?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

New Labour...

....I'm sorry but when New Labour came to power they were a really, really good thing for this country.

Now they are turning themselves into almost as hated a party as the Conservative party at the end of the Thatcher and Major years.

Personally I think it's sad that New Labour is basically the New Conservatives. I also think that being in absolute power for too long has gone to certain Ministers heads and it's not other 'politicians' taht are out of touch with public feeling but many of the Ministers themselves.

Sleaze, corruption and incompetence is a major problem with this current government, as much as it ever was under previous ones and more so than many of them.

I don't like the idea of The Conservatives getting back into power but as a socialist friend of mine said the other day, "I'd almost prefer the Tories back in than Blair - at least you have no illusions and hopes to be dashed then."

Britain needs a change of leadership. No idea where it will come from as I really don't think the Tories will be able to get back into power just yet and The LibDems aren't strong enough at National level yet either. I just hope whomever the next Labour leader is will bring in a whole load of new faces into Ministerial roles and mend some of the problems and awful decisions that Blair and his cronies have made.

Either that or a breakaway Labour party forms that is true to workers values without being militant socialists.

To think that I actually thought Blair would be a great Prime Minister back in the mid-90's (not that I've ever voted for him but I was very pleased to see him originally get in and then get a second term).

Comments

( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
inskauldrak
Apr. 26th, 2006 11:07 pm (UTC)
Well, many of us hoped that 'new' Labour would simply be a spin to get in not 'old' Labour, but just Labour... though even as a 17 year-old I distrusted Tony and have never forgiven him for Clause 4.

Out of interest, why do you put the 'socialist' next to 'militant' and make them separate from 'true to workers' values' - 'cos just simply Socialist covers the latter.

Breakaways aren't the answer - the last big lot were, sorry to say and no offence to you intended, the right-wing cowardly gits that formed the Social Democrats. To be fair, Militant were mad, but the SDs ran off rather than 'sully themselves' by working with the rest of the party to keep a sane path... and yet somehow we still came through it.

As to the new leader, I know who I'll be voting for - you won't see a denunciation of the past, but real differences (for the better), oh yes.
danny_e11
Apr. 26th, 2006 11:20 pm (UTC)
Militant were not mad IMO - they were unrealistic and unelectable, yes, but there weren't many things they advocated and stood for that I disagreed with actually ;-)
danny_e11
Apr. 26th, 2006 11:18 pm (UTC)
Either that or a breakaway Labour party forms that is true to workers values without being militant socialists

I'd have no problem whatsoever with them being militant socialists actually! ;-)

As for the rest, I agree on what you say and I'm now facing the dilemma of who to vote in next week's local election: I certainly don't want to vote labour, the tories obviously are not, never were and never will be an option and I don't even have Respect in my ward, cos Mr brightspark Galloway, who rightly said 'every country needs a labour party and this country doesn't have one anymore' then goes and fields some 1590859 candidates in the mainly asian boroughs of Newham and Tower Hamlets and FOUR (none of which as I said in my specific ward) in neighbouring - still East London and also predominantly working class - Waltham Forest, which is where I live (and it's not like he's put many in Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge or Hackney either). So much for the new 'old labour' party, he accuses labour of not being socialist enough and playing in the hands of the BNP and then doesnt bother giving the white (or black) working classes a chance to vote socialist, oh well...

Anyway I digress as usual, where was I? ;-)

Oh yeah, voting: that leaves me with 2 indipendents I've never heard of, seen the programme of or have any idea what they stand for and which side of the barricadefence they are (so I'm certainly not going to vote for them), one Green candidate and the Lib Dems... neither of which I used to consider 'left enough' for my liking, and now I find they are the most leftwing option I have, meh!

Anyway, 'scuse the incoherent rant, I'll go to bed now ;-)
inskauldrak
Apr. 27th, 2006 10:09 am (UTC)
I'm in WF - which ward are you in out of interest?
danny_e11
Apr. 27th, 2006 10:10 am (UTC)
Cathall - it's Leytonstone, just off Cathall Road, towards Stratford
inskauldrak
Apr. 27th, 2006 12:16 pm (UTC)
Ah yes, you've got Terry, Milton and another comrade who's name I've forgotten.

You may dislike a lot of Labour, but Terry in particular's worth talking to - been around since long before TB and from what I know of him very hard working.

Small world I'm up at the top of Leytonstone.
heliograph
Apr. 27th, 2006 12:21 am (UTC)
The root of your problem is your hope that your human government wouldn't suck.

Can you think of any government that you've experienced yourself that didn't suck? Historical examples don't count: history is written by the winners.
valleyman
Apr. 27th, 2006 12:39 am (UTC)
;osiehsoeirosijfoisejfoief
suewilson
Apr. 27th, 2006 07:25 am (UTC)
Nope
Have to say "New labour" always was "old tory"
Tony Blair was always Maggie in drag.

It was always actually there in thier manifestos - people just saw "Labour" and assumed they would be "Good for the NHS schools" etc however people only ever listen to sound bites rather than reading the manifestos so they were able to sneek in under the radar.

Some ideas Labour has had been good - Surestart, Childrens fund and Every child matters being the ones that have had big impact on me, but unfortunatly most of the actual implication has been a lost opertunity and the idea of "main streaming" the scervices they provided means most of the successful activities are vanishing due to a lack of finance.
hsb
Apr. 27th, 2006 09:13 am (UTC)
Right at the start, I saw a great cartoon with someone kneeling on a big sign reading "Tony", in the style of the Hollywood sign. He was sawing the leg of the 'n' off.

Having used all the policies that the Tories had suggested they might one day bring in (performance related pay *everywhere* and how many targets?), they have now stolen all their faults.

I am with the guy that said that at any election you should vote the bastards out - too much time in power is bad for every party.

H
gabby2600
Apr. 27th, 2006 10:09 am (UTC)
have you heard they want to LoJack everyone after the ID cards becoem manditory. SO evry one will have an RF ID chip under their skin and can be detected and followed everywhere.
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2015
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow