It’s got all the hallmarks of a disappeared people scandal in twenty years time.
1 Like
https://x.com/rushanaraali/status/1724886155554906522?s=46&t=Tk6buFVfyHeITdfFRWCVMg
Have seen a few of these statements coming out from Labour MPs. Fucking cowards. Zero integrity.
‘I support a ceasefire but didn’t vote for one’ is as bad as any spin that comes from the Tory party.
Party needs to split. Let Starmer and his spineless, power hungry blairites become the new Tory party. Tories are now the BNP. Let us have a proper Labour Party again
So you’re in favour of virtue signalling grandstanding, rather than having any actual achievement?
1 Like
Both Labour and the Tories need to be split. But to occur you need proportional representation. Instead both ending up as bedfellows, with those that don’t really share their values.
You would end up with:
Socialist Labour Party - Rayner, Corbyn, Diane Abbott etc
Current Labour Party - Starmer, Cooper etc
Traditional Conservatives - Dominic Grieve, David Gauke, Rory Stewart etc
ERG Conservatives - Johnson, Suella Braverman etc
To be honest Corbyn has also reminded people in recent weeks why he was a liability refusing to criticize Hamas. My guess is 75% of Labour supporter neither Starmer or Corbyns position. Instead have a position of wanting a ceasefire, absolutely condemn Hamas, however view the response by Israel with absolute disdain, because of the disregard for life.
3 Likes
Do you vote Greens? And if not, why not? It seems they are the only/closest match to your values?
It seems counterproductive to dilute the socialist vote even further by branching Labour off.
2 Likes
Under the FPTP system you usually have to vote for the least worse option. Voting for someone that doesn’t have a realistic chance is only slightly better than not voting at all.
4 Likes
Because if you don’t, the Tories will get back in.
1 Like
Theoretically yes, but with the UK system how it is, the 2 parties that stand any chance of winning are the tories or labour.
Greens will get at best 4-5 seats so will have little say or influence. They might get lucky with a very strong candidate in 1 consituency that can fight for that area, but most likely any green candidate that wins their seat will be there to make up numbers, similarly with the lib dems - far too many of the public don’t trust them
FIFY
It rather depends on where you live. My brother is a long term Labour supporter but votes Liberal (and has a Liberal MP) because the only realistic option is Tory. My MP is from the SNP. In 2017 a Tory got in mainly because the Labour candidate managed to split the anti-Tory vote. This, amongst a few others, actually prevented the Labour party being able to put a coalition together.
As I said, under FPTP you have to vote against the worse possible option.
1 Like
I find that rhetoric so sad. The Labour MPs that rebelled are putting their conscience and integrity before their careers. Couldn’t be further away from ‘virtue signalling’.
Usually Alliance, sometimes Greens. No Labour Party here.
The attitude that you should only vote for a party that has a chance of power is why we’ve had no executive for most of the past decade in NI.
1 Like
And what can they actually achieve with that vote? Can they stop the war with that vote?
It’s barely any different from legislating that Rwanda is a safe country.
1 Like
This is my opinion too. To resign the whip over what basically amounts to a semantic argument over language is absolutely pathetic.
Nothing that was voted for in Parliament amounts to anything that would make a bit of difference to what is actually happening in Gaza. It’s got that whiff of six form performative politics that still makes people, even now after 13 years, sceptical about Labour.
3 Likes
Let’s be honest, Starmer is a fucking tool for not allowing a free vote, and has boxed himself in from the start in the issue.
But having found themselves in this position, the rebels should have just abstained. That’s the sensible thing to do. You choose your big resignation moment over something that is actually going to make a difference.
It’s pathetic to say that calling unambiguously for a ceasefire is a semantic argument. It’s the only right thing to do when innocent people are being slaughtered at a rate unprecedented in any recent conflict.
If I was an MP I couldn’t live with myself if I abstained. None of our individual decisions will change the world, we’re only responsible for our own actions
1 Like
So politicians should have only vote when they know they can win? No space for conscience or integrity?
Astounded by this position tbh, but not gonna argue anymore about it as that is pointless
No, what’s pointless is compromising one’s future ability to make meaningful changes for what is ultimately a pointless vote.
If it was a tangible vote that could actually achieve meaningful peace, e.g. a vote to agree to provide funding for a civilian non-terrorist government for Gaza in return for a cessation of hostilities, then I would 100% agree with you.
But as it stands, it’s just pointless rubbish. It literally achieves nothing.
I think it’s very much an issue of party discipline, or at least the perception thereof. It’s not the best look for a leader to be led by the party, especially when it’s on an issue they’ve already made a few major blunders on.
The party position was for a humanitarian pause, unless he changes it behind closed doors “in consultation with the MPs”, then he’s always going to look weak, which is one of Sunak’s biggest problems right now.
1 Like
Has anyone resigned the whip over it? I thought that all of these resignations are from the shadow cabinet, meaning frontbenchers become backbenchers, which is fairly semantic itself.
1 Like