I'm all for instrumental coalitions around specific issues: sometimes winning just has to take priority over less immediate concerns. But equally, the compromises they require can simply not be worth it - plus I can't work w someone who has a go at me when I go to the loo halfway through the meeting - ThreadSky

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social • 2 days ago

I'm all for instrumental coalitions around specific issues: sometimes winning just has to take priority over less immediate concerns. But equally, the compromises they require can simply not be worth it - plus I can't work w someone who has a go at me when I go to the loo halfway through the meeting

Reposted from Ed Hodgson

So while you might not want to campaign alongside a Reform voter on refugee policy you might find you agree with them on pushing for greater regulation of social media. You may disagree with an evangelical Christian on trans rights, but share the same views on foreign aid.

Comments

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

Like, Starmer's Labour is often held up as an example of the successes that can come with this. And yes they've got into power by making themselves seem acceptable to voters disillusioned with an incompetent hard right Tory party.

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

But in doing so, they've conceded so much ideological ground to the Right that they've adopted many of the same policy directions. This has normalised those politics to the point that Reform can be our second party.

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

Oh sorry, Reform are actually *leading* in the polls. Well done Keir: a total vindication of your strategy here and you're def not gonna double down on it in response... https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51638-voting-intention-lab-25-ref-27-con-21-16-17-feb-2025

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

Plus Labour itself was purged of its own left to do so (they don't get to be in the coalition, apparently). And it's now led by people who want to strip me of my rights and accommodations necessary for me to exist in society - a problem for *my* participation, and an insane double standard to boot.

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

So what he's ultimately done is align Labour with the politics they should be opposing while setting up an even worse party for success, hypocritically exclude a load of more natural and reliable allies, and turn any collaborative space into one of unavoidable, bitter conflict for me.

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

And I worry that this sort of appeal to pragmatism reduces away these concerns: yes, it's good to build a wider base of support because numbers is power in a democracy. And yes, collaboration is good as a mode of peaceable politics and therein a good in itself.

nicoleteburbach.bsky.social•2 days ago

But if Starmer's labour is really is an example of what this coalitional approach can achieve, then I can't help but see it as a cautionary one - for all the reasons that tend to get elided by a coalitional impulse that is presented as pragmatic, but which is actually quite naive and idealising.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply