I think both main parties will always have difficulties with their radical wings. They are uneasy coalitions of centrists and radicals. They could always change the voting system and split into more homogeneous groups, but while they persist with FPTP on the chance of outright majority government, they’ll have to deal with the lines of Abbott, Corbyn, Bill Cash, John Redwood etc etc.
I’m trying to recall what those complaining about a Stalinist purge tweeted and wrote in 2019 when Sally Gimson and others were prevented from standing for Labour
As with most things in politics, the views on this from within (among the membership, the activists, and even the party-political-addicts) tend to be quite different from those of the general public. One of the main reasons why the general public has soured on Conservatives is their lack of unity and discipline. Nobody likes a divided party that is fighting among themselves. While the whole Diane Abbot business might rub the Labour activists and supporters the wrong way, Starmer would come out in front among the general public if he holds firm on red-carding Abbot. (It’s unfair to Abbot but sorry, sometimes you gotta take one for the team.) If Starmer rescinds the red card now, all that the general public is going to see is “a weak leader who caved in to infighting”, which by the way aptly describes the current occupant of Number 10 as well.
So I don't think you're 100% wrong, but nor do I think you're 100% right either.
Firstly, the best thing would have been not to have picked this unnecessary fight in the first place. So whoever briefed it to the Times - and whoever authorised that - is to blame for where we find ourselves.
Secondly, while I agree that if the voters notice this at all, it would probably be a net positive, I don't think that's the only part of the calculation particularly in the long term.
Yes. I agree that this mess shouldn’t have been allowed to develop in the first place.
Re: the larger point, I guess TeamStarmer’s calculus is along the lines of “we (New New Labour) need to be very loud and clear in distancing ourselves from the previous (New Old) Labour, even if we spill some blood in the process..”.
The treatment of Diane Abbott is very damaging for the Labour party. It has dominated the news for days now and will continue. Personally I think its time to retire. But its not my decision. If her local party believe she is the best representative then that view should win out. The same is true with Lloyd in Brighton. I remember under the Corbyn years the 'horror' of the right of the party at the thought of deselection processes as they feared being over run by the left. It didnt happen. With Lloyd its pathetic - if I was to make a 'claim' against Starmer from an interaction in Leeds before Brexit would he be suspended? Of course not. This is madness. I wont be voting for the Labour party, they are unworthy of my vote despite never having vote for anyone else until the last 2 years. They fail to show any leadership on any of the issues facing the country. This has to change. I am based overseas at the present time and see a society that is equally divided but where the core fundamentals do work. This is very different to the UK. Until we have honesty there is nothing. Starmer is being dishonest on Abbott as he is on Brexit, the NHS, the economy and tax.
I don't think this will have huge electoral impact. I do think it was wrong - and the wrongness is about the processes! We shouldn't do the right thing simply for short term electoral advantage but because a. it's the right thing and b. It makes us better in the long run!
I think both main parties will always have difficulties with their radical wings. They are uneasy coalitions of centrists and radicals. They could always change the voting system and split into more homogeneous groups, but while they persist with FPTP on the chance of outright majority government, they’ll have to deal with the lines of Abbott, Corbyn, Bill Cash, John Redwood etc etc.
I’m trying to recall what those complaining about a Stalinist purge tweeted and wrote in 2019 when Sally Gimson and others were prevented from standing for Labour
Well I did for a start. Because I hate factional bullshit moves whoever is making them, championing them or, indeed, diminishing them.
As with most things in politics, the views on this from within (among the membership, the activists, and even the party-political-addicts) tend to be quite different from those of the general public. One of the main reasons why the general public has soured on Conservatives is their lack of unity and discipline. Nobody likes a divided party that is fighting among themselves. While the whole Diane Abbot business might rub the Labour activists and supporters the wrong way, Starmer would come out in front among the general public if he holds firm on red-carding Abbot. (It’s unfair to Abbot but sorry, sometimes you gotta take one for the team.) If Starmer rescinds the red card now, all that the general public is going to see is “a weak leader who caved in to infighting”, which by the way aptly describes the current occupant of Number 10 as well.
So I don't think you're 100% wrong, but nor do I think you're 100% right either.
Firstly, the best thing would have been not to have picked this unnecessary fight in the first place. So whoever briefed it to the Times - and whoever authorised that - is to blame for where we find ourselves.
Secondly, while I agree that if the voters notice this at all, it would probably be a net positive, I don't think that's the only part of the calculation particularly in the long term.
Yes. I agree that this mess shouldn’t have been allowed to develop in the first place.
Re: the larger point, I guess TeamStarmer’s calculus is along the lines of “we (New New Labour) need to be very loud and clear in distancing ourselves from the previous (New Old) Labour, even if we spill some blood in the process..”.
The treatment of Diane Abbott is very damaging for the Labour party. It has dominated the news for days now and will continue. Personally I think its time to retire. But its not my decision. If her local party believe she is the best representative then that view should win out. The same is true with Lloyd in Brighton. I remember under the Corbyn years the 'horror' of the right of the party at the thought of deselection processes as they feared being over run by the left. It didnt happen. With Lloyd its pathetic - if I was to make a 'claim' against Starmer from an interaction in Leeds before Brexit would he be suspended? Of course not. This is madness. I wont be voting for the Labour party, they are unworthy of my vote despite never having vote for anyone else until the last 2 years. They fail to show any leadership on any of the issues facing the country. This has to change. I am based overseas at the present time and see a society that is equally divided but where the core fundamentals do work. This is very different to the UK. Until we have honesty there is nothing. Starmer is being dishonest on Abbott as he is on Brexit, the NHS, the economy and tax.
Put simply, the means are as important as the ends.
Labour will lose any decent chance of a functioning majority if they don’t sort the Diane Abbot issue quickly.
I don't think that's true. Or the reason they should sort this out.
Sorry -that reads blunter than I meant it to!
I don't think this will have huge electoral impact. I do think it was wrong - and the wrongness is about the processes! We shouldn't do the right thing simply for short term electoral advantage but because a. it's the right thing and b. It makes us better in the long run!