Starmergeddon: They Came And Ate Us

[_Os_]

Worth looking at the last few weeks to see how Labour's focus on immigration is going.

May 12th, Starmer's Island of Strangers speech.
May 12th to 16th, Labour's messaging focused only on immigration in what was know as "immigration week". A white paper was released yet again changing all the immigration rules.
May 15th, leaked audio of Chris Philp conveniently comes out during "immigration week" (eye roll), admitting Brexit/leaving the Dublin regulations mean asylum seekers cannot automatically be returned to the first place they claim asylum, which accounts for half of all asylum seekers in the UK.
May 22nd, ONS releases net immigration figures showing the number went down by more than half in 2024 to net 431k. This reflects Jenrick's (perhaps unsustainable) changes designed to cut numbers for a late election (which never happened) without regard for what happens after.

That's two weeks of perfect coverage from the point of view that "focus on immigration and Labour will win". There's a mad Enoch Powell speech, harsher laws on people legally living in the UK, lower net migration numbers, Tories admitting it was them. Instead it's reported like this:
May 15th, Express headline "The shocking number of migrants still moving to Britain revealed in major update" (reality check: net migration down by half)
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... jor-update
June 1st, massive focus on more than 1000 people arriving on boats in a single day, something the government has little ability to control.

Polling shows any movement over that time was within the margin of error. But taken at face value the numbers show: Labour increase by 1% and a Reform decrease by 1% on the day of the Island of Stangers speech, then as immigration is focused on more an increase for Reform by 1% and drops for Labour and the Tories by 1%-2%.

YouGov
May 5-6 : Labour 22%, Tory 17%, Reform 29%, Lib Dem 16%, Green 10%
May 11-12: Labour 23%, Tory 18%, Reform 28%, Lib Dem 16%, Green 9%
May 18-19: Labour 22%, Tory 16%, Reform 29%, Lib Dem 17%, Green 10%
May 26-27: Labour 21%, Tory 19%, Reform 29%, Lib Dem 15%, Green 11%
June 1-2 : Labour 22%, Tory 18%, Reform 28%, Lib Dem 17%, Green 9%

Still no evidence focusing on immigration is ever going to get Labour anywhere. It's not a debate about facts, net immigration can literally halve and the Express will say "The shocking number of migrants still moving to Britain revealed" and whoever is reading the Express will presumably think "FUCKING LABOUR!!!". Same with however many small boats there are.

[Paddington Bear]

Net migration can literally halve and it still remains a live issue because it is still at a totally historically unprecedented level, it is still the best part of half a million people in a year, we clearly can’t cope with those numbers, and we are pouring more people onto a wave of migration that is very poorly integrated, has low levels of employment and we lack the infrastructure to support as it is. This really isn’t particularly complicated - people’s world view needs to move on from the idea that this is a few Polish plumbers working exceptionally hard, the world has moved on in 20 years

[_Os_]

These people are seriously fucking deranged

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... orm-voters

Go fash to chase Reform voters who won't vote for you.
Go fash and alienate the moderate parts of the Party and floating voters (the latter who probably only voted for you out of fatigue at 14 years of Conservative Government, way to appeal to them long term).
Exist and be an object of derision from the left of the Party.

Seriously, Blue Labour should fuck off to the Tories, because that's essentially where they are.

Blue Labour sound awful, but the UK does need to axe all DEI stuff before it takes root. The discussions in the UK today around this stuff remind me of SA 20-30 years ago. There's a very limited amount of roles where most of those doing the job need to have the same identity as the "client" (for want of a better term) to perform the job properly. As soon as it gets into "reflecting the demographics of the country" (in some back office somewhere), or "ethnicity A does not make as much as ethnicity B on average" (when ethnicity A is obsessed with education and business ownership to a pathological degree, and ethnicity B struggles to work never mind save/invest), you just know it's going to be a total fuck up.

The reason I knew Truss was an incompetent moron who would be disaster PM, over a year out from her becoming PM, was that it was very obvious from her career trajectory that she was a diversity hire (Cameron A list etc). Even in something as subjective as politics it's not possible to throw anyone into the job. The irony is that once it's known an organisation is captured by this stuff, the automatic assumption becomes anyone who isn't a white man is incompetent, even (as is the case with the Tories) if they're incompetent also. Probably an argument that DEI has destroyed the Tories, but some of the CVs aren't as clear cut as Truss (some are, like Braverman).

Truss is instructive in many ways. Has no understanding her level in politics is local councillor who was promoted about 5 levels above her ability. She wants to be Tory leader and PM again. The norm for someone like that in a more normal job isn't the sack, it's sitting in their job multiple levels above their ability doing damage for their entire career. If SA is anything to go by (and it is regarding this stuff), Truss only gets sacked from a more normal job years down the track when her being white becomes an issue.

[_Os_]

Net migration can literally halve and it still remains a live issue because it is still at a totally historically unprecedented level, it is still the best part of half a million people in a year, we clearly can’t cope with those numbers, and we are pouring more people onto a wave of migration that is very poorly integrated, has low levels of employment and we lack the infrastructure to support as it is. This really isn’t particularly complicated - people’s world view needs to move on from the idea that this is a few Polish plumbers working exceptionally hard, the world has moved on in 20 years

Labour are doing the most they can do and there's demonstrably no increase in support.

Labour win nothing if they focus on immigration. The calculation is as simple as that. Net immigration can be near 1m, or 431k, same headlines, same talking points, Frog Face still grinning. Labour choosing to focus on immigration helps Reform if it helps anyone at all.

[Paddington Bear]

Net migration can literally halve and it still remains a live issue because it is still at a totally historically unprecedented level, it is still the best part of half a million people in a year, we clearly can’t cope with those numbers, and we are pouring more people onto a wave of migration that is very poorly integrated, has low levels of employment and we lack the infrastructure to support as it is. This really isn’t particularly complicated - people’s world view needs to move on from the idea that this is a few Polish plumbers working exceptionally hard, the world has moved on in 20 years

Labour are doing the most they can do and there's demonstrably no increase in support.

Labour win nothing if they focus on immigration. The calculation is as simple as that. Net immigration can be near 1m, or 431k, same headlines, same talking points, Frog Face still grinning. Labour choosing to focus on immigration helps Reform if it helps anyone at all.

They’re clearly not doing the most they can given they have announced a raft of new measures and focuses in the last week, you just don’t want them to take any action. 431,000 is a totally unsustainable, unprecedented, nation changing number in of itself hence why people remain pissed off.

Migration is an unavoidable political talking point because people care about it and they keep being ignored, hard as it is for many to believe that the general public are capable of forming opinions.

[Biffer]

These people are seriously fucking deranged

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... orm-voters

Go fash to chase Reform voters who won't vote for you.
Go fash and alienate the moderate parts of the Party and floating voters (the latter who probably only voted for you out of fatigue at 14 years of Conservative Government, way to appeal to them long term).
Exist and be an object of derision from the left of the Party.

Seriously, Blue Labour should fuck off to the Tories, because that's essentially where they are.

Blue Labour sound awful, but the UK does need to axe all DEI stuff before it takes root. The discussions in the UK today around this stuff remind me of SA 20-30 years ago. There's a very limited amount of roles where most of those doing the job need to have the same identity as the "client" (for want of a better term) to perform the job properly. As soon as it gets into "reflecting the demographics of the country" (in some back office somewhere), or "ethnicity A does not make as much as ethnicity B on average" (when ethnicity A is obsessed with education and business ownership to a pathological degree, and ethnicity B struggles to work never mind save/invest), you just know it's going to be a total fuck up.

The reason I knew Truss was an incompetent moron who would be disaster PM, over a year out from her becoming PM, was that it was very obvious from her career trajectory that she was a diversity hire (Cameron A list etc). Even in something as subjective as politics it's not possible to throw anyone into the job. The irony is that once it's known an organisation is captured by this stuff, the automatic assumption becomes anyone who isn't a white man is incompetent, even (as is the case with the Tories) if they're incompetent also. Probably an argument that DEI has destroyed the Tories, but some of the CVs aren't as clear cut as Truss (some are, like Braverman).

