Life – Terror. Ecstasy. Fight. Denial. Flight. Failure. PAIN. Forgiveness. Reconciliation. Hope. Love. Peace – Death.
17 months in, today (29/9/21), ‘Sir Keith’ in all his glowing emptiness made his first ‘F2F’ (Leader) party speech to Labour Conference. There is still every indication that Starmer is utterly intransigent and will continue to butt his head against the leftward wall, in the hope that, the centre & right will love him more and that will win him an election, and I mean him not us (Labour).
Starmer doesn’t have the political skills in his whole body that the gobshite Johnson has in his tiny penis. Until he does he will continue to be an empty political vessel, an impotent Empty Suit.
Before today I literally had no clue what Sir Keith is about At least now I know what his ‘mum & dad’ are all about.
The way Starmer slid onto the political scene, on the back of Corbyn’s coat tails, like a chameleon, shifting his stance, whilst quietly preparing, plotting to pounce. He excited the disillusioned centrists and the wannabe Labour-Tory’s by promising to finally banish the evil left Corbyn machine. The perception that he is a peerless campaigner, post Corbyn, who could win an election? I wholeheartedly reject it.
How to tell the difference between an ‘empty suit’ and an effective leader?
When considering any potential leader beware of false confidence. What I witnessed today wasn’t close to false confidence but closer to false delusionalist.
The leadership position requires a huge premium on executive presence. People look for gravitas, charisma, sincerity and people who are “comfortable in their own skin.” The media like the sound of a crisp, confident, polished answer to a question. They destroy anything less.
So when someone looks the part and speaks confidently, you are a step in the right direction, however, then you need to drill down further, finding out about the political philosophy and strategy. Starmer? No clue to either? We were previously led to believe he stood with Corbyn on ‘Labours’ principle policies …..clearly not?
So what does he stand for?
Truth is we don’t really know, not even after his 12,000 word essay and todays underwhelming sermon.
I know more about what he doesn’t represent –
1. Economic Justice – Starmer promised to reverse the Tories’ cuts in corporation tax, however when Rishi raised corporation tax in his last budget Labour voted against the measure.
2. Social Justice – Starmer’s refusal to back the social justice cause of a £15 per hour minimum wage.
3. Climate Justice – This conference Labour members passed a motion to back a Socialist Green New Deal, which includes a swathe of left-wing policies from public ownership of energy (not happening, see above), debt relief for low-income countries and rights for climate refugees. The policy package, according to the pressure group leadership, would come to £85 billion – however Starmer “won’t even commit to that”.
4. Promote Peace & Human Rights – In May Labour Palestinian members accused the party of “ignoring them” over a growing feeling the party is and was “drifting away from its anti-racist and anti-colonial principles”. In June 2020 Starmer refused to be drawn on sanctions against Israel, though opposed annexation. Labour’s conference just voted in favour of an appalling motion on Israel/Palestine which Lisa Nandy has already said will be ignored.
5. Common Ownership – Sir Keir’s now come out against public ownership of energy, though it wasn’t the first indication of a major policy backtracking. In September last year Lisa Nandy told Politics Live that public ownership was just “one way” and “another way” is “giving people more control”. At the CBI Sir Keir refused to commit to Corbyn’s policy of renationalising BT.
6. Defend migrants’ rights– Just yesterday shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed that Labour will not bring back freedom of movement. Starmer also angered members of the left, including Diane Abbott, last year over the party’s stance on migrant channel crossings after attacking the government’s incompetence at stopping them rather than defending their right to claim asylum in Britain.
7. Strengthen Workers’ rights and trade unions – Starmer’s relationship with the unions is hardly going well, not least regarding Unite, whose newly-elected Trotskyist leader has already turned against Starmer after he proposed scrapping one member one vote. She may even end up campaigning outside his house after Labour’s finances required the potential sacking of 90 Southside employees…It wasn’t the first time Unite fell out with Starmer, given they voted to cut their funding to Labour by around £1 million last October.
8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity – Far from embracing devolution, Sir Keir wrote an op-ed in September 2020 under the heading “we can’t have four nations pulling in different directions”. Many left-wingers will also be dismayed that the Labour Party conference voted against adopting proportional representation in their next manifesto.
9. Equality – While Sir Keir may have adopted the left-wing mantra du jour that it’s wrong to say only women are born with cervixes, he’s continuing to wind up the LGBT+ community by refusing to respond to Rosie Duffield’s supposed transphobia. He infamously described Black Lives Matter as “a moment”, saying the group’s demand to defund the police was “nonsense”, angering the hardest of the hard left.
10. Effective opposition to the Tories – It was telling Starmer left this one until last. Draw your own conclusions on this pledge…Two words ‘Marcus Rashford’?
Leaders know how to work a conference room. Starmer is self-conscious, often seemingly embarrassed and inept during interviews? Strong political ‘players’, are always smooth and polished because they built their entire career by knowing exactly the right kinds of words to inspire confidence (usually by taking credit for the work of others). They know the right buzzwords and how to speak at length while committing to very little. But like a con artist, that’s all they have – there is literally nothing behind Starmers Empty Suit’s rhetoric. Starmer cannot even convince himself let alone a dissatisfied voter?
Confident (effective) Leaders pay less attention to appearances. They don’t waste their time perfecting a power stance, or look at me ‘I’m interested’ ‘pointing’ postures, nor polished answers to that say nothing at all. Their answers can sound a bit less confident than the Empty Suit because their answers rely on more precision and nuance. They tell the truth even if it is hard to tell and even harder to hear. They built their career driving results and being accountable for outcomes, meaning they have made lots of mistakes and learned some hard lessons along the way.
The least competent people (the Empty Suits) spend their energy avoiding accountability and therefore can’t learn from mistakes they don’t admit to. Because they never admit to mistakes, they overestimate their abilities. Johnson, is a different type of empty suit that hides behind a carefully manufactured style, repulsive as it might be it is there and certain ‘types’ are infected by it, Johnson is infectious. That is his ‘connection’.
Starmer does not have a connection, any connection to ANYTHING least of all to the voters he is hoping to convince? Why? Simple, he is not sincere ergo not convincing?
He cannot be because he is not even convinced himself, about ANYTHING. Starmer is empty, a void, a changeling prepared to be anything it takes to succeed for himself. He has sold his soul, his principles, his morals and ethics in pursuit of the prize. To ‘Win at all costs’ …even if it means abandoning 100 years of social and political conscience?
There is no question that his shtick, backed up by an equally ruthless cabal of similar career politicians and organizers, worked in the short term, as he is now leader. But given what’s transpired since his appointment, a global pandemic, the worse UK government in living memory, the fact he cannot get even close in the polls speaks volumes about his totally inept leadership?
Can Starmer win an election in 3 years time?
I believe not.
Effective Leaders feel responsible for outcomes, including mistakes they did not personally make. So their learning curve is dramatically accelerated. Consequently, they realize how much there is to learn. Starmer continues to overestimate his talents, he is clearly out of his depth and surrounds himself with similar ineptness. The problem with that is there are at least three of his colleagues, waiting in the wings, like he was with Corbyn, ready to stab Caesar in the back at the faintest opportunity.
We are truly fucked
Thanks for Reading
Peace
Dying to Live 