But I can definitely see what I'd call "pandering" to those ideas by his party.
  - zimpenfish 2y ago
    > right now I feel like a right melon for voting for him Balance that with "keeping the Tories in power would have been far, far, far worse than the mild-right Labour of Starmer, especially now the US has gone for the second series of Lunatics In Power."
  - me_me_me 2y ago
    You have politicians in UK arguing first cousin marriage to be ok. Welcome back to 14th century The fact that politicians had to add law to ban it in the first place is ridiculous on its own. Everyone knows its an insets and it causes birth defects etc. What next ban sticking fork in a socket. Ban drinking bleach?

pwatsonwailes 2y ago

In the UK in particular, it makes more sense to think of things in terms of working class Vs middle class, rather than left Vs right. The working class used to be more left wing as a block, now it's more right wing as a block. Equally the chattering classes were more right, now they're more left. That's why Labour is worried about reform - they're confusing their historical voter base with "people who agree with our policies". They're looking for more votes, seeing Reform's numbers increase where they used to be, and working out how they can become more right ring, rather than how can we get more center and left leaning voters to vote for us. It's the trap the Tories occasionally fall into. Mostly the Tories are a bunch of different parties united by a few specific ideas. It's why they have so much infighting when they're in power - they aren't coherent about what they stand for. Traditionally Labour were clear on what they are, but that seems to be fracturing in the current political climate. A lot of this got predicted back when Labour became far more center ground in the 90s, at the same time as the traditional power structures of the left waned in influence. What'll be interesting is whether the right cede Reform voters to the left and let them proceed to fight amongst themselves to appease two ideologically opposed voter bases, and become a far more center right party (probably after getting rid of Kemi), or fight for reform voters and leave Labour stronger. Tune in in 2028 to find out what happens next I guess.

drcongo 2y ago
I thought I was going to disagree with this post when I read the opening sentence, but actually it's bang on. When the Blue Labour coup installed Starmer as leader I vowed never to vote Labour again as it essentially turned the UK into a two party system with both of those parties right of centre, which in turn has moved the Overton window far enough to the right that Reform now have dangerous levels of influence over policy.
flir 2y ago
I'm a big fan of Electoral Calculus' Tribes model: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/pol3d_main.html https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/pol3d_main.html Bearing in mind all models are wrong but some models are useful, I think that one's more useful than left/right, class, or politicalcompass models.