justtwothings is in the top 1% of interest and insight as always :) ... but I don't see it's hobnobbing that is distorting Labour policy(?) Isn't it more that Labour is resolutely, grimly taking a status-quo position on every issue to win Westminster? (Win the battle, but lose the war on poverty etc.)
Without access to the inner workings, how would we know? But the perplexing thing about the current Labour leadership is that they rule out policies that are clearly popular, including policies that would help a progressive government build a progressive narrative. They have ‘red lines’ where no red lines are needed, at least when you look at polling. And we also know from every bit of academic research that has been done on this that the super-rich have an excessive influence on policy, largely because of their privileged access. So perhaps I am putting two and two together—but I may also be jumping to conclusions.
justtwothings is in the top 1% of interest and insight as always :) ... but I don't see it's hobnobbing that is distorting Labour policy(?) Isn't it more that Labour is resolutely, grimly taking a status-quo position on every issue to win Westminster? (Win the battle, but lose the war on poverty etc.)
Without access to the inner workings, how would we know? But the perplexing thing about the current Labour leadership is that they rule out policies that are clearly popular, including policies that would help a progressive government build a progressive narrative. They have ‘red lines’ where no red lines are needed, at least when you look at polling. And we also know from every bit of academic research that has been done on this that the super-rich have an excessive influence on policy, largely because of their privileged access. So perhaps I am putting two and two together—but I may also be jumping to conclusions.