Skip to main content

Brown must lose

We can change the Labour Party...



...easy as A, B, C

I am your typical left-wing (mainstream) voter, who was up until recently in a quandary, but the more I read woolly, apologetic, cowardly articles like Jonathan Freedland's and numerous others in the Guardian, the more I realize that it is every left-of-centre persons duty NOT to vote Labour in this election.

No, its not yet again about holding one's nose and voting tactically. We do this every time, and yet the same authoritarian, right-wing, neo-liberal administration stays in power, be they Tory or Labour.

The media don't like to acknowledge it, but we have two main parties who have the same political agenda. This will be the first and hopefully only time I will vote Liberal-democrat, because it is the only mainstream party to identify itself (ever so slightly) with the left of centre and it seems not be scared to either.

Since the Labour party abandoned its principles and accountability 15 or so years ago in its desperate search for power, its only natural for traditional, democratic socialists like me to look to the Liberals in order to try and break that strangle-hold that the right-wing free-market evangelist nutters have had on us for the past 30 years.

Sure, the Liberals are not the answer, and yes, the British government is based not on popular votes, but on the electoral college of Parliament, but you do three important things when you vote Liberal-Democrat.
.
A

If you vote Liberal Democrat then you show to the powers that be on May the 7th, that by looking at the sheer percentage of voters who went over from New Labour to the Lib-Dems, that the electorate rejects what Brown, Darling, Mandleson, and Ed Balls stand for.

B

This then precipitates the radical overhaul the Labour party needs in order to get back to its proper Keynesian roots, when everybody realizes that Clegg and Cameron can't and won't work together in a hung Parliament.
.
C

That way, when we have another election soon afterwards, the Labour party will have got rid of its corrupt, right-wing control freaks and will be represented by a proper, accountable, pro-union mainstream left- of - centre party.

I voted tactically in '97 and will not do so again. Tactical voting has not worked. If we want REAL change, it's not necessary the Liberal-Democrats, it's voting for a party that is closest to your beliefs. The greens, for example, or even RESPECT.

___________________________________


The party that you once believed in, the Labour Party, will have to come to the mountain, that is the electorate.

____________________________________

That way the party you once believed in, will have to come to the mountain that is the electorate. Over three-quarters of us (the electorate) - normal working people earning 15 - 50,000 pounds a year, have not had a party to represent us for the last 13 years.

We've had to accommodate our lives to the Blair and Brown governments, now its time that party (Labour) come looking for us again. If you want the same- old- saymo, do what Guardian writers like Jonathan Freedland say- hold your nose (or more suitably, have a lobotomy!) stick your head in the sand, and let one version or another of a right-wing government further degenerate the nation state in favour of the corporate state.



By Andy Hall

Comments

Lucy said…
really good reasons not to vote labour! although i do think its unfair to say that labour and conservatives are basically the same, they're not as different as they were but theyre nowhere near the same either.

also, the working class arent interested in labour anymore, most buy into rightwing individualism, would the old labour party have survived on us middle class, socially aware lefties? i really doubt it....seems a bit of a stalemate.
Philip Hall said…
Talking to a former member of Militant, now our union leader, he says that that was always the hope, that a properly Left party would emerge from Labour's period in the wilderness and of course it did not.

I am not sure if your Arguments work Andy.
Unknown said…
Thats the whole point phil. there has'nt been a period of wilderness for Labour where they thrash around looking for any route to power.They've been exercising that power in government for the last 13ys. Their subsequent choice back in the early nineties to go the free market way has shown them up to be a party that has chosen the wrong path. Now that we have economic melt-down for ordinary working people and record profits for the banks (stuffing our money into their pockets). Its there for everybody to see that unless Labour goes back to its roots, things will carry on as they are. if we vote Labour, this will only make brown feel that his policies have been vindicated.
Lucy, i don't think its as black and white as that. There are still a majority of working class people out ther that still have an allegience to traditional Labour values, and also enough middle classes out there that sympathize with a broadly left view, that arent neccasarily sandal-wearing muesily crunchers (although i am partial to a bit of Alpen every now and then!). Andy
Philip Hall said…
Andz, they have been in the wildreness before and they haven't splintered.

Camraman sends comments to me, but doesn't post them up. Vote Liberal Democrat, get Conservative, was one.

