Do you think one of the reasons that boris keeps getting away with things is because the public have a different impression of him than sw1? Eg most pundits and oppo mps babble away about him being a right wing fascist whereas most of the public think he’s a decent guy but a clown. In general how would you attack boris if you were Labour, or would you follow Amazon principle of almost ignoring the competition and focusing totally on the customer? Thanks Dom
What about housing? Surely a massive issue among 18-35/40? Also a concern of parents (40-65) who are worried their children can't afford their own home. The Conservatives have no real plan or intention to address this - botched planning reform, even 95% mortgages policy still requires an inordinately large income in many parts of the country.
Starmer a total dud. Silent on Conservative treatment of young people. NI rises and changes to student loan repayments will leave someone on ~£30,000 about £1000 worse off every year. Conservatives considering changing loan terms retrospectively! It feels almost criminal, yet Martin Lewis making more noise than Labour leader.
I'll read in more detail later as there is much here, however, I have to agree wholeheartedly on two points:
As someone who voted remain (yes, I know, banish me from here :) ) we have got to stop banging on about how it was 'stolen' as though somehow Leave voters didn't know they were voting for Brexit. What I want now is someone who has a vision and a plan for a post Brexit Britain, one that exists in 2040 not 2005. Boris is a noisy empty vessel with a nostalgic story to sell and Starmer is just not cutting through that.
Also, completely agree with physically keeping data teams away from the decision and strategy makers, even to the extent of putting them on a different IT infrastructure and technology. People think of data as immutable and impartial but it doesn't interpret itself.
I don't think Nandy is the player you and other 'blue labour' pundits seem to think she is. I initially had the same impression of her as you did at the start of the 2020 leadership election. However the more I saw the more issues there were.
In said leadership election she pushed for keeping freedom of movement with the EU (not only re-opening brexit but also pushing for the most unpopular bit of the whole arrangement).
She also parrots whatever stupid woke line is doled out on twitter as readily as Starmer does.
Maybe you've seen something I haven't, or maybe she's just 'the starter for 10'. Either way the underlying logic of the candidate that should be found is solid.
The closest people I can think of that fit who you are looking for are Gloria De Piero or Caroline Flint (Both of whom also have issues) but both are now out of parliament. People like them either lost their seats in 2019 or were pushed out the party under Corbyn (and are now replaced with the aforementioned communists)
In general, there is even more of a dearth of decent 'operators' in Labour than in the conservatives. They disproportionally take their MPs from Law and (non-STEM) academia, hence why so many act like the clueless remainers in london despite holding constituency's in poor places far from Westminster.
Having said that, happy to see other suggestions of labour MPs that might have potential.
Very interesting. Very. In a nutshell - for the good of the people /country whatever colour you are red or blue . We basically can’t go on like this without VL in No.10. It won’t change , the old dinosaurs won’t let it . I’m a conservative South East dwelling Brexiteer. It’s done . Let’s not go on about it. Those changes that needed to happen after however I fear won’t … not without fundamental change. Even I can see how trying to get someone in Labour to steer the party back to its original roots, the common man… the working man and his family can be seen as appealing . Heck after reading all that , I would consider voting for them.. because with the shit we’ve been through and looking ahead even more to get through we really really need someone on our side and at our table. Not just the red wall voters the true blue small business voters too! We are Nationalists …. Much like the original true reds … my only major concern is socialism…. You say ignore the ‘woke’( sorry I said it) shite and trans dribble and all the other political correctness on steroids …. But letting in another Labour Party makes me nervous … Will the socialism/commie mindset drip further into the government of this country and then we really are done for …dunno… but certainly something has to be done ! .
These views are not out of line with what many within Labour think, but our party is a sack of rats atm. We'd have to apply all this 4GW stuff internally before we get to deploy it against the Tories.
DC, I must say the last two posts are top drawer!!
Question about MRP, have you even seen this technique used for probabilities of obtaining planning permission? Combining generic planning laws, local unitary development plans, local community opinion, previous planning committee responses, local community deprived infrastructure etc. Could be utilised effectively pre acquisition, pre planning and during planning.
Also the piece by Cornell on the thermodynamical nature of war was very interesting. Have you come across any similar reports covering regional and or international capital flows (would have thought more addressable post Covid with voluntary data provision)?
3) There have been internal disagreements in Labour over raising the minimum wage (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58713344). Is raising or lowering the minimum wage better for attracting votes?
4) What should Labour's policy be on housing?
5) Another please do not preemptively dismiss question - how should Labour deal with Scotland and Scottish independence?
