Wikipedia

Talk:Labour Party (UK)/Archive 15

< Talk:Labour Party (UK)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by NotQualified in topic labour blocked investigations into child rape cases in oldham seven times
Archive 10 ← Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Political positions

Latest comment: 2 months ago181 comments40 people in discussion
No consensus to change the political position and moratorium on further discussions around their political position until January 2025. — Czello (music) 12:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Currently, in the infobox, it says that Labour's political position is centre-left. But I think this is an outdated label.

In the article, Political positions of Keir Starmer, it says:

In a January 2020 interview, Starmer described himself as a socialist, and stated in an opinion piece published by The Guardian the same month that his advocacy of socialism is motivated by "a burning desire to tackle inequality and injustice".

In the very next paragraph it says,

In an interview with the i's Francis Elliott in December 2021, Starmer refused to characterise himself as a socialist, asking "What does that mean?" ...

Later,

...[I]n the run-up to the 2024 general election, Starmer told the BBC "I would describe myself as a socialist. I describe myself as a progressive. I'd describe myself as somebody who always puts the country first and party second"

Since flip–floppery is not considered a political position in Wikipedia, we have to analyze the actions of the Labour Party and contrast them with that of the Conservatives, which are labeled as centre–right to right–wing. From the same article:

In 2023, Starmer removed the ten socialism-based pledges that he had made in the 2020 party leadership contest from his website, after having abandoned or rolled back on many of these, citing the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic situation as reasons for having to "adapt".

During the 2020 Labour leadership election, Starmer pledged to scrap university tuition fees; he dropped this pledge in May 2023, citing a "different financial situation" following Liz Truss' premiership.

[Starmer] has ruled out extending free school meals to all primary school pupils in England, instead pledging to extend breakfast clubs including free breakfasts for every primary school in England.

Starmer's position on public ownership over national infrastructure has changed over time. In the 2020 Labour Party leadership election, Starmer ran on a pledge to renationalise rail, mail, water, and energy back into common ownership; he dropped this pledge in July 2022 and said he would take a "pragmatic approach" to public ownership.

Perhaps this is Starmer's socialism with British characteristics, the idea that every country has different conditions under which to establish socialism, or a society where the workers own the means of production. In Britain's case, its conditions involve Covid-19, climate change, and an incompetent government allergic to the concept of egalitarianism. In other words, Britain's conditions are no different from what every other country has been forced to endure in the past few years, and every socialist country has at one point had to deal with a government similar to the one led by Sunak and his predecessors, of which there are many, and therefore the label of democratic socialism that is also included in the infobox (but which is currently being discussed in another topic) is completely untrue.

Starmer favours partnership between government and business, having said: "A political party without a clear plan for making sure businesses are successful and growing ... which doesn't want them to do well and make a profit ... has no hope of being a successful government."

May I ask what Starmer thinks of lobbying and chaebols?

Oh, dear...[1]

Starmer favors Britain's current first-past-the-post voting system and opposes proposals for electoral reform, such as the adoption of proportional representation.

Apparently, Labour thinks more than 5,000,000 votes translating into 2 seats is democratic.[2]

In a Sunday Telegraph article he wrote in December 2023, Starmer praised Margaret Thatcher for seeking to "drag Britain out of its stupor", saying Thatcher had "set loose our natural entrepreneurialism" during her time as prime minister, and used Thatcher, as well as Tony Blair and Clement Attlee, as examples of how politicians can effect "meaningful change".

Does anyone here believe that Margaret Thatcher was anything that even closely resembled center left politics? Additionally, I would like to point out that Tony Blair, who is widely anatagonized by his own party for, among other things, spearheading the British effort to back America in a war without international support that led to the deaths of, possibly, more than a million people. Attlee is not clean either in the eyes of many British leftists, presumably, as he was led the British role in the Korean War, as more than 50,000 British troops saw combat in a war "justified" by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 82, the legitimacy of which is questionable due to the lack of representation for the government of China, represented by a military dictatorship in the Island of Taiwan, no less violent than the Communists, and the Soviet boycott of the UN due to the aforementioned lack of Chinese representation. The bombing and starvation of North Korea, supported by Attlee, killed potentially 1,500,000 million civilians.[3]

The Labour Party does not support the abolition of the unelected, undemocratic, aristocratic House of Lords.[4] In fact, Labour has 171 seats and are looking to appoint more.[5] Labour has also vowed to block any attempts to hold a second Scottish independence referendum, even if the Scottish National Party win a majority in Scotland.[6] Because Starmer cannot be accused of trying to implement socialism in one country, we can interpret this as Labour being a British nationalist party opposed to the democratic will of the Scottish people, pretending the situation in Scotland hadn't changed significantly since Brexit.

In 2005, Starmer stated that "I got made a Queen’s Counsel, which is odd since I often used to propose the abolition of the monarchy".

Starmer has also been knighted, hence Sir Keir Starmer.

Starmer supports maintaining the UK's nuclear arsenal as a nuclear deterrent, and voted for renewal of the Trident programme; he supports the general post-Cold War British policy of a gradual reduction in nuclear stockpiles.

