What happened to the progressive-left majority in Britain?

[Beskar]

interestingly, conservatives would also advocate fir ways for the work that one does. They would also be against Baby Factories and scroungers.

You appear equally happy for conservatives to be all fixated on removing the debt in one cohort yet subdivide the alternative from the "big spend". Conservatives would also be pro investing on infrastructure via a variety of funding methods.

This is why I don't mind the Conservative Party in the UK in comparison to many of the others in other countries, like America, where both Democrats and Republicans are to the Right of our David Cameron. (Something I have said before)

I am not a loyalist to any of the parties, I am non-partisan, so if the Conservative party does things I approve of, I have no qualms in approving. Remember when they were cutting down the benefits, and I created a topic saying I approved of it?

Q: if there is a problem with what is consdiered to be the left-wing, is it precisely because we don't have 'true' progressive-left parties anymore?

That could be the case. There are left-wing people, but some of them are what I would call 'traditional' left-wing, this mainly applies to the Trade Union crowd. These usually use outdated arguments and concepts, and would probably increase benefits "just 'cause" without any real logic behind that sort of action.

[Furunculus]

That could be the case. There are left-wing people, but some of them are what I would call 'traditional' left-wing, this mainly applies to the Trade Union crowd. These usually use outdated arguments and concepts, and would probably increase benefits "just 'cause" without any real logic behind that sort of action.

hmmm, if the traditional 'left' is occupied by a dieing breed of trade-unionists using outdated arguments and concepts, then perhaps the OP question is invalid; the argument has moved beyond what was traditionally recognised as left/right politics.

i accept the premise, it seems quite reasonable, but it leads to a further question:

Q: Why does what once represented right-wing politics seem to be thriving, when that which represented left-wing politics seem to be struggling?

our political system is what it is, and one 'half' of the self-described equation seems to be struggling more than its 'opposite' in representing the will of the people.............

[HoreTore]

Blair happened.

It was his New Labour that destroyed the european social democracy. The only reason we still have social democrats in power here is because our Labour thankfully left the New Labour way in 2005.

There is no evil in the world we cannot blame on Tony Blair and his New Labour nonsense. When a socialist party starts calling for lower taxes and privatization, something is very, very wrong.

[Furunculus]

but blair did what he did because he wanted to get elected.

new-labour had its clause 4 moment because the public weren't going to accept the loonier elements of labour ideology.

likewise the tories lost their way when they enacted loony authoritarian laws such as section 28.

all parties need to evolve to meet the expectations of the people they claim to represent.

why isn't the progressive-left evolving fast enough, or is this merely a temporary blip, in which case what will change to create progressive-left 2.0?

[Devastatin Dave]

[Devastatin Dave]

Its ok for the kids to play and spend and spend and spend, but occasionally the adults have to break up the party, get things back on its feet. But once the money starts flowing again, the adults celebrate a bit too much and become kids again. Cycles, simply cycles....
10 years from now the right will become the left and 10 years from that the left will become the right. Me? I'm going to go spank my monkey....

[Strike For The South]

+1

Also; brown people

[Furunculus]

+1

Also; brown people

i take it dev-dave is saying that champagne-socialists have a hard time understanding the concerns of their working class electorate, or possibly that a wealthier electorate is less appreciative of social-democratic politics.

but with your comment i am stretching........... do you mean that pro-immigration policies commonly espoused by left-wing parties have back-fired because their core electorate, the poor working class, are the first to suffer under high immigration regimes?

[HoreTore]

but blair did what he did because he wanted to get elected.

new-labour had its clause 4 moment because the public weren't going to accept the loonier elements of labour ideology.

likewise the tories lost their way when they enacted loony authoritarian laws such as section 28.

all parties need to evolve to meet the expectations of the people they claim to represent.

why isn't the progressive-left evolving fast enough, or is this merely a temporary blip, in which case what will change to create progressive-left 2.0?

Yes, in the short term he got elected. Look at the state of those who followed his policies now to see the long term effect.

If you want tax cut, why vote for the minimal tax cuts given by Labour, when you could vote for the heavier tax cuts given by the conservatives? Makes no sense.

Also, there is of course the voters who do not want neither tax cuts nor privatization. The industrial worker, those who have relied on Labour for stability and security. They have seen Labour as their party.

But then Tony Blair came along, with his wave of privatization. The market was best left alone, according to him. Thus, those industrial workers no longer felt protected, they no longer thought Labour would save them if their industry got into trouble. Industrial buildings where demolished, and where there once was work for a thousand people, there's now an apartment building for the rich, which the working class can only dream of seeing the inside of. That's when the working class lost its faith in New Labour.

[rory_20_uk]

He also believed in massive conscription for the Civil Service and others organs of state. The best way to organise is Centrally with those who merely happen to live in the area following orders from the People's Representative, not merely the people - after all what do they know?

Horetore - quick reality check... The Rich don't want to live in apartments built in an Industrial Estate. That is fiction. You don't knock down a steel mill and turn it into Executive flats funnily enough.

The UK tried "backing" leading industries in the 1970's. The Unions saw these as cash machines and managed to produce goods that no one wanted with abysmal quality but with wage increases that manage to cause massive inflation. Many industries weren't fine then went into trouble as though this was a blip - they were massively undercut from elsewhere in the world yet wanted subsidies to carry on doing what they'd always done but for increasing wages.

The labour party was required roughly 100 years ago. Most of the things they campaigned for are now laws, which is what created this difficulty of what to now stand for. There is health and safety that can cripple companies that go over 50 employees, unemployment and other allowances that already create a situation where working isn't profitable, subsidised houses that can be almost bequeathed to one's children and an expectation that jobs should be on the doorstep as it would be unthinkable to move from their area. From no health service bar a few friendly societies to one where IVF and cosmetic procedures are free and yet we still manage to have high levels of teenage pregnancy, from no dentistry to braces from the state lest people have crooked teeth. Education was the purview of the few now is for all until 18 - although we still manage to slide yearly down the league tables.

The working class lost faith when they belatedly realised that providing worse service at a greater cost than others do in the world and the massive debts that had been created by pouring money into "investments" turned out to have failed the most basic test of an investment which to get more out than one puts in - like all the lucky investors who bought the gold Brown flogged.

[HoreTore]

Quick reality check, rory:

The harbour in Drammen, the workplace of just under a thousand, is set to be knocked down in a few years, replaced with apartment buildings of the very expensive kind

[Beskar]

Q: Why does what once represented right-wing politics seem to be thriving, when that which represented left-wing politics seem to be struggling?

I don't have the full answer, but from experience in speaking to people, there are many things issues in the social-sphere which are exerting themselves more strongly than other issues, so it creates a perception of a 'right-wing' shift which might not even be there (or debatable).

There has been an increase in the "Non-Working Classes", and people who are not a member of them, feel cheated. So there is popular support in tackling the parasites of society. This is further reinforced by stories in the media where they have large screen televisions, iphones, and other materialistic possessions. Which party is most likely to deal with this issue? Conservatives.

There has been uncontrolled immigration, from everywhere, and this has lead to a situation where in many towns and cities (for example, Luton), a game called "Spot the White person" has sprung up. Obviously which party is deemed to tackle this issue the most? Conservatives.

Etc Etc

This doesn't mean other issues aren't as important. There is still public support for Public services, such as education and NHS, which are deemed 'Key Policies which Labour got right'. Labours introduction of the minimum wage is also another landmark example of the good things they did.

However, the downside to this is, when you have something going well, it is no longer an 'issue'. So when an issue is solved, no one is actively concerned or complaining about it.

[Furunculus]

This doesn't mean other issues aren't as important. There is still public support for Public services, such as education and NHS, which are deemed 'Key Policies which Labour got right'. Labours introduction of the minimum wage is also another landmark example of the good things they did.

However, the downside to this is, when you have something going well, it is no longer an 'issue'. So when an issue is solved, no one is actively concerned or complaining about it.

accepting the broad trends above, two points stand out:

as rory said above, the right vocally supports public services too, it's just a case of how much.

this comes back to the evolution question, and the position above: "what is labour for once the money is gone" where does the progressive left go next?

[Devastatin Dave]

this comes back to the evolution question, and the position above: "what is labour for once the money is gone" where does the progressive left go next?

They blame the right for holding on and hiding the wealth.

[Furunculus]

They blame the right for holding on and hiding the wealth.

hmmm, maybe it does have something to do with the rise of this overused and abused concept of 'fairness' that seems to dominate the airwaves..........?

[Louis VI the Fat]

I blame the internets for the collapse of intelligent Western political debate.


The interwebz favours the instant opinion over one formed by careful consideration. Favours shouting over the whispered doubt.
On the internet young males are enormously overrepresented, this skews the formation of opinion to their likeness: irresponsible, shortsighted, populist, hard right.


As a result, Europe is transforming itself from one big Switzerland - moderate, caring, fair, widely spread affluence - into a Russia: authoritarian, brutal, power and wealth highly concentrated, with love of 'strong men' - whether in politics, army, the street, or business.

[al Roumi]

hmmm, maybe it does have something to do with the rise of this overused and abused concept of 'fairness' that seems to dominate the airwaves..........?

In that lies a point you've missed among all the crowing about the right being in full swing and "on the button". All three main political parties in the UK are now sat firmly on the centre ground. The Tories under Cameron (irrespective of the coalition) are as obssessed as anyone (including Blair) with progressive policies, that is policies which shelter the vulnerable and attempt to provide a true meritocracy. If fairness is over-used, it's because the majorities whom the the parties represent want a "fair" system.

As Beskar pointed out, the demographics today are different to those of the 80s. The Cons and Labour have gone from entrechment in their respective Right/Left bastions, fighting it out over the no-mans land of the middle class vote -to both setting up camp among the middle class centreground -with less focus on the more demarcated left/right fringes.

The great trick the coalition is pulling off is selling progressive stuff to the right, and giving the left rather little to quibble about. Well, except maybe that tiny issue of how quick they are cutting to address the deficit.

As to the very first point about the left being out of touch, I have to say I found that funny. Labour is quite clearly suffering a hang-over from it's 12 year stint in power, and I'm not sure Ed will do terribly well -or be around that long. But how long did it take the Tories to sort themselves out after 97?

[Beskar]

this comes back to the evolution question, and the position above: "what is labour for once the money is gone" where does the progressive left go next?

I apologise, could you specify the question?

For example, I am reading this question in multiple ways, and I am uncertain of which you mean.

Is it:
"Which party should the progressive left go next?"
"What does the progressive left do in times of limited funds?"
or another question.

Also, in the last election, I would argue that the Liberal democrats were the "Progressive Left" party.