Some interesting ideas here, but Labour's main problem is not the leader (though clearly Starmer is useless and Nandy isn't strong enough) but the party itself. The way it chooses, finances and trains candidates - so that they're all on the same page - as...as what exactly? What actually is Labour's political philosophy? Then maybe do something about the idiotic way it chooses its leaders... And then consider this - exactly how many CLP's do you imagine will discuss, or be allowed to discuss, these ideas in the coming weeks? There you go...
This is excellent advice that I am almost certain will not be taken.
1) 'Tough on crime; tough on the causes of crime'.
The Left do not think crime is caused by bad people behaving badly; rather they believe it is caused by *insert social buzzword here*. The fact this policy has been tried for entire 1900s is beside the point (see https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP99-111/RP99-111.pdf pg 14 - yes, despite the medical advances from the 1960s we've managed to double the murder rate!). Another fun example is the burglary rate is basically zero when it's raining...
You don't need to increase police numbers/funding. You need them on the street deterring crime, but the Left believe it's deprivation not depravity.
2) Social engineering is Fabianism to the core
Why would they give up ideas like LGBTQIALMNOP or The Climate Crisis when they are goldmines for manipulating how people think and behave?
3) How does Labour win without Scotland?
A genuine question. I can't find 320 seats in England/Wales that they could win. If they have 50, or even 30, seats from the SNP then maybe, but 'England's stopping us doing anything' is depressing effective north of the border. Labour currently have 1 (one) MP from Scotland.
Minor correction: "look at how elite graduates fell for Stalinist propaganda in the 1930s"
And as we're on the subject, it's always nice to mention the Rand Rebellion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Rebellion . The CPSA joined, informally, with the ANC after WW2, just 25 years after 'Workers of the World unite and fight for a white South Africa'.
1) If you had been in charge, what would you have done about Covid? What are your views on 'The Great Barrington Declaration' and the relative success of Sweden?
2) Why are you so critical of David Davis? I admire him for his 'civil liberties' stance especially regarding ID cards. A covid pass can lead to a digital ID system which, in the hands of any of our governments, is a scary thought.
For all the Tories reading DCs post with their head in their hands - it will never, ever happen.
In "Patterns of Conflict", Boyd made extensive reference to the moral level of warfare. Congruity between one's actions and one's morality is how you keep people fighting under incredible duress over long periods of time. Actions that decouple from morality will serve to isolate a side from their allies. The master stroke of the last 80 years has been a program to redefine and invert what is evil and what is good. At least two generations are governed by inverted moral axioms that consistently bear bitter fruit. The reason "do-gooders" has been a pejorative for decades is because the people in question are so utterly convinced of the righteousness of their actions, the terrible results are written off as an acceptable cost. The reason 'do-gooders' consistently get away with ruining everything is because the vast majority of the public share their moral beliefs and differ only in conviction. The nutters DC refers to are not isolated activists, but the tip of a vast spear. Just as an infantryman has 10 men in the logistical chain behind him, each activist represents hundreds who align with them on a moral plane and whose support can be assured.
For the Labour Party to adopt this plan of action, it would have to publicly defect from Wokism and that will never be permitted to happen. This is to reject what they think to be good and adopt what they think to be evil. The Outer Party of the Cathedral (a term I detest) is completely converged by this inverted morality and it will eat alive anyone who dares to recant their faith. I know DC regards the culture war as an unimportant sideshow that gets in the way of real conversations, but he is mistaken to write it off so lightly. The ideology that grips the highest echelons of society is bent upon destroying family, nation, civilisation, beauty and truth. Its adherents behave in a coordinated fashion over long time scales and have manoeuvred their way into every node of influence and power. True believers in the inverted moral order have enacted laws that give them the authority of the state to enforce their will on the unwilling and there is no movement to remove these laws from the statute books because nobody believes they are wrong.
The culture war is not a sideshow, but the heart of the system's inability to govern well. It is a disagreement on an axiomatic level about what is right and wrong. And until that is resolved by deliberate and concerted effort, the entropic slide into chaos and mayhem will remain a feature and not a bug.
Hi Dom, any plans for the live q and a? Also if you’re looking for people to intern for you how can we contact you?
Most disaffected Labour and Tory Voters will vote Lib Dem at the next opportunity.
I know crazy right!
But that's what will happen
Do you think one of the reasons that boris keeps getting away with things is because the public have a different impression of him than sw1? Eg most pundits and oppo mps babble away about him being a right wing fascist whereas most of the public think he’s a decent guy but a clown. In general how would you attack boris if you were Labour, or would you follow Amazon principle of almost ignoring the competition and focusing totally on the customer? Thanks Dom
What about housing? Surely a massive issue among 18-35/40? Also a concern of parents (40-65) who are worried their children can't afford their own home. The Conservatives have no real plan or intention to address this - botched planning reform, even 95% mortgages policy still requires an inordinately large income in many parts of the country.
