This article by Seamus Milne in the Guardian is a classic of his style of journalism. He addresses a political issue, says some good things and counters the ignorant perception of other things. Then just when you think he has made his case fairly he tacks on a lot of extraneous socialism that has more to do with his private view of society than the issue he is supposed to be discussing: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/25/theyre-saying-miliband-is-weird-because-he-could-win
Some points from the article:
“He's weak. He's a loser. The public think he's weird.” Conservatives are not saying this (apart from the ghastly Dan Hodges, although he is not officially a Conservative). Labour insiders are generating this “New Labour whispering campaign”.
“…with Labour's parliamentary boundary advantage and a little help from UKIP, he might actually win” Winning through these false advantages would not be a win worth having. Labour would from the outset be seen as an illegitimate administration, alienating more people from the established system.
“Blairite and Brownite diehards” Who are the Brownites? Is anyone seriously thinking of bringing Gordon Brown back, either in person or as an ideology?
“From the Independent newspaper and City financiers to New Labour veterans like Lords Myners and Mandelson and shadow cabinet operators such as Ed Balls and Chris Leslie” Apart from City financiers this is a list of lefties. It rather proves the view that Ed Miliband is a divisive figure (and divisiveness stems from weakness at the top).
“Miliband's caution and equivocation partly stem from his lack of support in the shadow cabinet and parliament, and a determination to maintain party unity at all costs.” True union can only come from genuine love. Ed Miliband does not love the Labour party – his distaste for the people (as opposed to his love of the ideas) is obvious.
“…he himself is a product of New Labour politics, and has failed to mobilise his own base of support.” Is this because having gained the Labour leadership he does not know what to do next? Seamus Milne makes an oblique comparison with Margaret Thatcher – but from the start Margaret Thatcher knew exactly what she wanted to do and planned for it thoroughly.
“Miliband succeeds when he's bold… that means bringing to heel the briefers and rivals who would take Labour backwards and turning the tables on his media tormentors.” And how would he bring to heel these people? Sackings? Denunciations? Expulsions? This would mean hurting people, and this is one thing that Ed Miliband seems unable to do (for all the extravagant talk of fratricide - which in any case was probably a mistake and not the outcome he intended).
Some points from the article:
“He's weak. He's a loser. The public think he's weird.” Conservatives are not saying this (apart from the ghastly Dan Hodges, although he is not officially a Conservative). Labour insiders are generating this “New Labour whispering campaign”.
“…with Labour's parliamentary boundary advantage and a little help from UKIP, he might actually win” Winning through these false advantages would not be a win worth having. Labour would from the outset be seen as an illegitimate administration, alienating more people from the established system.
“Blairite and Brownite diehards” Who are the Brownites? Is anyone seriously thinking of bringing Gordon Brown back, either in person or as an ideology?
“From the Independent newspaper and City financiers to New Labour veterans like Lords Myners and Mandelson and shadow cabinet operators such as Ed Balls and Chris Leslie” Apart from City financiers this is a list of lefties. It rather proves the view that Ed Miliband is a divisive figure (and divisiveness stems from weakness at the top).
“Miliband's caution and equivocation partly stem from his lack of support in the shadow cabinet and parliament, and a determination to maintain party unity at all costs.” True union can only come from genuine love. Ed Miliband does not love the Labour party – his distaste for the people (as opposed to his love of the ideas) is obvious.
“…he himself is a product of New Labour politics, and has failed to mobilise his own base of support.” Is this because having gained the Labour leadership he does not know what to do next? Seamus Milne makes an oblique comparison with Margaret Thatcher – but from the start Margaret Thatcher knew exactly what she wanted to do and planned for it thoroughly.
“Miliband succeeds when he's bold… that means bringing to heel the briefers and rivals who would take Labour backwards and turning the tables on his media tormentors.” And how would he bring to heel these people? Sackings? Denunciations? Expulsions? This would mean hurting people, and this is one thing that Ed Miliband seems unable to do (for all the extravagant talk of fratricide - which in any case was probably a mistake and not the outcome he intended).
No comments:
Post a Comment