Like all Westminster parties, a party 99% composed of grifters who see politics as a means of becoming wealthier. Behind the scenes, most Tories and Labour mps socialise and generally share the same views.
this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
12 points (87.5% liked)
UK Politics
3291 readers
111 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It should come as no surprise, because they are not a liberal party. Labour are first and foremost a workers union party, and no matter how many BAME or LGBTQ+ policies they put out, they can all be easily overturned or replaced because not everyone in the party either believes in it, as its not a founding principal.
If you want a Liberal Labour party, then we would need to establish one, but trying to change an organisation as large as this is going to be an uphill battle.
I guess the other way would be to create a Labour Against non-White British group as a honeypot to oust applicants, but as we can see from this it's slow process. An entire group for discussing how to fuck over voters, and they only decide to suspend one?
So far ...
If you want a socially liberal party then being a part of a group that looks to mock and belittle minorities should be unacceptable.
Having a high profile token sacrifice, and seeing how much demand for blood remains is not a socially liberal policy.
Okay, I see your point, but they are still investigating. Give them a bit of a chance
I guess if this were reversed, so if this was an anti-labour unions group, and if a senior member was suspended for talking about wanting the Union to collapse then people would be up in arms that they are allowing any anti-union group to live inside Labour. But you'd be okay with that as long as they said they were investigating?
Sorry, but as far as I'm concerned being part of that group earns a suspension with a review, not the other way around.
Isn't it just an edgy humour group that has gone too fast? A lso, you can be assessed to WhatsApp groups without your approval.
Hence why i would talk about suspending while investigating not immediate dismissal.
Its all about priorities. If they are a liberal party moreso than a Union party then they would want to avoid even the appearance of being anti-socially liberal. Because they don't it shows that they really don't care about their appearance of being a liberal party and it's just a side hussle to keep the edge quiet. It would be dropped if it interfered with their main objectives (whatever they are).