This is militarism and is not in line with center left politics as far as I'm aware. The UK, as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, does not need nuclear weapons to provide a 'deterrence'.

He also criticised the Stop the War Coalition in an op-ed for The Guardian, writing that the group's members were "not benign voices for peace" but rather "[a]t best they are naive, at worst they actively give succour to authoritarian leaders" such as Russian President Vladimir Putin "who directly threaten democracies."

Labour's idea of a democracy is a society where 34% of the 60% voter turnout translates into a parliamentary majority and can do, in the context of British politics, close to whatever it wants.

In an interview with LBC on 11 October 2023, Starmer was asked whether it would be appropriate for Israel to totally cut off power and water supplies to the Gaza Strip, with Starmer replying that "I think that Israel does have that right" and that "obviously everything should be done within international law".

Within the context of foreign policy, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth is a nationalist concept.

Labour are also known to be purging left wing members of the party, promoting instead candidates such Luke Akehurst. I haven't offer citations here because they kept torpedoing this long topic because of 'broken links' that I had removed. Sorry, I am not really very tech savvy.

I think it should say centre, with a note adding that it has left–wing (Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott, etc), centre–right (Such as Labour Party leader... Keir Starmer), and centre–left (Such asAngela Rayner) elements. Obviously, Labour is in love with the free market, supports US foreign policy, supports the monarchy, supports closed electoral systems, etc... this is not center left. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:59, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

