Why are the UK Labour party so obsessed with working people?

Post Reply New Topic

So basically people on benefits or pensions can f**k off..

It's right in their name. They('re supposed to) represent Labour.

Yes, I will still vote for them despite currently being out of work but surely 'delivering for the British people' would be a fairer slogan?

Surely the party in government should represent the entire electorate?

Why do you vote with them if you don't agree with what the Party itself stands for? That doesn't make sense.

Because they're still better than the Tories and the Lib Dems are useless!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... e-man.html

The labour party do do far more for people on benefits than the tory party ever would.

If course all parties want people to work because working people put more into the economy.

You'd be better of not voting at all then using that logic.

Yes, well unfortunately in the UK we have a first past the post voting system so basically we're stuck with Labour or Tories.

Personally I'm hoping we get a hung parliament and a Labour/Lib Dem coalition.

The Tories were captured by Blairites years ago - no matter who wins elections to come the country will continue to swirl down the drain. The tiny sliver of difference between the two parties is nonsense like trans culture wars BS. Nothing important will change.

I suggest two options:

1) Vote for the party you hate the most. Whoever is in office will get blamed for the ever increasing violence and poverty, hurting them.

or

2) Don't vote. Then you can at least say "I didn't vote for this" or better yet "I refuse to legitimise this system of government and its inevitable results."

I know for a fact that there is a VERY large "conscious proletariat" in the UK, and as such, will maybe, reluctantly vote Labour, some of the time, and for sure this class would never vote for the Tories. That one side of your Duopoly which concerns itself with coddling that working class is obvious going to pander to the working class, and then when their voter base is sufficiently packed, they move the ratchet a bit to the left. But we all know what happens after that. That system never moves past a certain point.

Better to seek out your left and organize against that Duopoly.

Lots of people work, but some people work and barely tread water despite working. I'm not from the UK, but I thought that "Labour" was for the working class/hard working ( welders, truck drivers, postal workers, etc ). And regardless of if your working poor or not working poor, you're still poor and could be united in that. And what's wrong with that?

That's another reason why I'm a labour supporter. And no, I don't receive any benefits, nor do I want to, but if there ever comes a time where I have to then I'd feel more secure if labour was in.

Also, many autistic people require financial support, which I feel labour will be more in favour of. People with disabilities deserve financial support.

if i were a UK citizen i'd solidly support labour, as they remind me of our democrats. the righties/tories/GOP are just a bunch of arrogant toffs.

In the English speaking world labour parties have their origins in labour unions.

Like asking why do ice-cream shops sell ice-cream or why petrol stations sell petrol

LOL!^

Why is AMA so obsessed with medicine? Or the NBA so obsessed with basketball?

My guess is that by "working people" he means "common folks who have jobs", as opposed to "common folks who are unemployed". And he thinks that the Labor party favors the first at the expense of the later. Which they may or may not be doing.

And that he doesnt realize that the "Labor" in the name "Labor Party" means "workers". But that it means "workers" as opposed to "management", or commoners as opposed to the aristocracy. And so he doesnt realize how silly what he said sounds.

So...yeah you would think that a "Labor Party" would look after regular working people -whether they lose their jobs or not. So if they are pitting the unemployed workers against the employed workers then that might be an issue.

Since the 1990s the Labour party in Australia under Paul Keating and under Tony Blair in the UK have become right of centre parties that have re-braded themselves neo-liberal and broadened they support base to include socially liberal and economically conservative voters.

A little like "Greens parties" The world's first political parties to campaign on a predominantly environmental platform were the United Tasmania Group contested the April 1972 state election in Tasmania, Australia, and the Values Party of New Zealand, which contested the November 1972 New Zealand general election.

Since then political parties calling themselves "green" include groups like BLM, NAACP, Climate activists, LGBTQI, Disability rights (our current head of the Australian greens is disabled and is a disability advocate) immigration rights, native land rights etc etc....