Starmer a total dud. Silent on Conservative treatment of young people. NI rises and changes to student loan repayments will leave someone on ~£30,000 about £1000 worse off every year. Conservatives considering changing loan terms retrospectively! It feels almost criminal, yet Martin Lewis making more noise than Labour leader.
Lisa Nandy? https://twitter.com/politicsjoe_uk/status/1230837769200689155?s=21
I'll read in more detail later as there is much here, however, I have to agree wholeheartedly on two points:
As someone who voted remain (yes, I know, banish me from here :) ) we have got to stop banging on about how it was 'stolen' as though somehow Leave voters didn't know they were voting for Brexit. What I want now is someone who has a vision and a plan for a post Brexit Britain, one that exists in 2040 not 2005. Boris is a noisy empty vessel with a nostalgic story to sell and Starmer is just not cutting through that.
Also, completely agree with physically keeping data teams away from the decision and strategy makers, even to the extent of putting them on a different IT infrastructure and technology. People think of data as immutable and impartial but it doesn't interpret itself.
I don't think Nandy is the player you and other 'blue labour' pundits seem to think she is. I initially had the same impression of her as you did at the start of the 2020 leadership election. However the more I saw the more issues there were.
In said leadership election she pushed for keeping freedom of movement with the EU (not only re-opening brexit but also pushing for the most unpopular bit of the whole arrangement).
She also parrots whatever stupid woke line is doled out on twitter as readily as Starmer does.
Maybe you've seen something I haven't, or maybe she's just 'the starter for 10'. Either way the underlying logic of the candidate that should be found is solid.
The closest people I can think of that fit who you are looking for are Gloria De Piero or Caroline Flint (Both of whom also have issues) but both are now out of parliament. People like them either lost their seats in 2019 or were pushed out the party under Corbyn (and are now replaced with the aforementioned communists)
In general, there is even more of a dearth of decent 'operators' in Labour than in the conservatives. They disproportionally take their MPs from Law and (non-STEM) academia, hence why so many act like the clueless remainers in london despite holding constituency's in poor places far from Westminster.
Having said that, happy to see other suggestions of labour MPs that might have potential.
Very interesting. Very. In a nutshell - for the good of the people /country whatever colour you are red or blue . We basically can’t go on like this without VL in No.10. It won’t change , the old dinosaurs won’t let it . I’m a conservative South East dwelling Brexiteer. It’s done . Let’s not go on about it. Those changes that needed to happen after however I fear won’t … not without fundamental change. Even I can see how trying to get someone in Labour to steer the party back to its original roots, the common man… the working man and his family can be seen as appealing . Heck after reading all that , I would consider voting for them.. because with the shit we’ve been through and looking ahead even more to get through we really really need someone on our side and at our table. Not just the red wall voters the true blue small business voters too! We are Nationalists …. Much like the original true reds … my only major concern is socialism…. You say ignore the ‘woke’( sorry I said it) shite and trans dribble and all the other political correctness on steroids …. But letting in another Labour Party makes me nervous … Will the socialism/commie mindset drip further into the government of this country and then we really are done for …dunno… but certainly something has to be done ! .
These views are not out of line with what many within Labour think, but our party is a sack of rats atm. We'd have to apply all this 4GW stuff internally before we get to deploy it against the Tories.
DC, I must say the last two posts are top drawer!!
Question about MRP, have you even seen this technique used for probabilities of obtaining planning permission? Combining generic planning laws, local unitary development plans, local community opinion, previous planning committee responses, local community deprived infrastructure etc. Could be utilised effectively pre acquisition, pre planning and during planning.
Also the piece by Cornell on the thermodynamical nature of war was very interesting. Have you come across any similar reports covering regional and or international capital flows (would have thought more addressable post Covid with voluntary data provision)?
Questions about article:
1)Please do not preemptively dismiss this question - the left on crime:
Could the policy of increased prison rehabilitation/better conditions be sold to the public concerned about crime?
In Norway, the recidivism rate has fallen since the introduction of a prison system that actually treats prisoners well and tries to rehabilitate them (https://borgenproject.org/norways-prison-system/). By contrast, British prisons have gruelling conditions (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49324718) and furthermore bad prison conditions are linked to recidivism (e.g. allowing family visits reduces probability of recidivism https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/243718/evidence-reduce-reoffending.pdf theres more information confirming this).
2) Can the Green New Deal policy be useful in attracting votes for Labour? (policy details https://www.labourgnd.uk/gnd-explained)
3) There have been internal disagreements in Labour over raising the minimum wage (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58713344). Is raising or lowering the minimum wage better for attracting votes?
4) What should Labour's policy be on housing?
5) Another please do not preemptively dismiss question - how should Labour deal with Scotland and Scottish independence?
6) Labour policy on China (some on the left think China is an over exaggerated danger https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/08/china-military-power-zhengzhou-flooding-climate-crisis)?
7) If Labour uses this article and wins, will you accept an Order of Lenin from Jeremy Corbyn?
Some interesting ideas here, but Labour's main problem is not the leader (though clearly Starmer is useless and Nandy isn't strong enough) but the party itself. The way it chooses, finances and trains candidates - so that they're all on the same page - as...as what exactly? What actually is Labour's political philosophy? Then maybe do something about the idiotic way it chooses its leaders... And then consider this - exactly how many CLP's do you imagine will discuss, or be allowed to discuss, these ideas in the coming weeks? There you go...
This is excellent advice that I am almost certain will not be taken.
1) 'Tough on crime; tough on the causes of crime'.
The Left do not think crime is caused by bad people behaving badly; rather they believe it is caused by *insert social buzzword here*. The fact this policy has been tried for entire 1900s is beside the point (see https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP99-111/RP99-111.pdf pg 14 - yes, despite the medical advances from the 1960s we've managed to double the murder rate!). Another fun example is the burglary rate is basically zero when it's raining...
You don't need to increase police numbers/funding. You need them on the street deterring crime, but the Left believe it's deprivation not depravity.
2) Social engineering is Fabianism to the core
Why would they give up ideas like LGBTQIALMNOP or The Climate Crisis when they are goldmines for manipulating how people think and behave?
3) How does Labour win without Scotland?
A genuine question. I can't find 320 seats in England/Wales that they could win. If they have 50, or even 30, seats from the SNP then maybe, but 'England's stopping us doing anything' is depressing effective north of the border. Labour currently have 1 (one) MP from Scotland.
Minor correction: "look at how elite graduates fell for Stalinist propaganda in the 1930s"
They were already fully onboard. Communism is a Western idea (Marx = German buried in Highgate). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_General_Strike ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Reed_(journalist) .
And as we're on the subject, it's always nice to mention the Rand Rebellion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Rebellion . The CPSA joined, informally, with the ANC after WW2, just 25 years after 'Workers of the World unite and fight for a white South Africa'.
Gill
1) If you had been in charge, what would you have done about Covid? What are your views on 'The Great Barrington Declaration' and the relative success of Sweden?
2) Why are you so critical of David Davis? I admire him for his 'civil liberties' stance especially regarding ID cards. A covid pass can lead to a digital ID system which, in the hands of any of our governments, is a scary thought.
3) I like the post and agree with much of it.
For all the Tories reading DCs post with their head in their hands - it will never, ever happen.
In "Patterns of Conflict", Boyd made extensive reference to the moral level of warfare. Congruity between one's actions and one's morality is how you keep people fighting under incredible duress over long periods of time. Actions that decouple from morality will serve to isolate a side from their allies. The master stroke of the last 80 years has been a program to redefine and invert what is evil and what is good. At least two generations are governed by inverted moral axioms that consistently bear bitter fruit. The reason "do-gooders" has been a pejorative for decades is because the people in question are so utterly convinced of the righteousness of their actions, the terrible results are written off as an acceptable cost. The reason 'do-gooders' consistently get away with ruining everything is because the vast majority of the public share their moral beliefs and differ only in conviction. The nutters DC refers to are not isolated activists, but the tip of a vast spear. Just as an infantryman has 10 men in the logistical chain behind him, each activist represents hundreds who align with them on a moral plane and whose support can be assured.
For the Labour Party to adopt this plan of action, it would have to publicly defect from Wokism and that will never be permitted to happen. This is to reject what they think to be good and adopt what they think to be evil. The Outer Party of the Cathedral (a term I detest) is completely converged by this inverted morality and it will eat alive anyone who dares to recant their faith. I know DC regards the culture war as an unimportant sideshow that gets in the way of real conversations, but he is mistaken to write it off so lightly. The ideology that grips the highest echelons of society is bent upon destroying family, nation, civilisation, beauty and truth. Its adherents behave in a coordinated fashion over long time scales and have manoeuvred their way into every node of influence and power. True believers in the inverted moral order have enacted laws that give them the authority of the state to enforce their will on the unwilling and there is no movement to remove these laws from the statute books because nobody believes they are wrong.
The culture war is not a sideshow, but the heart of the system's inability to govern well. It is a disagreement on an axiomatic level about what is right and wrong. And until that is resolved by deliberate and concerted effort, the entropic slide into chaos and mayhem will remain a feature and not a bug.