« | Home | »

Ed’s Enemies

Tags: |

Ed Miliband’s enemies in the Labour Party are indulging in luxury: a pointless, expensive thing that only people with four years to spend can afford. Up to a point, they resemble John Major’s enemies in the Tory Party – a chorus of Viv Nicholsons who spent, spent, spent down to the penury of 165 surviving MPs in 1997. Those Tories had a reason, if an absurd one. They were hung up on the EU as a conspiracy by the heirs of Hitler to abolish England. The other motive for hating Major was devotion (in the High Church sense) to Margaret Thatcher, Queen and Martyr.

Ed’s enemies have no discernible principle, however misguided. They dream only of David: limp, charming US conformist, token foreign secretary, but the rightful heir to the shining void of Blairism. Childish beyond words, their view is supplemented by the trivialist press. Sketchwriters, too idle to stay for any parliamentary business except the leaders’ set piece, expatiate on voice timbre, assurance quotient, facial appearance and high-profile oneupmanship. The government meanwhile is rolling over in contradictions, policy reversals and ‘clarifications’. The opposition won’t need a ‘stronger’ leader to defeat them at the next election. They might try calm or reticence or even unity – or that bit in the Brer Rabbit books about lying low and saying nothing.

Comments on “Ed’s Enemies”

  1. Phil Edwards says:

    This was a joke, but I think it would actually work – if Miliband dropped off the radar until six months before the next election, then gave a press conference announcing that the Labour party (a) still existed and (b) had policies different from the Coalition, they’d probably get a majority. It would certainly be better than his current strategy, which seems to involve asking himself what Blair would say, thinking of something slightly left-wing and splitting the difference. As for the neo-Blairites (post-Blairites? crypto-Blairites?), a period of silence on their part would be most welcome.

  2. Attrition says:

    Liarbour doesn’t have different policies, it’s the third tory partei of the coalition.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • deano on Stoke and Copeland: Neoliberal economic policies were designed to benefit the very richest alone, at the expense of everybody else. This latest justification being put ar...
    • Rikkeh on Stoke and Copeland: Exactly. The elephant curve shows us that neoliberalism has, in economic terms, been fairly benign for the world's poorest 10%, been hugely benefi...
    • suetonius on Stoke and Copeland: A few thoughts. One, the left needs to go back to it's roots. "One Big Union." No more defense of Western privilege. We're all in this together. ...
    • wearytruth on Stoke and Copeland: "Corbyn’s stated mission in leading Labour is to offer a break with the past and create an economy for the many, not the few." That was MY stated...
    • Ouessante on Stoke and Copeland: Stoke: Cons+UKIP 49.1%, Lab 37.1%. Saved only by a split vote. Hardly cause for Lab rejoicing I think. They should be very worried.

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

Advertisement Advertisement