Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[farfromtheland]

Those "who have no other means to be heard" do have as much voice as anybody else - a vote every few years.

Lobbyists have ongoing influence.

 

[briantrumpet]

OK, Suzanne Moore is a token lefty at the Telegraph, but they carried this:

 

[farfromtheland]

I keep trying to quote the Unite cut in Labour funding, weird no?

Anyhow, Labour knows damn well that if Labour politicians treat union members badly, the converse will occur.

This is not quite the same as paying in advance for favours, but you could say if the business funders don't get what they want they won't pay again. But they will get their interests favoured because Reform shares those interests.

 

[Psamathe]

I do think there is nuance between a union funding the Labour Party for the benefit of the general public, against a billionaire overseas individual with no interest in anything other than themselves.

I agree but also consider that unions are not entirely "for the benefit of the general public" but rather for the benefit their members.

I do see that unions have a stronger justification for influence that eg those recently donating to Reform. But not for me to say one group buying influence should be allowed and another disallowed. I do feel that money should not buy influence.

 

[farfromtheland]

The founding of the Labour party was a wrong fork.

It lead to the total betrayal of the principle of workers' control - ownership of the product of our labour was consciously ditched as an aspiration by Blair and Brown.

Maybe party politics could have achieved relatively better with more integrity , but state communism too has always betrayed the people when power became its own end.

What we need is means. The method is the essence of real democracy.