Good piece. The feeling I get from the Labour leadership is that it lacks confidence.
From naively cutting the Winter fuel allowance at the behest of some treasury wonk who never stood for election, to parroting Reform UK policy, to running the world's first incognito Comms, the common theme is they don't realise they're in power, or they don't have the confidence to use it.
I'm one of the few who still quite like the idea of a Starmer government. Essentially an ordinary bloke who rose on merit to achieve high office. No Eton network to fall back on. No media buddies to big him up. No union to install him. A long record of public service. What's not to like?
But he has to realise he's in the big chair now. This is not a drill. He has to have the confidence to state his convictions and vision for the country clearly. I don't believe one of them is a "culturally coherent" populace, or impoverished public services. They don't feature is any of his backstory, so why are they so central now?
Anyone, esp McSweeny (who's own legend as the Barking BNP Butcher is patently false), who doesn't share those values, or is willing to equivocate for political expediency, must go.
I was going to comment to say something like this, so thanks for saving me the trouble:
"But he has to realise he's in the big chair now. This is not a drill. He has to have the confidence to state his convictions and vision for the country clearly"
This is my biggest disappointment in Starmer. And, at this point, what has he got to lose? Constantly trying to second-guess what Reform-curious voters are going to like has got him nowhere. Worse than nowhere. He might as well state his values clearly, and act on them.
I feel that he's constantly looking over his shoulder, wondering how this will "play out" in the media. This could work if his comms team were the best in the business, but the last 12 months should demonstrate that that's not happening. It just makes him look like someone else is in charge
Another excellent summary Ian. Given the economic and social disaster Labour faced once in power and continuing to the present, I think it was reasonable to give Starmer a period of grace to try to turn the oil tanker around. But the Labour comms continues to be an absolute bin fire. For example whoever thought it was appropriate for the PM to comment on what artists at Glastonbury say on stage but not about billionaires trying to ferment civil war in the UK needs to go asap. And I think the other factor involved here is the rise of Zack Polanski - while it’s easy to make lots of promises when you are a long way from power, he’s a way better communicator than Starmer and he absolutely rinsing the Labour social media. Given Labour were banking on the “it’s us or Reform next time” mantra at the next election, Polanski’s approach has given the Centrists somewhere else to go and it’s very difficult to see how Labour fight that appeal in the short term.
The fact that we've only just had a Deputy Leadership election, which was far more irritating than exciting to just about everyone, makes the prospect of a leadership election even more batshit crazy. We've all been poisoned by 10 years of media-driven (social, print & broadcast media) soap opera politics where we all feel obliged to serve up the next juicy high-octane drama for Chris fucking Mason and the rest of them to get pant-wettingly excited about. As you yourself put it: you’re the fucking government. Govern.
I agree with much of this, while still occasionally wavering towards the opposite conclusion. The lack of a moral core to Starmer's politics - despite evidence of such a thing in his legal career and private life - just feels absolutely ruinous. I know, objectively, that ditching an election winning leader 18 months in is mad - but I just can't bring myself to say it's a good idea to keep the guy who can't say "This is racist and wrong" unless it momentarily feels electorally convenient. He just feels like a moral vacuum.
also I know this is a side effect of the way substack works, but the fact the image on the front page has cut off the top of Starmer's head feels nicely symbolic and very funny
Thank you for updating me on what’s happening on the other side of the pond, even though it is depressing as hell to hear that the ostensible progressive party in the UK is falling into the same trap as the Democrats, of listening to soulless consultants and donors lulling them into becoming “centrist” zombies. And that Starmer is repeating Biden’s one weird trick of instituting some great policies while doing nothing to let people know they exist. Maddening!
But the one big question I have from listening to your very colorful recording is: how exactly does your dog take showers by himself?
Thanks for putting this together. You make a reasonable case for ejecting McSweeney who you say is ill-suited to the role of chief of staff. For Starmer, this would seem like a good bet to reduce the risk of being replaced himself. However, I wonder if ditching McSweeney would call into question (again), Starmer's appointments of his top team and his judgement. Perhaps, cocooned in one of No. 10's little Cubby-holes, they have convinced themselves they are stuck together and must ride it out as one.
I think the brutal reality which I’m coming to is that you were completely and utterly right with How Westminster Works. There are no parties with the system to find and raise up true talent. The more establishment the party the less it can solve any issues because it’s rotten (not in a particularly exciting or corrupt way… it’s just MOLDY).
