What’s next – I Can’t Believe It’s Not Labour…?

Old Labour. New Labour. Blue Labour. GEER. Next Generation Labour.

All seeking to represent the real views of the people.

Well, you know what?

This real person would like you all to kindly shut up.

I am sick of all the posturing and shouting amongst the Labour Party at the moment – no real person gives a damn who the ‘go-to’ think tank or group of the party is, or whether you’re to the left, right or north-east of the rest of them.

Do you know what they see? A bunch of political nerds trying to oust each other as nerd overlord – and they hate it.

I hate it.

They don’t care about factions or fractures, colours or collaborations – they care about life. You know, that rather important thing we are all finding rather difficult at the moment.

So – here’s an idea for you all – how about we all go knocking on doors or picking up phones, and ask the people what the problems are. How about we ask them what they’d like to see, and not each other.

That’s why I joined – why did you join?

It’s crazy I know, but hey … if everyone else can spend their time hypothesizing and bigging themselves up at the expense of the lost electorate, then why can’t I?


About Stackee

All you need is love. Well, that, and ice cream, beaches, Sci-Fi and pi(e). Perhaps water too.
This entry was posted in politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to What’s next – I Can’t Believe It’s Not Labour…?

  1. Ben Soffa says:

    To be fair, the people behind Next Generation Labour are very much the people out on the doorsteps – ward organisers, CLP officers, people spending hours on phonebanks. The initiating group has no Lords, no MPs but does have a couple of teenagers on it. We’re very much a grassroots collection of Labour members looking to influence the direction of the party.
    I don’t know about you, but we very much recognise the difference between Old Labour, New Labour, Blue Labour and other ways of thinking – not on a geeky philosophical level, but in terms of the difference as it was felt by real people in the real world.
    Just saying “let’s ask people what they think” is a cop out – ideas on how society should be shaped (the creation of the NHS, the minimum wage, the idea of gender equality) didn’t just spontaneously become something universally supported, but were ideas that had to be thought up, popularised and won through the consent of ordinary people. This mustn’t be about factions and personalities (and definitely not about destabilising Ed) but if Labour is to rebuild the trust of voters, it needs the ideas and the policies that are up to the job. We hope, in some small way, to contribute to that debate. If you agree with the politics in the statement please get involved!

    • Stackee says:

      To be fair, it’s not a direct attack on you as a group (hope it doesn’t come across that way!), but more the party culture of breaking of into its own little groups with their own agendas and ideas rather than try be a more collaborative collective. The idea would work, but only if we had a conference and party structure like, say, the Lib Dems where all could bring their ideas to the table and be judged accordingly.

      But we don’t, so it seems infuriatingly pointless and destructive. And, apart from anything else, it’s great fodder for the press: “More factions inside…” etc.

      But asking others is not a cop out; we all know what we, as members think (whether we agree or not). But we don’t win elections on our own – our hard work and canvassing mean nothing if, like towards the end of New Labour, people think we’re too self-obsessed and don’t care about them.

      We can’t create policies and form ideas from within the Westminster bubble; that is not the ‘norm’ for the many people we seek to represent.

  2. Stewart says:

    You’ve forgotten Red Labour. And Purple. Some nerd you are…

  3. Gracie says:

    Me too sick of it, I am just Labour and I want a Labour government and I’ll work to see that happen and I’ll support the leader no matter who he/she is – end of story.

  4. Sick of Ed says:

    I am not the type who follows blindly and uncritically.
    If Ed Miliband is dragging Labour away from identifying and opposing injustice such as draconian Work Capability Assessments designed to find almost everyone ‘fit-for-work’ so ATOS can get their bonus, and then leave the genuinely sick and disabled in a crumpled heap desperately hoping for someone to come along to help them mount an appeal – if Ed doesn’t think THAT is what Labour should take a stand on – then I will be leaving Labour!
    Ed’s cynical attempt to court LibDem voters may back-fire – old-school Labour voters may actually cross-over to the LibDems!

    • Stackee says:

      This wasn’t really about Ed, but that’s OK!

      If you’re referring to Ed’s speech today, that’s no what he said. What he said – and rightly – is we need to acknowledge the public think there is a serious problem within the benefits system. And we need to be seen as doing something about it.

      He referred to fraudsters – people who give others a bad name by abusing a flawed system.

      He talked of helping the people who need it most – that would be the sick and disabled.

      As someone with a disabled family member, I listened to his speech with great attention after seeing the press ‘hype’ – but found nothing in it to suggest he wants us to go down that route.

      I hope you see, over the coming weeks, that we are still very much the party of the people.

  5. Oz says:

    While I agree that most people don’t care and an outward approach is needed, ideological contest is important. Nothing is done in a vacuum and that ideological contest is important because it shapes how people engage with the community. ideological contests shape what people think is possible. Getting out there and being active in the community and those ideological debates are both needed.

    I’m personally a member of an organised Left faction within the Australian Labor Party. The problem is not organised groups. If Labour is a broad church then a degree of factionalism is inevitable. The problem is when factionalism becomes not about ideas and policies but about personalities and patronage and put ahead of the best interests of the party.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s