"Now, the party appears to be preparing to swap leaders, installing someone the wider country never actually voted for. Sure, he’s popular up North, but what about the rest of the country? Did the British public vote for him?
The only democratic move left for the Labour Party is to call a general election and let the voice of the people be heard. The electorate voted for Starmer, not Burnham. If Starmer goes, the country deserves its say."
This statement is not correct. We have a parliamentary system where at the national elections, we vote for our constituency MP. The whole country is not voting for Kier Starmer or Andy Burnham (or Rishi Sunak in the last election) unless they are your constituency MP.
Whilst I'm clearly not a fan of the big state collectivist instinct, it is not true that the only democratic move left for the Labour Party is to call a general election. This is why the conservatives didn't call one when changing leader.
Another election is not going to solve anything. Democracy in it's purest sense is two wolves and a sheep voting on who to eat for dinner. Unless we can understand the limits of government and use of force and coercion, unless we move back towards a free society which comes with personal responsibility; every election will be a swing from one side to the other without the necessary improvement in human flourishing.
I think you’ve missed the entire point, it’s not that we don’t have a parliamentary system or “a free society” my point was clear. In the last election the country voted for Starmer and the Labour Party. Not Burnham. I don’t argue about our parliamentary system or democracy. But the hypocrisy of Labour. They’ve called for general elections ever since Boris Johnson stepped down. So, if they’re serious and honest, the only decent thing for them is to call a general election and let the country decide who should be PM.
Completely agree about the hypocrisy and more than Labour I'd say all parties including Labour, Conservatives Reform, Liberal Democrats etc show this.
Whether people thought they were voting for Starmer and not Burnham at the last election doesn't change the reality that they voted for their representative at constituency level i.e. their MP and not for the party leader. No amount of wishing this or believing it will make it true.
Calling for an election would negate the correct characterisation of hypocrisy however on what basis and definition would that be decent? What then is the outcome when we swing from one branch of collectivism to another without realising and having the tools to address the deep seated structural issues with finances and incentives and trade offs?
But last time I checked the Prime minister is also an MP with a constituency 👀🤔 so reading this I’m wondering what’s your solution? You seem to identify the problem in your opinion, I would disagree with you on it, but what’s your solution?
You are calling for an action - a general election based on a belief that people voted for Starmer.
I'm simply trying to explain that this is not correct as even if people believed they were voting for their Labour candidate in their constituency for Starmer as leader to be PM, what we all did in reality was vote on who we want to represent us within our constituency.
Believing we are doing something different doesn't change what we actually did.
I don't like the outcome and especially what I would call liberty destroying big state policies that we have.
Also I would be cautious in saying this action (calling for a general election) is a solution and rising to your challenge to offer a one action solution? What the FFF project has identified and repeatedly reiterated that the public in the majority want high intervention and high spending by the state and low taxes for themselves which suffers from its own challenges. The FFF project is doing a fantastic piece in changing the window of acceptable opinion on this big interventionist and redistributive setup and that is the hard work needed to first change hearts and minds.
I may well be wrong and you may be right. I'm a stickler for principle and purity which I'm told is unhelpful so please accept my apologies in advance.
I think it was a mistake to call for Starmer to go as the replacement was worse. Best for no GE now until Burnham has shown how incompetent he is.
Please check your inbox too
I agree….lets see what happens
"Now, the party appears to be preparing to swap leaders, installing someone the wider country never actually voted for. Sure, he’s popular up North, but what about the rest of the country? Did the British public vote for him?
The only democratic move left for the Labour Party is to call a general election and let the voice of the people be heard. The electorate voted for Starmer, not Burnham. If Starmer goes, the country deserves its say."
This statement is not correct. We have a parliamentary system where at the national elections, we vote for our constituency MP. The whole country is not voting for Kier Starmer or Andy Burnham (or Rishi Sunak in the last election) unless they are your constituency MP.
Whilst I'm clearly not a fan of the big state collectivist instinct, it is not true that the only democratic move left for the Labour Party is to call a general election. This is why the conservatives didn't call one when changing leader.
Another election is not going to solve anything. Democracy in it's purest sense is two wolves and a sheep voting on who to eat for dinner. Unless we can understand the limits of government and use of force and coercion, unless we move back towards a free society which comes with personal responsibility; every election will be a swing from one side to the other without the necessary improvement in human flourishing.
I think you’ve missed the entire point, it’s not that we don’t have a parliamentary system or “a free society” my point was clear. In the last election the country voted for Starmer and the Labour Party. Not Burnham. I don’t argue about our parliamentary system or democracy. But the hypocrisy of Labour. They’ve called for general elections ever since Boris Johnson stepped down. So, if they’re serious and honest, the only decent thing for them is to call a general election and let the country decide who should be PM.
So you’ve got to read between the lines.
Completely agree about the hypocrisy and more than Labour I'd say all parties including Labour, Conservatives Reform, Liberal Democrats etc show this.
Whether people thought they were voting for Starmer and not Burnham at the last election doesn't change the reality that they voted for their representative at constituency level i.e. their MP and not for the party leader. No amount of wishing this or believing it will make it true.
Calling for an election would negate the correct characterisation of hypocrisy however on what basis and definition would that be decent? What then is the outcome when we swing from one branch of collectivism to another without realising and having the tools to address the deep seated structural issues with finances and incentives and trade offs?
But last time I checked the Prime minister is also an MP with a constituency 👀🤔 so reading this I’m wondering what’s your solution? You seem to identify the problem in your opinion, I would disagree with you on it, but what’s your solution?
You are calling for an action - a general election based on a belief that people voted for Starmer.
I'm simply trying to explain that this is not correct as even if people believed they were voting for their Labour candidate in their constituency for Starmer as leader to be PM, what we all did in reality was vote on who we want to represent us within our constituency.
Believing we are doing something different doesn't change what we actually did.
I don't like the outcome and especially what I would call liberty destroying big state policies that we have.
Also I would be cautious in saying this action (calling for a general election) is a solution and rising to your challenge to offer a one action solution? What the FFF project has identified and repeatedly reiterated that the public in the majority want high intervention and high spending by the state and low taxes for themselves which suffers from its own challenges. The FFF project is doing a fantastic piece in changing the window of acceptable opinion on this big interventionist and redistributive setup and that is the hard work needed to first change hearts and minds.
I may well be wrong and you may be right. I'm a stickler for principle and purity which I'm told is unhelpful so please accept my apologies in advance.