No. Aficionado538 (talk) 17:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
That's not an argument. Maurnxiao (talk) 17:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
truly wonderful and constractive critique Takis S1 (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Please refer to WP:OR and the closing statement of Talk:Labour Party (UK)/Archive 12#Request for comment on lede sentence which suggests "It is highly unlikely that any future RFC to change "centre-left" to "centre-left to left-wing", "left-wing", or any other label, will be successful, unless it can be shown that the consensus of reliable sources explicitly use the new proposed label. "Consensus of reliable sources" doesn't mean unanimity, but it doesn't mean a minority viewpoint, either. If only some sources use the new proposed label, that may support an attributed statement in the body, but not necessarily a statement in wiki-voice in the lead. If no sources use the new proposed label, then we certainly cannot use the new proposed label in wiki-voice. Guidance can be found at WP:DUE." Editors' personal opinions on the Labour Party and its politicians are not useful for building the encyclopaedia. Ralbegen (talk) 17:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Most sources agree that Labour is going down a rightward path. From a starting point of centre–left, the obvious answer that may be in our conscience is that Labour are now a centrist–ish party with centre–right and centre–left elements. Maurnxiao (talk) 17:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
You've got to do a survey of RSs on google scholar by searching something neutral like "Labour party Starmer ideology" and tallying the results. Personally I think it's a mistake to view Starmer as in any way ideological. It's not part of his thought process. If he thought communism solved more problems than it caused, he'd have communist policies. Alexanderkowal (talk) 01:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
The sources currently listed are from three elections ago, 2015. They no longer really apply to the new Starmer Labour. Maurnxiao (talk) 09:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
better idea show me a credible not outdated source taht actually labels them as centre-left or left wing also its not that radical to assume labour has moved right i agree with the centre label. Takis S1 (talk) 18:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Soft Support, a centrist label seems more fitting under Starmer's leadership GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 02:07, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I second this and this has been sourced in several reliable sources. Starmer is undoubtedly a centrist so it makes sense to describe him as such. I disagree with the notion that Starmer is centre-right and this description has not been supported by reliable sources as far as I am aware. I'd argue that several of those positions listed above are more than compatible with centre-left politics contrary to some claims, such as the position on Trident and nuclear weaponry.
As for the position of the Labour Party as a whole, I'd support something like "Centrist to centre-left" in the infobox. This characterisation is supported by sources. I would not support "left-wing to centrist". There are some more left-wing elements in the party, but these are mainly just minor factions, and the current leadership has sidelined them as part of its programme to move the party toward the centre, unlike with the broad church approach employed by Corbyn's leadership of accepting the party right (centrists) and involving them in party processes. In addition, although Corbyn's leadership was certainly firmly on the left, the party as a whole during this period remained on the centre-left, and Corbyn himself moderated several of his policy positions. His left-wing leadership was also the exception not the norm, with the party almost always taking a centre-left or centrist position from Attlee onwards, with Michael Foot being the only other exception to the rule. Kinnock and Wilson, like Starmer, moved to the centre-left or the centre after they became leader, so I don't think the party can be described as left-wing really. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 07:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, the only time "centrist to left-wing" or "centre-left to centre-right" (as in as a single label going more than one position over if that makes sense) is when the article's about an alliance or a coalition of some sort, à la New Popular Front with its "centre-left to far-left" label. Otherwise anything that encapsulates that wide of a spread of positions should either be labelled with the majority position(s) or simply "big tent" GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 07:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Support Third this. I would also favour "Centre to centre-left" personally. Icantthinkofausernames (talk) 23:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
To clarify, my remark about a centrist label refers to this (potentially also to a solo "centrist" label, but only if consensus decided as such). I simply meant the inclusion of "centre" without the qualifier of "...-left", whether that includes both labels or a singular one. Hopefully that makes sense. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 12:55, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Support Centre to centre-left describes the Labour Party well in my opinion. To suggest centre to centre-right seems incorrect to me. PlatypusAreDucks (talk) 04:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Some quick concerns about listing the Labour Party as centre to centre-left without making valid references from the latest leadership election to the latest General Election (2020-2024), and only than citing sources that end in 2015. This approach appears to subjectively reflect how editors personally view the ideological spectrum and the Labour Party, rather than either where Labour position themselves or how 'centre-left' is consistently presented across Wikipedia; especially because it might mean the Liberal Democrats would then have to shift towards being exclusively centre-left, and althoguh I would agree that it has recently adopted a more centrist overtone with some centre-right elements, I would disagree that this makes them any more 'centre to centre-left' than other nominally social democratic parties; for example, Italy's Democratic Party, Slovakia's Hlas, Germany's SDP, or Australia's Labor Party.
I would also like to point out that Clause IV of the 2022 Labour Party Rule Book; the most recent version of the party's constitution, explicitly says "The Labour Party is a democratic socialist Party", and this has not been raised in the discussion of whether Labour is a democratic socialist party (I know there's a wider question about "whether the leadership is democratically socialist", but please actually give some consideration to how the party refers to itself before making edits. GuernseyIndependenceParty (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
This is all WP:OR. I'm disappointingly seeing a lot of that here lately where it concern's Labour's political ideologies/position. — Czello (music) 07:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Do you consider wanting to use sources more recent than ones from 2015 original research? I don't, I'm providing some additional information with which we can work to update the political position. Maurnxiao (talk) 09:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
If you're talking about the sources you've linked in your opening post, then yes - it's WP:SYNTH. The sources need to directly say what you're intending to change the article to, but you appear to be making interpretations based on them. — Czello (music) 10:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Those sources I used to back up claims such as Labour wanting to appoint members to the House of Lords. There are other sources directly showing Starmer's path away from the left...[7][8][9] Maurnxiao (talk) 10:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Suppose it turned out the Pope was an atheist. Would that mean the Catholic Church wasn't Christian? The description of the ideology of the Labour party should be based on what reliable sources say, not our interpretations of whoever happens to be the current leader.
