... and socially stratified Britian, where social mobility is impossible?
For example, look back at their plan for school league tables, which was supposed to promote competition amongst schools, thus causing them to preform better. What has happened is that schools rated highly attract people into the area, making the property prices sky-rocket, thus forcing the poorer people into schools with a poorer level of education.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought the Labour party stood for a more equal Britian (Supposedly stemming form their socialist-ish roots). This was either a lie, or they have failed miserably.
Can anyone please explain this to me?
2007-09-28 10:23:40 · 6 answers · asked by The Bassline Libertine 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
They got so demoralized by being beaten by Thatcher that they moved towards the centre. After all, that's where elections are won and lost.
2007-09-28 10:32:18 · answer #1 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.....You are not wrong.....There is no explanation, It would take me at least 10 hours to explain poitical history to anyone, and I am definitely no expert. It was no lie initially, the Labour movement grew from socialist principles, ie that the gains of the capitalist were dependent on it's labour force. therefore it's labour force should benefit from that profit. This led to improvement for the working man/woman. Cut to 21c we are now back in the same situation with "cheap" labour undermining a fair wage for the indigenous worker. What does that teach us? That profit is all! Yes, we poor workers may be better off, but in comparison to our "masters" we are even further behind. This is the argument at basic........Please feel free to comment, Good luck .
2007-09-28 11:09:14 · answer #2 · answered by Willow 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
New Labour moved from a social democratic position to a neo-liberal "third way" position, one which mixed moderate social liberalism with market capitalist policies. It's probable that the majority of Labour's Parliamentary party are still liberals or social democrats, but the manner in which the neo-liberal tendency has seized control has left the rest of the party isolated and divided. The Labour Party membership at large still represents a social democratic base, but it remains to be seen that this base can reclaim the Party from the "market is the only way" clique.
2007-09-28 12:51:40 · answer #3 · answered by nic_ess 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's why the call politics queer. and were the saying politics make strange bed fellows comes from.
the parties don't and have not stood for anyone or thing except them selves for a very long time. from the beginning of time i think.
2007-09-28 11:14:23 · answer #4 · answered by IHATETHEEUSKI 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because Tony Blair and his ilk hijacked the old Labour Party instead of starting a new one of his own
2007-09-28 10:40:54 · answer #5 · answered by Eddie D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
because new labour are integrity free.
2007-09-29 05:27:36 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