Which party, anywhere in the world, has been true to their word once in power?
Comment on Italy will be the latest country to require age verification for porn sites
Zombie@feddit.uk 5 days agoTo say that the UK is currently Labour led is like saying Germany from 1933 - 1945 was run by socialists (national socialists as it were).
Their name means fuck all when their actions say the opposite.
sqgl@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Zombie@feddit.uk 5 days ago
The Labour Party had won a landslide victory at the 1945 general election, and went on to enact policies of what became known as the post-war consensus, including the establishment of the welfare state and the nationalisation of 20 per cent of the entire economy.[2] The government’s spell in office was marked by post-war austerity measures; the crushing of pro-independence and communist movements in Malaya; the grant of independence to India, Pakistan, Ceylon, and Burma; the engagement in the Cold War against Soviet Communism; and the creation of the country’s National Health Service (NHS).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attlee_ministry
A number of liberalising social reforms were passed through parliament during Wilson’s first period in government. These included the near abolition of capital punishment, decriminalisation of sex between men in private, liberalisation of abortion law and the abolition of theatre censorship. The Divorce Reform Act 1969 was passed by Parliament (and came into effect in 1971). Such reforms were mostly via private member’s bills on ‘free votes’ in line with established convention, but the large Labour majority after 1966 was undoubtedly more open to such changes than previous parliaments had been.
The franchise was also extended with the reduction of the voting age from twenty-one to eighteen in 1969.[1]
While condemning racial discrimination (and adopting legislation to make it an offence)
Education held special significance for a Labourite of Wilson’s generation, in view of its role in both opening up opportunities for those from working-class backgrounds and enabling Britain to seize the potential benefits of scientific advances. Under the first Wilson government, for the first time in British history, more money was allocated to education than to defence.[2]
One notable effect was the first entry of women into university education in significant numbers. More broadly, higher education overall was significantly expanded
Wilson also deserves credit for grasping the concept of an Open University, to give adults who had missed out on higher education a second chance through part-time study and distance learning.
Campaigns were also launched by the government to encourage people to take up means-tested benefits to which they were entitled to.[9] For instance, a publicity campaign launched by the government increased the fraction of children eligible to get free school meals.[10]
en.wikipedia.org/…/Labour_government,_1964–1970
Although the 1974–1979 Labour Government faced a number of economic difficulties, it was nevertheless able to carry out a broad range of reforms during its time in office. During Harold Wilson’s final premiership, from 1974 to 1976, a number of changes were carried out such as the introduction of new social security benefits and improvements in the rights of tenants. In March 1974, an additional £2 billion was announced for benefits, food subsidies, and housing subsidies, including a record 25% increase in the state pension. Council house rents were also frozen. Council house building continued on a substantial scale, although there was now a greater emphasis on modernising older properties rather than replacing them with new ones. That year, national insurance benefits were increased by 13%, which brought pensions as a proportion of average earnings “up to a value equivalent to the previous high, which was reached in 1965 as a result of Labour legislation.” In order to maintain the real value of these benefits in the long term, the government introduced legislation which linked future increases in pensions to higher incomes or wages.[10] In 1974–1975, social spending was increased in real terms by 9%. In 1974, pensions were increased in real terms by 14%, while in early 1975 increases were made in family allowances. There were also significant increases in rate and rent subsidies, together with £500 million worth of food subsidies.[11]
To help those with disabilities, the government introduced an Invalid Care Allowance, a Mobility Allowance, a Non-Contributory Invalidity Pension for those unable to contribute through national insurance, and other measures. To combat child poverty, legislation to create a universal Child Benefit was passed in 1975 (a reform later implemented by the Callaghan government).[13] To raise the living standards of those dependent on national insurance benefits, the government index-linked short-term benefits to the rate of inflation, while pensions and long-term benefits were tied to increases in prices or earnings, whichever was higher.[14]
sqgl@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
I heard good things about Labour post war (from Gary’s Economics) but put it down to war recovery.
1974-1979 is what I will look more into thanks to you.
sqgl@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
Here in Australia we saw a bigotted Eddie Booth in BBC’s Love Thy Neighbour(1972-1976). He was a fanatical Labour supporter. What was that about?
phutatorius@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
Labour (at least in the UK, I don’t know about AU) is not a socialist party, though at times it has had some socialist members and MPs.
And, regardless of that, there have been numerous socialist and social-democratic parties that have been authoritarian, not just the center-left. Left/right and authoritarian/non-authoritarian are independent dimensions.
Zombie@feddit.uk 5 days ago
Aye, that’s true. My point was just that to claim the UK is Labour party led (in contrast with Italy’s neo-fascists) doesn’t really work as a contrast because they’re not really contrasting. The UK’s current Labour party is authoritarian, pro-capital, pro-austerity, anti-welfare state, anti-immigrant, anti-freedom of expression, anti-protest, anti-democracy, pro-Trump, and pro-Farage.
They’re not the Labour party any more (although that’s been obvious since 1997 when they rebranded as New Labour) but to those who don’t follow UK politics they still have the marketing of socialists, of pro-welfare state, of being pro-democracy and pro-worker. That is not the case, and they probably have more in common with Meloni’s Brothers of Italy, neo-fascist party, than they do with 20th century Labour from which they are so closely associated.
crapwittyname@feddit.uk 5 days ago
-Labour Party Rule Book, clause IV