If voting Liberal Democrat means waking up to a Conservative government, would you still do it?
Unknown said…
Phil back in '97 labour had a massive mandate and they didnt do anything progressive with it because they had a right wing leadership.
Philip Hall said…
This issue of Brown - Cameron must seem so distant and irrelevant to the South Africans and people from other countries.

I wonder if they know just how sick we are to the bones of the political system we have - a political system that serves the powerful and rich - come what may.

We have no choice. Our democracy is a fraud and the fifth estate helps perpetrate that fraud. The real action all taes place in the dynamics between government and the rich and powerful after the election.

To paraphrase Henry Ford You can have any government you like so long as its neo-con.
Nat Hall said…
I completely agree with all that has been said by Andy Hall, the more I read about New Labour and their policies since 1997 the more I realise that they are just a continuation of Thatcherism. Their Third Way politics are just a polite way of saying we are actually massive conservatives. I hate Brown just as much as Blair. His endorsement of free market capitalism, and his changes to the way the Treasury was run (it is now run by ex bosses of huge corporations and banks) makes me sick. A quote that I read an article on Brown from an academic journal the other day has really made an impression on my view towards him and New labour in general. 'Brown's personal political philosophy has been more influenced by market liberalism and the ideas of US thinkers (including neoconservatives) than by European social democracy, becoming increasingly distant from the Labour party's mainstream ideas' (Lee, 2007). New Labour are as far removed from Old Labour as the Conservative party in my opinion, and will therefore NOT be getting my vote in the coming election. Until there is a complete overhaul of the party and its current policies/ideology they will not be getting my valuable/precious vote. If you want to make a real stand vote Lib Dems, who are the closest thing to the Labour party we used to have and need.

Popular posts from this blog

A warm welcome

. Why blog on ARS NOTORIA? I have set up this website,  ARS NOTORIA ,  (the notable art) as an opportunity for like-minded people like you to jot down your thoughts and share them with us on what I hope will be a high profile blog. . ARS NOTORIA is conceived as an outlet: a way for you to get things off your chest, shake those bees out of your bonnet and scratch that itch. The idea is that you do so in a companionable blogging environment, one that that is less structured - freer. Every article you care to write or photograph or picture you care to post will appear on its own page and you are pretty much guaranteed that people will read with interest what you produce and take time to look at what you post. Personal blogs are OK, but what we long for, if we can admit it, are easy-going, loose knit communities: blogging hubs where we can share ideas and pop in and out as frequently, or as seldom, as we like. You will be able to moderate and delete any of the comments made on 

Phil Hall: The Taleban are a drug cartel disguised as an Islamist movement

Truly the Taleban could have arranged as many bombings and terrorists acts as they liked in the UK. There are many Pashtun young men and women in cities in the UK who still have large extended families back in Afghanistan and who could be forced into doing something they should not. But guess what. So far there have been no attacks by Afghans on British soil. Why? It is a mystery. News comes from Afghanistan and the recent UN report that the Taleban and the drug trade are intertwined and that now the Taleban, who are mainly Pashtun, are officially in command of an international drug cartel.  News comes from Afghanistan that Taleban drug lords go to Dubai to live high on the hog and gamble and sleep with women and luxuriate in all the that the freedom to consume has to offer, while their footsoldiers, peasant fighters, are deluded and told that they are fighting a patriotic religious war.  And though they are told they are fighting a religious war what really matters to them in tr

Our Collective Caliban

At the risk of seeming digitally provincial, I’m going to illustrate my point with an example from a recent Guardian blog. Michel Ruse, who is apparently a philosopher, suggested that, whilst disagreeing with creationists on all points, and agreeing with Dawkins et al on both their science and philosophy, it might be wiser and more humane (humanist, even) not to vilify the religious as cretinous and incapable of reason. Which seems reasonable, to me. According to many below-the-line responses he is a ‘half-baked’ atheist, ‘one of the more strident and shrill New Apologists’ and, apparently, “needs to get a pair’. And that’s just from the first twenty comments. A recent article by a screenwriter at a US site was titled ‘Why I Won’t Read Your Fucking Screenplay.’ Tough guy. I wonder how his Christmas cards read. I’m going to sound like a maiden aunt dismayed by an unsporting bridge play and can perhaps be accused of needing to ‘get a pair’ myself (although, before you