I don’t know what the future holds, but I suspect the next election will fundamentally break the FPTP system. There will be some form of coalition… where the vision and narrative comes from the minority partner and Labour just provides the machinery to govern. If that even makes sense.
I no longer have any sympathy for any one in the Labour Party. They continue to use OUR tax money to pay for a genocide. This is unforgivable. The fact that anyone thinks it could be forgiven by economic recovery etc shows just how far we have fallen as a society. I used to have so much respect for Jess Phillips, Angela Raynor and others, but now, once in power they have shown us who they really are. Actively supporting not just the slaughter abroad, but the deaths of older people from freezing (they even predicted how many would die before callously going ahead anyway), forced thousands more children into poverty, actively worsened racism leading to racially motivated riots, rapes and killings. Destroyed our civil rights to protest, are busily bringing in new ways to destroy what's left of out nature depleted country. They have no morals, no ethics, they are well and truly bought. They have broken every promise, every pledge they ever made to grab power. Nothing that any of them say can be believed any more.
I want them gone. Not just Kier Starmer, all of them.
Well said. But many will see this as 'naive', 'unrealistic', even 'juvenile'. They will say you have to put on big boy pants and make tough choices, and if that means children being blown up, disabled people struggling to survive, people being locked up for holding a sign, or the world descending into climate chaos, then that's how you show you have what it takes. Realpolitik. Which means always favouring the strong over the weak. Always siding with the powerful over the vulnerable. Follow the money, and let flow where it will.
Personally, I’m feeling more emotional, less analytical. Visceral even. I am outraged by Labour and the ripple effect of their actions and inactions, which will be felt for a long time I think. We seem to be increasingly a fractured society. They had us, they had power and opportunity and gave us hope. Voters -like me -are their problem. I am done with them and I cannot see anyone in the party changing that. If that is irrational, so be it, they have been arrogant and shown no moral courage or integrity ,decency, advocacy. Not one quality I can admire. Simply more of the same (old) politics but worse -as if we could ever have imagined that scenario being a possibility 🤷♀️😑
Firing McSweeney, while an appealing idea, isn't going to fix the problem. The problem is the guy who hired him. I used to work as a director in TV, and in my very first job I was making a total balls of it, and when that became clear, who got fired? My assistant director. Because in TV and movies the accepted wisdom is, you don't fire the director - it looks terrible and it rattles everyone. So Assistant Heads roll, and the person responsible carries on making a balls of everything. The show I made was shit and nobody watched it. Over the years I got better, but it was an expensive education for all involved.
Thanks for your integrity in owning up to your past failings. The thing about McSweeney is that he is the idea of a good comms director for the British culturally shallow like Starmer and his crew. McSweeney, a man raised in pre Emerald Tiger rural Ireland, seems to believe that British culture and the voting demographic he wishes to appeal to are exactly the same as the manipulative simplistic cultural stereotypes exhibited by the old British comedy reruns on Radio Four Extra. The most shameful aspect of this being that no one at Starmer’s HQ seems to be able to tell the difference either.
Well said, and sums up my own views on this. Starmer is pretty crap at many important parts of the job; but even if replacing him were easy (which it isn’t), it wouldn’t solve the underlying problems. It might provide a short bump in the polls, and then they would go back down again a month later, as the small boats keep coming and the prices keep rising and you still have to wait ages to see a doctor.
Also, it would make Labour MPs look ridiculous. They all campaigned less than 18 months ago to make this guy Prime Minister! And now they’re telling us he’s the wrong man for the job? As you say, if they decided the solution to the country’s woes was to descend into intra-party fighting and spend weeks on a leadership contest, the public would not be impressed, any more than they were when the Tories did it.
No, we’re stuck with Starmer (short of him randomly resigning or becoming unavailable for personal reasons). But he can fix some of the things listed here while still in office, and dumping McSweeney would be a good start.
I *would* like to see Starmer go, not least because he doesn't deserve to keep the job. But I entirely take your point about it possibly not changing much & fully admit to being at a loss about who I'd prefer. Ditching McSweeney is therefore vital, imo. Something absolutely must be done.
For the avoidance of doubt, BTW, I read the substack to find out your opinion. I *listen* to it to hear your exasperation, the interventions from Thanos or other noises, your frustration with the tech and the bits where you edit on the go. Never change.
I will never tire of how you sign off. Keep them coming. And thank you for your level headedness in all this madness. You make my weekends better as a result.