Truss is instructive in many ways. Has no understanding her level in politics is local councillor who was promoted about 5 levels above her ability. She wants to be Tory leader and PM again. The norm for someone like that in a more normal job isn't the sack, it's sitting in their job multiple levels above their ability doing damage for their entire career. If SA is anything to go by (and it is regarding this stuff), Truss only gets sacked from a more normal job years down the track when her being white becomes an issue.

This is just fantasy. Desperately trying to find a way to say the right has been infected with DEI and that’s the problem, rather than their ideas and competence. Your description of equality and diversity initiatives bears no relation to anything I’ve ever seen in my roles in government, industry or academia.

[_Os_]

Go fash to chase Reform voters who won't vote for you.
Go fash and alienate the moderate parts of the Party and floating voters (the latter who probably only voted for you out of fatigue at 14 years of Conservative Government, way to appeal to them long term).
Exist and be an object of derision from the left of the Party.

Seriously, Blue Labour should fuck off to the Tories, because that's essentially where they are.

Blue Labour sound awful, but the UK does need to axe all DEI stuff before it takes root. The discussions in the UK today around this stuff remind me of SA 20-30 years ago. There's a very limited amount of roles where most of those doing the job need to have the same identity as the "client" (for want of a better term) to perform the job properly. As soon as it gets into "reflecting the demographics of the country" (in some back office somewhere), or "ethnicity A does not make as much as ethnicity B on average" (when ethnicity A is obsessed with education and business ownership to a pathological degree, and ethnicity B struggles to work never mind save/invest), you just know it's going to be a total fuck up.

The reason I knew Truss was an incompetent moron who would be disaster PM, over a year out from her becoming PM, was that it was very obvious from her career trajectory that she was a diversity hire (Cameron A list etc). Even in something as subjective as politics it's not possible to throw anyone into the job. The irony is that once it's known an organisation is captured by this stuff, the automatic assumption becomes anyone who isn't a white man is incompetent, even (as is the case with the Tories) if they're incompetent also. Probably an argument that DEI has destroyed the Tories, but some of the CVs aren't as clear cut as Truss (some are, like Braverman).

Truss is instructive in many ways. Has no understanding her level in politics is local councillor who was promoted about 5 levels above her ability. She wants to be Tory leader and PM again. The norm for someone like that in a more normal job isn't the sack, it's sitting in their job multiple levels above their ability doing damage for their entire career. If SA is anything to go by (and it is regarding this stuff), Truss only gets sacked from a more normal job years down the track when her being white becomes an issue.

This is just fantasy. Desperately trying to find a way to say the right has been infected with DEI and that’s the problem, rather than their ideas and competence. Your description of equality and diversity initiatives bears no relation to anything I’ve ever seen in my roles in government, industry or academia.

As I said, the same arguments I heard 20-30 years ago. The UK is at the thin end of the wedge on this stuff. But if you're making some convoluted argument that a multi racial/ethnic society needs to discriminate against some to make it "fair" that's a bigger proposition than some are bargaining for and will end up collapsing institutions. There's a lot of Western exceptionalism in the debate too, because multiple countries have found out a lot of this the hard way, they're just not Western because this is new in the West.

It's an open and shut case that Truss was on the Cameron A list and parachuted because of sex, from there she learned to say whatever she thought Tory members wanted to hear in that particular moment (anti-Brexit, pro-Brexit). Braverman the same story but was parachuted at least once because of her race too. If you're running an organisation like that, you're going to destroy yourself.

[Biffer]

Blue Labour sound awful, but the UK does need to axe all DEI stuff before it takes root. The discussions in the UK today around this stuff remind me of SA 20-30 years ago. There's a very limited amount of roles where most of those doing the job need to have the same identity as the "client" (for want of a better term) to perform the job properly. As soon as it gets into "reflecting the demographics of the country" (in some back office somewhere), or "ethnicity A does not make as much as ethnicity B on average" (when ethnicity A is obsessed with education and business ownership to a pathological degree, and ethnicity B struggles to work never mind save/invest), you just know it's going to be a total fuck up.

The reason I knew Truss was an incompetent moron who would be disaster PM, over a year out from her becoming PM, was that it was very obvious from her career trajectory that she was a diversity hire (Cameron A list etc). Even in something as subjective as politics it's not possible to throw anyone into the job. The irony is that once it's known an organisation is captured by this stuff, the automatic assumption becomes anyone who isn't a white man is incompetent, even (as is the case with the Tories) if they're incompetent also. Probably an argument that DEI has destroyed the Tories, but some of the CVs aren't as clear cut as Truss (some are, like Braverman).

Truss is instructive in many ways. Has no understanding her level in politics is local councillor who was promoted about 5 levels above her ability. She wants to be Tory leader and PM again. The norm for someone like that in a more normal job isn't the sack, it's sitting in their job multiple levels above their ability doing damage for their entire career. If SA is anything to go by (and it is regarding this stuff), Truss only gets sacked from a more normal job years down the track when her being white becomes an issue.

This is just fantasy. Desperately trying to find a way to say the right has been infected with DEI and that’s the problem, rather than their ideas and competence. Your description of equality and diversity initiatives bears no relation to anything I’ve ever seen in my roles in government, industry or academia.

As I said, the same arguments I heard 20-30 years ago. The UK is at the thin end of the wedge on this stuff. But if you're making some convoluted argument that a multi racial/ethnic society needs to discriminate against some to make it "fair" that's a bigger proposition than some are bargaining for and will end up collapsing institutions. There's a lot of Western exceptionalism in the debate too, because multiple countries have found out a lot of this the hard way, they're just not Western because this is new in the West.

It's an open and shut case that Truss was on the Cameron A list and parachuted because of sex, from there she learned to say whatever she thought Tory members wanted to hear in that particular moment (anti-Brexit, pro-Brexit). Braverman the same story but was parachuted at least once because of her race too. If you're running an organisation like that, you're going to destroy yourself.

I’ve never encountered a scheme in the uk in government academia or industry that has promoted discrimination.

She may have got to the MP list as a result of women shortlists but that’s not why she was selected as party leader and PM. That was because the members of the Tory party would rather have a useless woman than a little brown chap. They’re probably the group in the country that’s the least DEI set of people.

[_Os_]

This is just fantasy. Desperately trying to find a way to say the right has been infected with DEI and that’s the problem, rather than their ideas and competence. Your description of equality and diversity initiatives bears no relation to anything I’ve ever seen in my roles in government, industry or academia.

As I said, the same arguments I heard 20-30 years ago. The UK is at the thin end of the wedge on this stuff. But if you're making some convoluted argument that a multi racial/ethnic society needs to discriminate against some to make it "fair" that's a bigger proposition than some are bargaining for and will end up collapsing institutions. There's a lot of Western exceptionalism in the debate too, because multiple countries have found out a lot of this the hard way, they're just not Western because this is new in the West.

It's an open and shut case that Truss was on the Cameron A list and parachuted because of sex, from there she learned to say whatever she thought Tory members wanted to hear in that particular moment (anti-Brexit, pro-Brexit). Braverman the same story but was parachuted at least once because of her race too. If you're running an organisation like that, you're going to destroy yourself.

I’ve never encountered a scheme in the uk in government academia or industry that has promoted discrimination.

She may have got to the MP list as a result of women shortlists but that’s not why she was selected as party leader and PM. That was because the members of the Tory party would rather have a useless woman than a little brown chap. They’re probably the group in the country that’s the least DEI set of people.

If you make a list of candidates and it's only women or only people who are not white. That is unavoidably gender and racial discrimination.

Truss was boosted first into being an MP then very quickly into ministerial roles, because she was chosen by Cameron for reasons other than merit. Here's a pop quiz for you, how long did Truss spend in the Commons and how much of that was on the back benches? Yes the Tories are not "transformed" to use Orwellian SA language, but they very obviously boosted every MP they had who was a woman or not white to their front benches.

But back to your personal experiences in employment. Has anywhere you have worked employed people in the exact proportion to the racial demographics of the UK (which is changing, so what may have matched that 20 years ago, does not today)? Were any of those companies owned in exact proportion to the racial demographics of the UK? If not using the logic of DEI, they need to undergo further discrimination to achieve a "fair" "representative" outcome.

Of course if the UK does actually have imbalances between different ethnic groups (it does, as every single multi racial/ethnic society does), then all the organisations most able to hire all the competent people to satisfy DEI demands do so. Everyone who is not a big corporate with huge resources, then somehow has to meet all the DEI requirements under conditions where all the employees needed to do so have already been hired. Which is why all the multi nationals support this stuff, they operate in non-West markets which have similar laws and know it's a nice additional barrier to entry.

[Biffer]

As I said, the same arguments I heard 20-30 years ago. The UK is at the thin end of the wedge on this stuff. But if you're making some convoluted argument that a multi racial/ethnic society needs to discriminate against some to make it "fair" that's a bigger proposition than some are bargaining for and will end up collapsing institutions. There's a lot of Western exceptionalism in the debate too, because multiple countries have found out a lot of this the hard way, they're just not Western because this is new in the West.

It's an open and shut case that Truss was on the Cameron A list and parachuted because of sex, from there she learned to say whatever she thought Tory members wanted to hear in that particular moment (anti-Brexit, pro-Brexit). Braverman the same story but was parachuted at least once because of her race too. If you're running an organisation like that, you're going to destroy yourself.

I’ve never encountered a scheme in the uk in government academia or industry that has promoted discrimination.

She may have got to the MP list as a result of women shortlists but that’s not why she was selected as party leader and PM. That was because the members of the Tory party would rather have a useless woman than a little brown chap. They’re probably the group in the country that’s the least DEI set of people.

If you make a list of candidates and it's only women or only people who are not white. That is unavoidably gender and racial discrimination.

Truss was boosted first into being an MP then very quickly into ministerial roles, because she was chosen by Cameron for reasons other than merit. Here's a pop quiz for you, how long did Truss spend in the Commons and how much of that was on the back benches? Yes the Tories are not "transformed" to use Orwellian SA language, but they very obviously boosted every MP they had who was a woman or not white to their front benches.

But back to your personal experiences in employment. Has anywhere you have worked employed people in the exact proportion to the racial makeup of the UK (which is changing, so what may have matched that 20 years ago, does not today)? Were any of those companies owned in exact proportion to the racial demographics of the UK? If not using the logic of DEI, they need to undergo further discrimination to achieve a "fair" "representative" outcome.

Of course if the UK does actually have imbalances between different ethnic groups (it does, as every single multi racial/ethnic society does), then all the organisations most able to hire all the competent people to satisfy DEI demands do so. Everyone who is not a big corporate with huge resources, then somehow has to meet all the DEI requirements under conditions where all the best employees needed to do so have already been hired. Which is why all the multi nationals support this stuff, they operate in non-West markets which have similar laws and know it's a nice additional barrier to entry.

That'd just so far away from what happens it's not worth discussing with you.

And just to not, both David Cameron and Rishi Sunak were MPs for less time, and with less government experience, than Liz Truss was when she became leader.

[tabascoboy]

With Truss, I'm sure it was a mixture of Tory HQ thinking she was compliant enough to be led in the direction they wanted, and/or she could be moulded into, Maggie Reborn. For the members around the country it was likely a mixture of that, with Truss being seen as a supporter of the BoJo they loved rather than Sunak as someone who was instrumental in the removal of him. Not to mention she was seen a tax-cutter not raiser.

Apparently no-one had any inkling she would turn full on MAGA loving Loon so quickly and disastrously.

[Deepsouth]

Imagine the English. What did someone call you? A nation of shopkeepers. Was that Adolf? Or a Frenchman...

[Hugo]

The Plaid Cymru MP that was on Question Time was actually insane. People like this who have no viable solutions to problems other than vibes need not be in power.

[TedMaul]

Imagine the English. What did someone call you? A nation of shopkeepers. Was that Adolf? Or a Frenchman...

Certainly not a pig thick Aussie.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Imagine the English. What did someone call you? A nation of shopkeepers. Was that Adolf? Or a Frenchman...

Certainly not a pig thick Aussie.

Even if one accepts the charge it's hardly damning. Oh no, someone has noted we engage in commerce, the shame!

Much more damning would be something like Brexit, with it's take on events that you can have too much commerce and it's better to shrink an economy