Keir Starmer has praised Margaret Thatcher for effecting “meaningful change” in Britain in an article directly appealing to Conservative voters to switch to Labour.

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the Labour leader said Thatcher had “set loose our natural entrepreneurialism” during her time as prime minister.

“Across Britain, there are people who feel disillusioned, frustrated, angry, worried. Many of them have always voted Conservative but feel that their party has left them,” he said. “I understand that. I saw that with my own party and acted to fix it. But I also understand that many will still be uncertain about Labour. I ask them to take a look at us again.”

In the article, Starmer pointed to Labour prime ministers of the past – Tony Blair and Clement Attleee – as well as Thatcher, as examples of how politicians can effect meaningful change.

  • HelloThere
    link
    32
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/02/voters-have-been-betrayed-on-brexit-and-immigration/

    Here is the full article, it doesn’t appear to be behind the Telegraph’s paywall which is helpful.

    It’s a pretty nothing piece really, the Thatcher comment is a single sentence within a fuller paragraph, here it is in full.

    Every moment of meaningful change in modern British politics begins with the realisation that politics must act in service of the British people, rather than dictating to them. Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism. Tony Blair reimagined a stale, outdated Labour Party into one that could seize the optimism of the late 90s. A century ago, Clement Attlee wrote that Labour must be a party of duty and patriotism, not abstract theory. To build a “New Jerusalem” meant first casting off the mind-forged manacles. That lesson is as true today as it was then.

    The main thing for me here is that everyone on the left knows that Thatcher did not act in service of the British people, and very much did dictate to them. Starmer/ghost writer specifically says “sought to drag”, and that is a very different thing compared to “successfully dragged”. However, because the people that read the Telegraph are so delusional that they genuinely believe she did that, they will add that conclusion themselves.

    As the article continues it moves on to the impacts of tory lies

    While we were moving back towards voters, the Tory Party has been steadily drifting away. Years of sowing empty promises, cynical falsehoods and false dawns is now reaping inevitable consequence. The Tories have talked the talk on fiscal prudence while wasting untold billions, weighing the country down with debt and raising the tax burden to a record high.

    The “raising the tax burden” clause even links to a telegraph article specifically addressing income tax paid on pensions. It’s clear that they know who they are talking to, even if it’s not particularly difficult or clever to do that. That paragraph then finishes with:

    They have squandered economic opportunities and failed to realise the possibilities of Brexit.

    And does not elaborate further, instead they move on to the state of public finances.

    This pattern continues throughout the rest of the article is a typical example of talking to people where they are. If a disillusioned telegraph reading Tory voter reads this and it sees Labour as less of a personal threat, that’s a good thing. It may even stop them feeling so impassioned to vote for the incumbent, or maybe it’ll help set them on a path to voting for Labour. Either way that helps come election time.

    Is this article the type that is going to motivate me to get up and campaign for Labour next year? No, it isn’t. But it also isn’t aimed at me. Separately, reducing the “us and them” divide is also broadly speaking a good thing.

    If we can show a vision of the future where centre-right Tory voters are part of the society we want to build - and here I’m thinking of your typical small c conservative boomer, worked all their life and made good money, comfortable but not rich, recently retired and still living in their detached 1970s “executive” family home, aka the people who benefitted from previous Labour governments - then Labour’s ability and resilliance in government will be much higher.

    And yes, I am hoping that when in power Starmer finds ways to do good socialist things, and I know that there’s a risk of being bitterly disappointed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      107 months ago

      Yeah the article content really doesn’t seem as bad as the momentum folks are making it out to be, and you raise the salient point that this messaging is speaking to the groups of voters who labour need to bring over to win.

      I personally would like to see a few more lefty policies over the next year, but grandstanding and promising the world means nothing if they lose the next election. I get why Starmer has been playing it safe this way, and I get why people are sometimes disappointed with it, but they are in it to win it and that’s a very good thing.

      The country is in a real mess and we simply need successive Labour governments to start the long road to recovery. We often talk about how damaging the polarization of politics has become, so reaching across the divide to try and bring voters over shouldn’t be demonised.