I would however remove the political position info-box which merely tells readers where Wikipedia editors place the party's ideology along the political spectrum. TFD (talk) 10:58, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Well, if the Pope had spent his time appointing atheist Cardinals and getting rid of Catholic ones, then that might change the situation a little bit more. Maurnxiao (talk) 11:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Dont all reliable sources say its right wing, the few that dont are either outdated or downright biased to the right Takis S1 (talk) 19:08, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
No they don’t, I’ll do a survey Alexanderkowal (talk) 19:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Academic sources don't really discuss ideology when talking about Starmer's LP, ultimately because it doesn't make sense. He engages in ideological quietism, academics don't attempt to pin a political ideology on him. Alexanderkowal (talk) 20:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Starmer is an adherent of flippism–floppism. But we are discussing the political position of the Labour Party, and he has played a significant role in shaping it since he became leader. It's no longer the Party of Corbyn and co., it is ideologically soulless and wishes to win over centrists, centre-left, center-right and even right–wingers unhappy with the Tories. This broad appeal, and the large tent where its members are, make me think labelling it as a big–tent centrist party, with a note mentioning its various if unofficial factions, might be a better thing to do than label it centre-left, using decade old sources from three election cycles ago. Maurnxiao (talk) 20:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Please review WP:OR, this is WP:Not a forum. You’re not going to convince anyone or make any progress without using WP:RSs, only academic sources would be applicable here, and from the survey I did some appear Corbynite but not even they call Labour right wing, at most centrist. Centre to centre-left would be the most accurate representation of RSs Alexanderkowal (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I think that there are plenty if not a large consensus of sources that have started talking about its shift to the right and even one that says that they have become more right wing than the Liberal democrats (or more that the lib dems are "pushing the proggresive mantle") https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/10/lib-dems-progressive-mantle-robust-opposition-labour
Therefore, calling them centre left is definantly wrong the majority of labour's policies are right of centre and with constant attacks on the left by Keir Starmer the party should be considered at least Centrist.
"By most accounts, the 2024 manifesto will sit on the Right of this ideological ledger."
https://unherd.com/newsroom/how-left-wing-is-labours-manifesto/(14 June, 2024)
"Starmer left-wing purge row is not dying down"
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cv22n56e3z6o(30 May 2024)
"The British public is increasingly willing to place its trust in a centre-right party with no major spending commitments, which is looking to make Brexit work and which aims to reduce the national debt over the next parliament."
https://unherd.com/newsroom/labour-is-now-the-centre-right-party/(1 September, 2023)
In general they are placed right of center of course because there are plenty of leftists and centre-leftists but they arent the majority i thing calling a centrist party with leftist, centre-leftist and centre-right factions is best
Takis S1 (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Only academic sources for something like this I think Alexanderkowal (talk) 11:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
In the absense of many academic sources on it, we'd have to use news sources. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
No. KronosAlight (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Support. I just agree with your propose. Hidolo (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support Keir is not remotely left-wing and is as centrist as Blair. He's probably to the right of Joe Biden. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 05:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
“Since flip-floppery isn’t a political ideology”… what you’ve just described is what is called pragmatism. It doesn’t fit nicely into a box somewhere on the commonly-accepted left-right political spectrum. I would argue there’s no problem with that - why should people have to fit into these stringent classifications?? I would say Labour is a big-tent centre to centre-left political movement primarily based around principles of social democracy, social liberalism and delivering social justice TheKlowster (talk) 13:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose, doesn't matter if Keir Starmer is not considered centre-left, but Labour Party as majority social democratic should stay centre-left. Odideum (talk) 15:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Suggestion - Perhaps we add a footnote as I suggested in another discussion for the time-being/a middle-ground until more academic sources come around during Starmer's leadership of the country? As I am sure there will be several done during his tenure as he is a quite an unknown figure and lacks any true position/ideology so far. ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Clearly Left wing. Maybe not far left. 99.76.143.165 (talk) 04:21, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I disagree, the party is a big tent at the moment, still enconpassing young left wing types, and older more moderate blairites. Centre Left is an apt discription, as that is the base from which the party intermitently sways left (under Corbyn) or right (under Starmer). By the same logic I don't get why the tories have been moved to Centre right-right wing, they've drifted slightly, given policies like Rwanda, but apart from that its clear they've swayed less than labour has from the centre left, given that labour isn't hiking the main taxes, or promising increased spending. 86.129.233.186 (talk) 09:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
The conservatives drifted more than slightly, the European Research Group practically ran the party Kowal2701 (talk) 09:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Along with the Common Sense Group Kowal2701 (talk) 09:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Opposed. Sources referring to the Labour Party as a centre-left party:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/04/europe/uk-election-europe-populist-surge-intl/index.html
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/05/center-left-in-us-sees-a-lesson-in-british-election-results-00166686
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live-blog/uk-election-live-updates-rcna160149
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/04/uk-election-2024-polls-open-for-landmark-vote-.html
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/05/g-s1-8456/uk-labour-party-win-keir-starmer
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/07/02/uk-election-labour-keir-starmer-sunak-class-supermajority-social-democracy-global-left/
https://www.semafor.com/article/07/05/2024/how-the-center-left-won-in-britain-even-as-europe-moves-right
https://abcnews.go.com/International/keir-starmer-uk-pm-conservatives-suffer-record-defeat/story?id=111689276
https://www.wsj.com/world/uk/uk-election-results-2024-6649b68c
https://apnews.com/article/uk-labour-leader-keir-starmer-profile-dc40877586d32b903e4ecdb7e397f803
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uks-labour-win-massive-election-majority-exit-poll-shows-2024-07-04/ KronosAlight (talk) 09:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
what a load of shit 2A00:23EE:1590:40AC:68A7:76AD:396C:E24F (talk) 17:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