“Labour will win the next election if inflation is under control, growth has returned & public services have improved.” To that add, if the small boats issue is under control - it may be painful for liberals to acknowledge it, but it has resonance across a majority of voters.
Labour could draw lessons from their Labor counterparts in Australia and issues they had 15+ years ago after 15+ years of Oz LNP Tories under John Howard.
Australian Labor then lost power for another decade over leadership fights during their term, constant Murdoch led dog whistling and wedging with frequent polling on divisive issues (while disappearing the right to protect them).
First, ditch McSweeney and get out of the London media & advisor bubble; assess threats, develop strategy and policy internally, to rebut and counter right wing talking points.
Threats are ageing and low info white regional voters (see Brexit), Murdoch led RW media ecosystem including BBC and social media influencers (platforming Farage). Related are the US fossil fueled 'free market' Atlas Koch and anti-immigrant Tanton Network think tanks (see Tufton & Fox News) that lobby both media types and MPs.
Avoid being reactive and reflexive following imported US white Christian nationalist &/or libertarian talking points, but addressing voters' perceived issues and a strategy to communicate, preferably at the grass roots vs RW MSM; importantly explain immigration and demography well.
Major part of Australian LNP Tories success was due to ageing demography and old white Australia attitudes became anti-immigrant; promoted by Howard, Murdoch, Koch and Tanton think tanks.
It was achieved by, one guesses, pollster Sir Lynton Crosby following US 'deep south' and GOP methods (sentiments shared with many older Dixie Dems) and anti-immigrant agitprop to pare off older Labor to vote Conservative on social issues ie. let their inner bigotry out.
Related, is the Orwellian messaging which borrows from the old eugenics movement of Tanton and deep south 'segregation economics' of Kochs' muse Buchanan (behind Hayek's bastards) ecology and freedom.
Applied to 'immigrants' eg. 'limits to growth' or 'degrowth' and 'sustainable population' to match 'carrying capacity'; old ethnic separatist tropes masquerading as environmental and/or demographic.
Good piece. The feeling I get from the Labour leadership is that it lacks confidence.
From naively cutting the Winter fuel allowance at the behest of some treasury wonk who never stood for election, to parroting Reform UK policy, to running the world's first incognito Comms, the common theme is they don't realise they're in power, or they don't have the confidence to use it.
I'm one of the few who still quite like the idea of a Starmer government. Essentially an ordinary bloke who rose on merit to achieve high office. No Eton network to fall back on. No media buddies to big him up. No union to install him. A long record of public service. What's not to like?
But he has to realise he's in the big chair now. This is not a drill. He has to have the confidence to state his convictions and vision for the country clearly. I don't believe one of them is a "culturally coherent" populace, or impoverished public services. They don't feature is any of his backstory, so why are they so central now?
Anyone, esp McSweeny (who's own legend as the Barking BNP Butcher is patently false), who doesn't share those values, or is willing to equivocate for political expediency, must go.
I was going to comment to say something like this, so thanks for saving me the trouble:
"But he has to realise he's in the big chair now. This is not a drill. He has to have the confidence to state his convictions and vision for the country clearly"
This is my biggest disappointment in Starmer. And, at this point, what has he got to lose? Constantly trying to second-guess what Reform-curious voters are going to like has got him nowhere. Worse than nowhere. He might as well state his values clearly, and act on them.
I feel that he's constantly looking over his shoulder, wondering how this will "play out" in the media. This could work if his comms team were the best in the business, but the last 12 months should demonstrate that that's not happening. It just makes him look like someone else is in charge
"wondering how this will "play out" in the media"
Someone should tell him: it's playing out very badly
Also, just reposted by Adam, should you need some more background
https://substack.com/@adambienkov/note/c-172130829?r=3riobv
Another excellent summary Ian. Given the economic and social disaster Labour faced once in power and continuing to the present, I think it was reasonable to give Starmer a period of grace to try to turn the oil tanker around. But the Labour comms continues to be an absolute bin fire. For example whoever thought it was appropriate for the PM to comment on what artists at Glastonbury say on stage but not about billionaires trying to ferment civil war in the UK needs to go asap. And I think the other factor involved here is the rise of Zack Polanski - while it’s easy to make lots of promises when you are a long way from power, he’s a way better communicator than Starmer and he absolutely rinsing the Labour social media. Given Labour were banking on the “it’s us or Reform next time” mantra at the next election, Polanski’s approach has given the Centrists somewhere else to go and it’s very difficult to see how Labour fight that appeal in the short term.
