Yeah, get rid of the only party leader who opposes austerity, that's the solution.
But yes, it seems the 'working classes' have chosen fascism over socialism.
Russia and China have turned capitalist, the working class has turned nativist and hipsters have turned libertarian. At this point the only socialists left are 3 blokes on this message board.
The Lib Dems are running on a platform of not invoking article 50. Labour needs a leader to do the same and that should take precedence over anti-austerity positions (after all, the economic effects of Brexit will be worse than the effects of austerity).
" that among the divides exposed in this referendum, the most dangerous one was within a Labour movement that cared more for the moral high ground of progressive liberalism than the lives of the working and non-working poor."
Another good article: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics...ns-culture-war
From Stephen Bush's article in the New Statesman:
At the start of the campaign, the question that most accurately predicted whether you would back Remain or Leave was consistently: “Are you a graduate?” (Those who answered yes were much more likely to vote in favour of staying in the EU.) Stronger In never found a way to change that and win over those who left education at 18 or earlier...
This fissure has been growing for the best part of a decade and a half, but Britain’s first-past-the-post system, which deters newcomers and maintains entrenched parties, has provided a degree of insulation to Labour that its European cousins have lacked...
In office, both Blair and Brown calculated, wrongly, that Labour’s core vote had “nowhere else to go”. In opposition under Ed Miliband, the party calculated, again wrongly, that discontent with immigration, and the rise of Ukip powered by that discontent, was a problem for the Conservative Party alone.
In a 2014 pamphlet for the Fabian Society, *Revolt on the Left, the activist Marcus Roberts, the academic Rob Ford and the analyst Ian Warren warned that Labour had “few reasons to cheer about the Ukip insurgency and plenty to worry about”. When the votes were cast in the general election the following year, that prediction turned out to be dispiritingly accurate...
For the most part, however, first-past-the-post papered over the cracks in Labour’s broad coalition: cracks that, in the harsh light of the EU referendum, have become obvious. The divide isn’t simply one of class, or income.... Inhospitality towards Brexit proved a stronger indication of city status than a mere cathedral: Vote Leave generally found Britain’s great cities more difficult terrain than the surrounding towns and countryside.
The problem of the fracturing vote is particularly acute for the Labour Party... Britain’s EU referendum placed Hampstead and Hull on opposing sides for the first time in modern British political history.
It was Tony Blair who... said that the new debate in politics was not left against right, but “open v closed” – openness to immigration, to diversity, to the idea of Europe...
At the 2015 election Labour’s coalition was drawn from the young, ethnic minorities and the well educated... The party was repudiated in the Midlands, went backwards in Wales and was all but wiped out in the east of England. (Scotland was another matter altogether.) Its best results came in Britain’s big cities and university towns.
The Remain campaign gave Labour a glimpse of how Miliband’s manifesto might have fared without the reassuring imprimatur of a red rosette. Britain Stronger In Europe has been rejected in the Midlands and struggled in the east of England. But it also failed to inspire passion in Sunderland, Oldham and Hull – all areas that, for now, return Labour MPs.
I can't remember who posted this in the previous thread, but thanks, whoever it was. It's bloody good.
I’ve long suspected that, on some unconscious level, things could be even stranger than this: the self-harm inflicted by Brexit could potentially be part of its appeal. It is now being reported that many Leave voters are aghast at what they’ve done, as if they never really intended for their actions to yield results.
This taps into a much broader cultural and political malaise, that also appears to be driving the rise of Donald Trump in the US. Amongst people who have utterly given up on the future, political movements don’t need to promise any desirable and realistic change. If anything, they are more comforting and trustworthy if predicated on the notion that the future is beyond rescue, for that chimes more closely with people’s private experiences. The discovery of the ‘Case Deaton effect’ in the US (unexpected rising mortality rates amongst white working classes) is linked to rising alcohol and opiate abuse and to rising suicide rates. It has also been shown to correlate closely to geographic areas with the greatest support for Trump. I don’t know of any direct equivalent to this in the UK, but it seems clear that – beyond the rhetoric of ‘Great Britain’ and ‘democracy’ – Brexit was never really articulated as a viable policy, and only ever as a destructive urge, which some no doubt now feel guilty for giving way to.
Thatcher and Reagan rode to power by promising a brighter future, which never quite materialised other than for a minority with access to elite education and capital assets. The contemporary populist promise to make Britain or American ‘great again’ is not made in the same way. It is not a pledge or a policy platform; it’s not to be measured in terms of results. When made by the likes of Boris Johnson, it’s not even clear if it’s meant seriously or not. It’s more an offer of a collective real-time halucination, that can be indulged in like a video game.
How much of that (alleged regret of leave voters, stupidly not knowing what the EU is or that their votes might have an effect) is a real phenomenon and how much an extension of the same derision from remain voters that clearly motivated many of them in the first place?