holly

An excerpt of the quoted article reads: What this points to, and which McTague at least seems to get, is that the Labour Party has run out of road. It no longer has a purpose, not just as the political wing of organised labour but as the electoral vehicle of social democracy. The shibboleths about equality and opportunity run up against the harsh realities of the Thatcher dispensation: embedded inequality, a fear of offending the rich, a hollowed-out economy dependent on the kindness of strangers. The social and cultural ambitions of the party, from decent housing and reliable welfare to non-utilitarian education and collective arts, have long since shrivelled to practically nothing. The interrogation and reform of the state has given way to the punitive inspection of the populace. The monarchy and the House of Lords stumble on while we are told we can no longer afford benefits for the sick and elderly. The NHS is bleeding to death and once it has gone Labour will have lost the last vestige of its commitment to the welfare state. A revived commitment to the warfare state, as promoted by the likes of Paul Mason.

fromarsetoelbow.blogspot.com/2026/02/afte...

Pretty good piece this

the Palestine Action ban really was a classic Starmer govt move: a hysterical overreaction that won them zero plaudits from the right, cost them badly to the left, and which got shot down in the end anyway.

Oh my god I didnt think we could get any more "clarity" but here we are

7m ago 10.35 GMT Home secretary 'disappointed' by ruling, plans to appeal Home secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was 'disappointed' by the ruling and that she plans to appeal it. In a statement, she said: ■■ I am disappointed by the court's decision and disagree with the notion that banning this terrorist organisation is disproportionate. "The proscription of Palestine Action followed a rigorous and evidence-based decision-making process, endorsed by parliament. The proscription does not prevent peaceful protest in support of the Palestinian cause, another point on which the court agrees. “As a former lord chancellor, I have the deepest respect for our judiciary. Home secretaries must however retain the ability to take action to protect our national security and keep the public safe. I intend to fight this judgment in the court of appeal."

Imagine if they put this energy into defending trans people rather than pretend there's nothing they can do.

Or things they might like to do!

For example raising income tax, trans rights, saying immigrants/refugees/a diverse society as a whole enrich society

Reading the Palestine Action judgment.

This, from Yvette Cooper's statement explaining why PA were to be proscribed, is surprisingly revealing. She says that PA are being proscribed
(a) to make them easier to prosecute
(b) ...at least in part for non-terrorist actions
1/n

Equally public opinion is something that can be shaped by arguing the case, something this gov doesnt do much.

Its frustrating Starmer also ruled out Levenson 2 because the media does so much to influence the electorate.

No I agree there probably isnt a left majority (although obviously Keir only got some 30% himself!). Its more that the left is an important constituency that Labour cant take for granted.

To be fair I think the left has moved on, in going to the Greens. But Labour figures are still processing the consequences of the divorce.

Yes the analogy of a toxic marriage is an apt one and it would be much healthier for all involved (including the voters!) If we could change the voting system and get a divorce. Staying together for the sake of the kids isnt worth it!

Yes, Labour did raise taxes, but by ruling out income tax they dont have enough revenue, so are forced into the same austerity logic, like the Disability cuts. And disengenuously employing language of scroungers/overdiagnosis etc

It seems to me that the whole mantra of the Labour right is to acknowledge the electorate as it is, not what you'd like it to be. But that attitude isn't extended to left-leaning voters, its felt they have nowhere else to go. And Labour figures are indignant when they actually do go elsewhere.

I dont understand, how can they ignore the provision that its an invasion of privacy to ask if you have a GRC?

This just go back to auroboros discourse of whats left/right wing thats been doing the rounds lately.

Partly its an issue of salience of issues with voters and partly what labour chooses to prioritise in comms

So the court rules on trans rights, and the Labour government claims they are powerless, but the court rules on Palestine Action, and the government wants to fight it?

Palestine Action have WON their judicial review in the High Court!
A massive victory for free speech, freedom of association and the right to protest.
A massive defeat for the draconian attempts by Keir Starmer's government to curtail our fundamental rights.

I think "works out its differences internally" is a key phrase here because Starmer is widely regarded to have won the leadership disingenuously, presenting himself as more left than he is, and his subsequent attitude of "if you dont like the changes to my Labour Party, leave"

Maybe cause he's so rich already he didn't need to go off being a global consultant to despots to make his fortune like Blair

Europe miles ahead of the UK 👏, no wonder the UK is aligning itself with MAGA.

Just in case anyone has forgotten here are Starmer's pledges
the list of things he said he would do once elected leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister

(Spoiler alert He ain't done any of them)

They've been saying it since the SC decision. Its just a convenient lie to avoid taking any action

the enemy is both strong and weak

Gender is simultaneously irrelevant next to the objective reality of "biological sex" and must be rigorously enforced. because god forbid any girl gets a short haircut

a stat i always cite is the number of anti-trans articles in the press went from 60 in a year, to 7,500

I definitely feel addled when I think of bringing up Wes Streeting in small talk

And that senior figures like Akehurst and Reed are sending strong signals of their own.

At best there's some strategic incoherence and mixed messages, which is something of a theme of Starmers Labour.

Yes I appreciate there are important constraints like these. I suppose a good deal comes down to how much benefit of the doubt do you extend to Starmer. I obviously give less than you, partly for his statements on this but also on things like trans rights and immigration.

If you compare to say the treatment of Russia its clear how restrained the UK has been. What has there been to apply any meaningful pressure or address the injustices, rather than pausing a deepening of relations?

But the whole thing reeks of this attitude of minority rights are a waste of time. We need to throw as many groups under the bus so we can get on the with big boy politics of taxes and war etc.

To the extent that they wasted time on it at all, youre right it could have been avoided in the likes of Polanski but just giving an emphatic "yes" to the question are trans women women

Equally they've suspended trade talks but why are companies like Pret not penalised for operating in occupied territory or Steve Reed threatening councils re boycotts?

I would just submit that a government that wanted to do more, could do more.