The fact that we've only just had a Deputy Leadership election, which was far more irritating than exciting to just about everyone, makes the prospect of a leadership election even more batshit crazy. We've all been poisoned by 10 years of media-driven (social, print & broadcast media) soap opera politics where we all feel obliged to serve up the next juicy high-octane drama for Chris fucking Mason and the rest of them to get pant-wettingly excited about. As you yourself put it: you’re the fucking government. Govern.
I agree with much of this, while still occasionally wavering towards the opposite conclusion. The lack of a moral core to Starmer's politics - despite evidence of such a thing in his legal career and private life - just feels absolutely ruinous. I know, objectively, that ditching an election winning leader 18 months in is mad - but I just can't bring myself to say it's a good idea to keep the guy who can't say "This is racist and wrong" unless it momentarily feels electorally convenient. He just feels like a moral vacuum.
also I know this is a side effect of the way substack works, but the fact the image on the front page has cut off the top of Starmer's head feels nicely symbolic and very funny
Thank you for updating me on what’s happening on the other side of the pond, even though it is depressing as hell to hear that the ostensible progressive party in the UK is falling into the same trap as the Democrats, of listening to soulless consultants and donors lulling them into becoming “centrist” zombies. And that Starmer is repeating Biden’s one weird trick of instituting some great policies while doing nothing to let people know they exist. Maddening!
But the one big question I have from listening to your very colorful recording is: how exactly does your dog take showers by himself?
Thanks for putting this together. You make a reasonable case for ejecting McSweeney who you say is ill-suited to the role of chief of staff. For Starmer, this would seem like a good bet to reduce the risk of being replaced himself. However, I wonder if ditching McSweeney would call into question (again), Starmer's appointments of his top team and his judgement. Perhaps, cocooned in one of No. 10's little Cubby-holes, they have convinced themselves they are stuck together and must ride it out as one.
Yes there's a real danger of this
I think the brutal reality which I’m coming to is that you were completely and utterly right with How Westminster Works. There are no parties with the system to find and raise up true talent. The more establishment the party the less it can solve any issues because it’s rotten (not in a particularly exciting or corrupt way… it’s just MOLDY).
I don’t know what the future holds, but I suspect the next election will fundamentally break the FPTP system. There will be some form of coalition… where the vision and narrative comes from the minority partner and Labour just provides the machinery to govern. If that even makes sense.
In with you on the next election. We're atthe point where fptp simply can't handle the preferences
I no longer have any sympathy for any one in the Labour Party. They continue to use OUR tax money to pay for a genocide. This is unforgivable. The fact that anyone thinks it could be forgiven by economic recovery etc shows just how far we have fallen as a society. I used to have so much respect for Jess Phillips, Angela Raynor and others, but now, once in power they have shown us who they really are. Actively supporting not just the slaughter abroad, but the deaths of older people from freezing (they even predicted how many would die before callously going ahead anyway), forced thousands more children into poverty, actively worsened racism leading to racially motivated riots, rapes and killings. Destroyed our civil rights to protest, are busily bringing in new ways to destroy what's left of out nature depleted country. They have no morals, no ethics, they are well and truly bought. They have broken every promise, every pledge they ever made to grab power. Nothing that any of them say can be believed any more.
I want them gone. Not just Kier Starmer, all of them.
Well said. But many will see this as 'naive', 'unrealistic', even 'juvenile'. They will say you have to put on big boy pants and make tough choices, and if that means children being blown up, disabled people struggling to survive, people being locked up for holding a sign, or the world descending into climate chaos, then that's how you show you have what it takes. Realpolitik. Which means always favouring the strong over the weak. Always siding with the powerful over the vulnerable. Follow the money, and let flow where it will.
Personally, I’m feeling more emotional, less analytical. Visceral even. I am outraged by Labour and the ripple effect of their actions and inactions, which will be felt for a long time I think. We seem to be increasingly a fractured society. They had us, they had power and opportunity and gave us hope. Voters -like me -are their problem. I am done with them and I cannot see anyone in the party changing that. If that is irrational, so be it, they have been arrogant and shown no moral courage or integrity ,decency, advocacy. Not one quality I can admire. Simply more of the same (old) politics but worse -as if we could ever have imagined that scenario being a possibility 🤷♀️😑
Firing McSweeney, while an appealing idea, isn't going to fix the problem. The problem is the guy who hired him. I used to work as a director in TV, and in my very first job I was making a total balls of it, and when that became clear, who got fired? My assistant director. Because in TV and movies the accepted wisdom is, you don't fire the director - it looks terrible and it rattles everyone. So Assistant Heads roll, and the person responsible carries on making a balls of everything. The show I made was shit and nobody watched it. Over the years I got better, but it was an expensive education for all involved.