This should not be changed unless reliable and recent sources can be presented that explicitly state the party to be of a political position other than centre-left. These reliable sources must comply with WP:SYNTH. Helper201 (talk) 10:23, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

  • [10], 2024; "left/centrist divide"
  • [11], 2023; quietism or third way
  • [12], 2023; "decentralised communitarian socialism", basically the Cooperative Party
  • [13], 2023; "moved Labour into a more centrist position"
  • there was another one describing it as centrist when I did my initial survey but can't find it now
Alexanderkowal (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
None of those directly above quotes call the Labour as a whole centrist. Saying the party has a "divide" is not that, third way is not something that is usually put in the position section of the infobox, the "decentralised communitarian socialism" is not relevant to political position, and "moved Labour into a more centrist position" like the rest breaks WP:SYNTH as "more centrist position" is not saying the party is overall and/or as a whole centrist. Also, please provide full sentences when you give quotes, this much better helps identify whether or not they comply with the synth guideline. Helper201 (talk) 11:58, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Left/centrist divide supports “Centre to centre-left”. Genuinely those are the only academic sources I could find that discuss Labour’s ideology under Starmer. There’s next to no literature on it Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:08, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
You’re not going to find any sources that call Labour as a whole centrist because that would be obv incorrect. The proposal is centre to centre-left Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:11, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose It's worth pointing out that we generally don't alter a party's position based on their current leader, as it's WP:RECENTISM. For example, we didn't change Labour to be further to the left under Corbyn; we kept them as they were under Miliband. For us to move the party's position I think we're going to need several years worth of sources that demonstrate their shift has been a permanent one, up and down the party. — Czello (music) 12:18, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
    Miliband and Corbyn were centre-left.Meesher (talk) 12:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
    Ditto. Aficionado538 (talk) 12:43, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
    Neither Miliband nor Corbyn made efforts to purge ideologically moderate sections of the party in the way that Starmer has. Maurnxiao (talk) 23:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
    This doesn't really address my point. It's recentism to alter the whole ideology of the party based on recent events; it should only be done after a few years when sources are still describing them as centre/centre-right/whaterver. — Czello (music) 09:01, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    As opposed to having nearly decade old sources from three election cycles ago that do not adequately describe the Labour Party which is possibly going to be in the British government for the next five years? Isn't there a difference between resentism and being outright outdated? Maurnxiao (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    Again, we'd need several years worth of sources illustrating there's been a WP:LASTING shift in the party in order to make that change. Until then I think sources from 2015 suit just fine (and, again, were fine during the Corbyn years). We also don't know if they'll govern as a centre-right party when in office, or if their huge majority will allow them to be comfortably centre-left. — Czello (music) 15:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    Again, Corbyn didn't purge members ideologically to the right of him. Labour has rid itself of most of the leftists in their ranks, that isn't undone in just a few weeks. This is a long lasting change for the Labour Party akin to 1997. Maurnxiao (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    This is a long lasting change This is WP:CRYSTAL. We don't know if it's a long lasting change yet. — Czello (music) 15:53, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    If, say, the Republican and Democratic parties were banned today, would considering that a long lasting change be crystal balling? Maurnxiao (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    This is a bit of a non-sequitur, and distracting from the point. Labour hasn't been banned, and neither has its left wing members. It's WP:OR to suggest that a few on the hard-left being booted out has a long term impact. — Czello (music) 19:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    "...and neither has its left wing members" That's not true. Sources: [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]. Also, they intentionally sabotaged Corbyn so that a left wing party leader wouldn't win and become prime minister [22], and then banned him from even being a regular Labour MP [23]. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Some of the hard-left were booted out; there are still leftists in the party. And again, this is all beside the point – it's not like the party is solely populated by right wing people now. It still overwhelmingly has left/centre-left politicians in its ranks. It's WP:OR for us to speculate like this. — Czello (music) 07:16, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    "Centre to centre-left" wouldn't be a radical change, it's not exactly excessive recentism or crystalballing; no-one's proposing a change to centre-right. A party's position should reflect its current position. Parties' ideologies do change overtime and it should be updated to reflect that.
    UKIP's position was changed from "right-wing" to "right-wing to far-right" in 2018/19ish after quite a bit of debate and back-and-forth. The party had clearly moved towards the far-right after its mid-2010s heyday even though it was only 2-3 years ago at that point. Icantthinkofausernames (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    ..."no-one's proposing a change to centre-right." I am, more specifically a change to; centre, centre to centre-right, or centre-right. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Sorry, somehow missed that. I do agree Starmer's Labour definitely has some centre-right elements but I think describing them as centre-right overall is a little too far, and we'd probably struggle to find enough sources to justify it. Although... Labour is clearly to the right of the Lib Dems now, and they're classed as "centre to centre-left" (or maybe just "centre-left" would fit them better nowadays?) Icantthinkofausernames (talk) 08:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    He's purged the leftists, not the soft left, ie centre-left, which still make up a considerable part of the party with some serving in the shadow cabinet. Kowal2701 (talk) 18:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    Historically socialist parties have routinely purged left-wing elements. That doesn't mean they change their ideology every twenty years. TFD (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    British Labour's hardly socialist. Maurnxiao (talk) 20:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    As Herbert Morrison said, "socialism is what the Labour government does." More broadly, socialist party refers to a group of parties that arose in the 19th century to support labour but have over time broadened their constituency. At least, that's how the terminology is used in reliable sources. TFD (talk) 21:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    Why is Herbert Morrison – whom I did not know before you brought him up – considered an authority in this matter when he is making comments such as these? It is like saying Nazism is whatever the Tories do, ergo, Conservative Party far right. Maurnxiao (talk) 21:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
    In order to categorize socialist parties, do we start with Labour, the German Social Democrats, the French Socialists and the numerous other parties that have called themselves socialist for decades and cooperated in self-described socialist organizations or do we start with a Platonic ideal that no perhaps no party meets?
    BTW, it's a little too early in the discussion to bring up HItler. But it would be peculiar to argue that the Nazi Party weren't really a Nazi party because they didn't live up to whatever definition of a Nazi Party you had. TFD (talk) 00:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Neither the SPD in Germany nor the Socialists in France have shifted anywhere near as much to the right as the Labour Party did under Blair and is doing under Starmer. Not that I'd consider any of these parties socialist, really, it is like calling the Nazis socialist because they called themselves National Socialists. By the way, I think you should reread the earlier Nazi analogy I made, you seemed to have completely missed the mark. I was talking about the Conservative Party in the UK, not the Nazis. Maurnxiao (talk) 00:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    @The Four Deuces Neither of those parties are socialist, they are social democratic. In the case of the french socialists, they merely align themselves with left wing political groups/coalitions. In the case of SPD, the party as it currently is, is not socialist and hasn't been for decades if not over a century.
    The Nazi party is by definition Nazi, as Naziïsm is defined as being the ideology of the Nazi party. Such is not the case for Labour and Socialism. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Socialism is defined as the ideology of socialists. Parties and groups calling themselves socialist came together in the 1889 Socialist International. The more radical members would eventually regroup in the Communist International, while the moderates would continue to be called socialists.
    Do you think that no socialist parties ever existed or somehow they morphed into something else? People who think that have little understanding of the history of socialism. TFD (talk) 03:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I have to mention, Nazïsm being defined as the ideology of the Nazi party isn't comparable to Socialism being the ideology of Socialist parties. The Nazi party was a single party that established its own ideology, Socialism isn't defined by its relationship to a party or a group of parties, it's a clear cut ideology with its own origins outside of the party system of most liberal-democratic nations. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 03:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Socialism is not what the Labour government does, the Labour government is very capable of doing non-socialist things. I don't understand how socialism can be defined that way at all. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    That's the No true Scotsman fallacy. A Scottish person refuses to accept that a criminal is Scottish because no Scot would commit such a crime. But even though Scots may be mostly law abiding, that's not the definition of a Scotsman. We learn about the Scots by studying them, not by creating an ideal.
    Do you think that socialist parties ever existed and if not what is the point of having such a term? TFD (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Socialism is a set of ideas that are not bound to a single party which has deviated greatly from the beliefs of its founders over a hundred year journey. Maurnxiao (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Also, please do not forget the apparently very common fallacy fallacy. Maurnxiao (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    So are you saying that while we can talk about liberal, conservative, Christian Democratic, nationalist, fascist, and communist parties, we cannot talk about socialist parties? Why is there a special rule? TFD (talk) 14:22, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    No I am not saying anything even remotely like that so that seems like an odd question to me. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
    Would you agree that the Liberal Democratic Party is a liberal party, the Conservative Party is a conservative party, the Green Party is a green party, the Scottish National Party is a nationalist party, the Communist Party of GB is a communist party? Why therefore can we not say Labour is a socialist party? Is there some sort of purity test we apply to Labour but not these other parties? TFD (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
    If their actions defy their name then yes? Do you consider the Nazi Party socialist because it had National Socialist in the name? Misnomer. Maurnxiao (talk) 10:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
    I would assume that the people who coined the term socialist to describe their movement were socialists, just as the people who coined the term liberal to describe their movement were liberals. Of course some parties deliberately misname themselves. But I see no evidence that when the Labour Party was founded in 1900 it as significantly different from other socialist parties or that it is today.
    One of the ways to determine if the self-description fits the facts is to look at international affiliations. Labour for example was in the Socialist International and the Socialist caucus in the European parliament. Nazis OTOH never belonged to any international socialist organizations.
    Do you not think that Marx and Lassalle, Engels and Bernstein and Kier Hardie were socialists? I have seen no sources they weren't. TFD (talk) 02:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    None of which has any bearing on the policies of the modern Labour Party. It was socialist, once, but that is clearly no longer the case. Maurnxiao (talk) 10:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    Policies and ideology are separate things. Liberals, conservatives and socialists have supported and opposed free trade, the welfare state, immigration, high taxes, slavery, abortion and anything else you want to name. Parties change policies based on ideology. The developed world today is not the same place as Europe 100 years ago. Only a fool would insist on keeping the 1924 platform of the Labour Party UK, the Social Democratic Party of Germany or the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks). TFD (talk) 03:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
    @Czello In that case I propose that we have different political positions listed for the different time frames, like what's done at Radical Party (France). A Socialist Trans Girl 02:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong support. You have, in great and very sufficient detail, detailed how the labour party is not centre-left. The party is centre, centre to centre-right, or just centre right. I've already written a thing supporting it so I'll restate that here, ommitting the irrelevant parts.

Considering their selection for their candidates this election, and the fact that they self-sabotaged Corbyn (source) and kicked him out of the party (source), it cannot be said that they are centre-left to left-wing at all, barely even centre left at that point.
What a party says itself in its manifesto is often not reliable, and often they do not reflect the ideology of the party itself. There must be third party reliable sources saying it is centre-left. I have not seen any reliable third party sources saying the Labour party is centre-left, from after the expulsion of Corbyn, which are about it being centre-left (not just saying it within it briefly through circular sourcing). I have three saying it's centre-right. 1 2 3. (Note sources 2 and 3 are opinion, though are still of value while adjusting for that).
Additionally, the party itself says it is pro-business (source), which is mutually exclusive with being pro-worker; centre-left politics is pro-worker first and foremost, within a welfarist democratic capitalist system.
I do not see how they are still centre-left at all when they have shifted right on the economy (Blair notoriously gave up to the right mostly on economics), on immigration, on the EU, on trans rights, etc.}
Additionaly, the party under Starmer is, on almost all if not all issues, to the right of Joe Biden, who is a centre to centre-left social liberal. And, in the UK, the Liberal Democrats are to the left of Labour on all issues, especially social and foreign policy.

Therefore, it is my belief that it cannot reasonably be considered centre-left. A Socialist Trans Girl 02:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I have seen this and your other recent comments in this discussion and I agree completely with you. It should also be pointed out that on foreign policy, Labour is nearly indistinguishable from the Conservatives. It's pretty neoconservative, militaristic, and aligned almost symmetrically with the US.
By the way, it wasn't just Corbyn who was expelled from the party. Probably the other most notable attempt at destroying the remnants of the leftist Labour was the botched attempt to get rid of Diane Abbott. The party is currently at war with the left, and in fact there has been a significant rightward shift in British politics recently. Current Labour is, in my estimation, closer to the early 2010s Tories than any party with the interests of the working class in mind. Maurnxiao (talk) 02:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Respectfully, no academic sources state centre-right or even centre. They just say the party has been moved from left/hard left towards the centre. I think this is WP:POV pushing Kowal2701 (talk) 05:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Pushing from a POV is a valid way of working because others will push from a different one and we’ll arrive at a middle ground, but it is time consuming, I’d rather we just tried to put our own opinions aside and followed academic sources. Personally I’m to the left of Starmer, but I’d rather this encyclopaedia were accurate Kowal2701 (talk) 06:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry but there's a lot of WP:OR arguments in here, such as Additionally, the party itself says it is pro-business, which is mutually exclusive with being pro-worker (aside from being untrue/POV). Comparisons to Joe Biden are also WP:OR, but don't really tally given that the American political landscape is to the right of ours, anyway. Biden might be considered centre-left in the US, but if you plopped him in in the UK it'd be harder to make that point. — Czello (music) 07:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose, as there is so many way much more "centre-grounded" parties than the current Labour Party (under Starmer) in the other European countries and around the globe (including various third way, social-liberal, neoliberal, nationalist big tent parties, "social democrats" only by name, etc. - which also include parties without ANY left-wing faction within it), that are still clasified as "centre-left" in political spectrum. Also in the U.K. politics the Liberal Democrats are traditionally "centre to centre-left" party in the Parliament. Also, durring Blair (much more centrist programe) and Corbyn (leftist) terms Labour was still seen as "centre-left" political party. --Dav988, 07:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it is best to keep the current Infobox:
Ideology: Social democracy
Political position: Centre-left
Which is the most common Infobox description for similar parties, also based by the vast majority of the main sources in case of the U.K. Labour. --Dav988, 07:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree, must keep center-left as it does with sister parties like Australian Labor Party , Social Democratic Party of Germany and New Zealand Labour Party given these parties have been also labelled "moved to the center" and "adopted some center-right policies" yet retained being labelled Centre-left. Please remove the [under discussion] Mhaot (talk) 10:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
You don’t get the deciding vote, it is still under discussion Kowal2701 (talk) 10:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Similar parties still are not the Labour Party. Maurnxiao (talk) 11:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Agree to this. Social-democracy and centre-left. Gc12847 (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Support, the party are simply prima facie not left of the centre based on the policies they've adopted. People citing recentism ignore that they've been centrist to centre-right for 30 years, with a brief blip.Meesher (talk) 12:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose,

- Under that logic, many other sister parties would had their Centre-left position removed. One example is the Australian Labor Party which they too had moved to the center and adopted certain centrist to center-right policies ever since Bob Hawke (1980s) from economic liberalization to Asylum Seekers to Immigration.
- Starmer in May 2024 reiterated he and the parties commitment to social democracy in a statement saying “I would describe myself as a socialist. I describe myself as a progressive” Source: https://theconversation.com/is-keir-starmer-a-socialist-232567#:~:text=%E2%80%9CI%20would%20describe%20myself%20as,as%20a%20democratic%20socialist%20party.
- A key element that keeps center-left parties center-left is the affiliation and support from Trade Unions even if the party itself moves slightly economically right. Labour Party and other sister parties fits in this category. Mhaot (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
That is correct, all of those should be changed to reflect their actual ideology, and wikipedia shouldn't be used to whitewash them with outdated labels like "social democracy" (lol) and "centre-left". Michail (blah) 09:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose there is no notable difference between it and other social democratic political parties in Europe. Support leaving it "Centre-left". Completely Random Guy (talk) 12:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose as I also support leaving "centre-left" alone. To be honest, as I always state in similiar discussions, I oppose the "xxxxx to xxxxx" format (e.g. "centre-left to left-wing") and political positions in infoboxes. The Labour Party has been broadly and quintessentially a centre-left, social-democratic party for almost a century, including when its leaders came from the left. Also under Corbyn, the party's majority was arguably centre-left. It is surely centre-left now, as the party has lost votes to its left to the Greens and independent candidates. --Checco (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Seconded, also strong oppose. I would not recommend adding "democratic socialism" back in, by the way. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Also strong oppose The policies on worker's rights, rail renationalisation, soereign wealth-fund and green energy and still centre-left. Also, others have said, it is no diffeent from other centre-left parties. Gc12847 (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose for the reasons set out immediately above by Checco; also, irrespective of Labour's purportedly 'centre-right' (dubious...) leadership, the parliamentary party is still a heterogeneous coalition of the solid left (as per Socialist Campaign Group) right through to the soft left and moderates. 'Centre-left' applies perfectly fine and I would suggest adding democratic socialism back to the ideology section too. · | (t - c) 16:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong consensus was already reached to remove Democratic Socialism, there were very few dissenting voices, it won't be added back in in the absence of a brand new discussion. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 17:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment I've already opposed above, but we've now got a reliable source from today that explicitly calls Labour centre-left. — Czello (music) 17:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Support Changing to Centre to Centre-left seems like the most logical option. Viatori (talk) 06:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Further comment: "centre-left" already includes both "centre" and "left-wing"; it is perfectly OK to describe a quintessential social-democratic party like Labour. --Checco (talk) 06:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong support — Labour is clearly not a centre-left political party. It self-describes as the natural party of business. Centre to centre-right is the correct label for this mess of a party. The zeal with which some editors are defending the centre-left / social democracy label with links to sources from 2010 is honestly quite pathetic. Michail (blah) 09:36, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Arguably the zeal with which some editors propose centre-right without any academic sources is equally pathetic Kowal2701 (talk) 09:42, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
It is literally indistinguishable from one-nation conservatism ("the preservation of established institutions and traditional principles within a political democracy, in combination with social and economic programmes designed to benefit the ordinary person"), but you do you I guess. For some people it's acceptable for Wikipedia articles to gaslight readers with sources from 2010. Michail (blah) 10:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. The sources are outdated and from three election cycles ago. Maurnxiao (talk) 11:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Being a party of business is not a left/right distinguisher in the modern day. A centrist or centre-left party can certainly be pro-business. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 15:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Important to note that there is a difference between small businesses and bigger ones. Maurnxiao (talk) 15:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support - After weeks of discussions, it's clear that strong support indicates the correct ideological label under Starmer's leadership is centre to centre-left. Michalis1994 (talk) 17:13, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
It is not unprecedented, either; look at the Liberal Party in Canada. Maurnxiao (talk) 17:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Disagree that Labour Party should be labelled centre to centre-left rather than keeping the centre-left position as:
- Liberal Party of Canada shouldn't even compared here as LPC is not grouped as Progressive Alliance but rather Liberal International (as with Liberal Democrats (UK))
- A key element of a centre-left party is the link to Trade Unions and adherence to Social Democracy (even if not adhered strongly)
- May as well change most other sister parties (such as Australian Labor Party, Social Democratic Party of Germany) under this argument as they had also been label "moving the center" and "Third Way" Mhaot (talk) 03:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure I would be entirely opposed to that third point you brought up. Maurnxiao (talk) 11:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose I haven't been very involved in this discussion as a participant but have read through it so far. The vast majority of news sources, many of which have already been linked by other editors, describe Labour's win as a victory for the center-left. Additionally, while there are some issues they have moderated on, many of the party's priorities remain oriented with the left, such as workers' rights and environmental policies (see here [25]). Additionally, as another editor pointed out, centre-left can encompass some centrist or even slightly centre right views, as well as ideas farther to the left. It's a label for a slightly left wing party, which I think fits Labour's current ideology quite well. Harshalrach (talk) 22:18, 6 July 2024

