Dinosaurs against change

by Chris McLaughlin
Sunday, September 26th, 2010

The conservative right in Labour has moved swiftly and in a co-ordinated way to deligitimise Ed Miliband’s election as its party leader. David lost because he did not garner as many votes among MPs as his supporters were banking on, not because of the “unions”. The fact that Ed won more support among working people than the discredited (unjustly but still current) MPs should not be held against the result – one which all those who falsely say they will support the leadership are already picking apart in Manchester’s hotels and bars. Big supporter of David says he should now bow out. Why if he is such an asset to the party and country, I ask? Because he has just lost out to little brother is the answer. Typical of the infantile politics of new labour. There is a mission and they are not on it – the biggest danger to the power they want to resecure. As always, regressive. No understanding of the change that has already taken place among the electorate or the real task ahead. Tribal in an I’m-all-right-Jack-way. David has a place in the future on this country, but not as (shadow) Chancellor. If the deal done between Ed and Ed in the vote does not translate into Balls having the job then the whole point in having Ed is pointless.
It’s a turning point and no time for civil war, but the Right just can’t wait to start, and play straight inro the arms of the press they fear and the Tories they envy.
Chris McLaughlin, Editor, TRIBUNE
ps: please don’t anybody tell me again that the good thing about Blair was that he could win elections – one, Smith would have won in 1997, the vote has been declining until the Tories took a long time to choose an electable leader and three – whatever the achievements – is that really what you wanted a Labour government to do? Do you dismiss the deaths of innocenrt Iraqis and hate the working class and trade unionists so much?

The only place you can read all of Tribune's articles as soon as they are published is in the magazine. To find out more about subscribing from as little as £19, click here.

About The Author

Chris McLaughlin is Editor of Tribune
  • Anonymous

    Taking into consideration the relations between the last Labour PM but one and his Chancellor, I imagine the last thing that Ed will want is Balls in the position of Shadow: of course if he is obliged to give him the post, there could be trouble ahead.

  • uguagliance

    Were you entirely sober when you wrote that hate-filled screed?

  • Cmclaughlinw14

    Sober, yes. Battered by the relentless conservatism of new labour sados, yes. Hate? No. Passionate, yes. More a case of the truth hurts doncha think?

  • Anonymous

    “Heart on fire and brain on ice?” Not in this case.

    You’re meant to be the Editor, a senior professional writer, but your remarks were expressed with the kind of hostility that made me think that you were ready to chuck a metaphorical bottle at the crowd in the bar, and that I might well be in that crowd.

    You may think you are just passionate but all I felt was hate, even though I’m probably not someone who you would normally hate.

    If you aren’t a yob, why act like one?

  • Blythe

    I just hope that while of course Ed will want to bring unity to the party he has the balls to recognise he has to take out and crush the old guard, before they try to take him out and crush him.

  • Sippinatbells

    This comes across as a rant, lacking coherence, articulacy or foundation in solid fact. Many at the conference worried about Ed’s leadership are not on the “right” or envying the Tories, any more than Ed is the “Red” union puppet the media are portraying him as. As the Autumn Fabian Review has demonstrated, it is self-delusional fantasy for us to believe the electorate has shifted from the centre ground, and the feeling of public hostility towards Ed is already a legitimate cause for concern. If we want to oppose an administration as dangerous as Thatcher’s with an alternative vision, this can only be done from a standpoint that the public will take seriously – there is nothing “conservative” or right-wing about admitting to this cold reality. The fact is that on policy, you probably can’t get a cigarette paper between Ed and David really, but the public will respond to one and not the other. Like it or not, the unions DID swing the vote in Ed’s favour, and while that’s no big problem in the Labour fold, to the general public it is the kiss of death. Furthermore the general party membership overwhelmingly voted for David. Taken together these facts do not give us a great deal of cause for optimism come election time – that’s what I think, it’s what numerous others I’ve spoken to think, and I’ll be damned if any of us are remotely close to the “right” of the Party.

blog comments powered by Disqus