Thanks for your integrity in owning up to your past failings. The thing about McSweeney is that he is the idea of a good comms director for the British culturally shallow like Starmer and his crew. McSweeney, a man raised in pre Emerald Tiger rural Ireland, seems to believe that British culture and the voting demographic he wishes to appeal to are exactly the same as the manipulative simplistic cultural stereotypes exhibited by the old British comedy reruns on Radio Four Extra. The most shameful aspect of this being that no one at Starmer’s HQ seems to be able to tell the difference either.
Well said, and sums up my own views on this. Starmer is pretty crap at many important parts of the job; but even if replacing him were easy (which it isn’t), it wouldn’t solve the underlying problems. It might provide a short bump in the polls, and then they would go back down again a month later, as the small boats keep coming and the prices keep rising and you still have to wait ages to see a doctor.
Also, it would make Labour MPs look ridiculous. They all campaigned less than 18 months ago to make this guy Prime Minister! And now they’re telling us he’s the wrong man for the job? As you say, if they decided the solution to the country’s woes was to descend into intra-party fighting and spend weeks on a leadership contest, the public would not be impressed, any more than they were when the Tories did it.
No, we’re stuck with Starmer (short of him randomly resigning or becoming unavailable for personal reasons). But he can fix some of the things listed here while still in office, and dumping McSweeney would be a good start.
I *would* like to see Starmer go, not least because he doesn't deserve to keep the job. But I entirely take your point about it possibly not changing much & fully admit to being at a loss about who I'd prefer. Ditching McSweeney is therefore vital, imo. Something absolutely must be done.
For the avoidance of doubt, BTW, I read the substack to find out your opinion. I *listen* to it to hear your exasperation, the interventions from Thanos or other noises, your frustration with the tech and the bits where you edit on the go. Never change.
I will never tire of how you sign off. Keep them coming. And thank you for your level headedness in all this madness. You make my weekends better as a result.
“Labour will win the next election if inflation is under control, growth has returned & public services have improved.” To that add, if the small boats issue is under control - it may be painful for liberals to acknowledge it, but it has resonance across a majority of voters.
The recording was hilarious.
Labour could draw lessons from their Labor counterparts in Australia and issues they had 15+ years ago after 15+ years of Oz LNP Tories under John Howard.
Australian Labor then lost power for another decade over leadership fights during their term, constant Murdoch led dog whistling and wedging with frequent polling on divisive issues (while disappearing the right to protect them).
First, ditch McSweeney and get out of the London media & advisor bubble; assess threats, develop strategy and policy internally, to rebut and counter right wing talking points.
Threats are ageing and low info white regional voters (see Brexit), Murdoch led RW media ecosystem including BBC and social media influencers (platforming Farage). Related are the US fossil fueled 'free market' Atlas Koch and anti-immigrant Tanton Network think tanks (see Tufton & Fox News) that lobby both media types and MPs.
Avoid being reactive and reflexive following imported US white Christian nationalist &/or libertarian talking points, but addressing voters' perceived issues and a strategy to communicate, preferably at the grass roots vs RW MSM; importantly explain immigration and demography well.
Major part of Australian LNP Tories success was due to ageing demography and old white Australia attitudes became anti-immigrant; promoted by Howard, Murdoch, Koch and Tanton think tanks.
It was achieved by, one guesses, pollster Sir Lynton Crosby following US 'deep south' and GOP methods (sentiments shared with many older Dixie Dems) and anti-immigrant agitprop to pare off older Labor to vote Conservative on social issues ie. let their inner bigotry out.
Related, is the Orwellian messaging which borrows from the old eugenics movement of Tanton and deep south 'segregation economics' of Kochs' muse Buchanan (behind Hayek's bastards) ecology and freedom.
Applied to 'immigrants' eg. 'limits to growth' or 'degrowth' and 'sustainable population' to match 'carrying capacity'; old ethnic separatist tropes masquerading as environmental and/or demographic.
"Fuck's sake, Thanos!"
Also:
"Fuck's sake, Keir!"