NPR describes Starmer as a "centrist."[26] The problem is that these terms mean different things depending on context. If you want to say the party is left-wing, right-wing, centre-left, centrist, etc., you have to tell the readers what you mean by those terms. TFD (talk) 04:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose As other users have mentioned, reliable sources have consistently described Labour as a center-left party. Those voicing support, in contrast, seem to mainly be rooting their arguments in a personally-defined purity test, rather than basing said arguments in any sort of academic or journalistic consensus.Jogarz1921 (talk) 07:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

The problem with this take is that journalists also apply personally-defined purity tests. The centre-left for a journalist in the United States is the centre/centre-right for any European politician. Also, the political compass placed Labour squarely in the centre-right camp based on its policies. Michail (blah) 09:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Although it is true that some journalists do this, academic sources are also available that would place Labour on the centre-left; such as a recent paper from The British Journal of Politics and International Relations that was published this year and argues that the UK, Australian and and New Zealand Labour Parties "are still rooted in a recognisable centre–left tradition, but operating from a narrower base of core values". The discussion on this page appears to have avoided looking at publications like this, and instead given near-exclusive preference to the 'personally-defined purity test' you mention, which should be anathema for an encyclopaedia (albeit historically consistent with some of the earliest versions!).
Likewise, I would strongly advise against using the Political Compass as a reliable indicator of any party's ideology. It has no clear methodology, is not tested for reliability, is frequently criticised by academics, and only represents the views of its editor(s). GuernseyIndependenceParty (talk) 11:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
  • last year, not this year - sorry, completely forgot what year this is!
GuernseyIndependenceParty (talk) 11:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Feel free to remove social democracy from the ALP infobox in this case, because "it remains unable – even through third way means – to offer policy innovations or solutions. It cannot or will not reactivate core values of the social democratic tradition". And feel free to remove it from Labour as well, since the jist is that these three sister parties have essentially the same definitely-not-social-democratic platform. Michail (blah) 13:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Political Compass is nowhere near reliable as a source – in fact I'd go as far as to say it's actively untrustworthy. — Czello (music) 11:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose, centre-left is well sourced and still reflects the bulk of the party - regardless of some of the policies of the current leader. Labour has moderated towards the centre since the Corbyn-era, but certainly not much more so than the Liberal Democrats or Labour's social democratic counterparts in Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, etc.--Jay942942 (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Well sourced? The current sources are from four election cycles and three leaders ago. Maurnxiao (talk) 12:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
A list of recent sources that state Labour is centre-left:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/04/europe/uk-election-europe-populist-surge-intl/index.html
https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/spain-sanchez-scholz-germany/ (from politics lecturer at King's College London)
https://www.newstatesman.com/editors-note/2023/03/jason-cowley-keir-starmer-learnt-return-german-social-democrats
https://sciencebusiness.net/news/universities/uk-universities-crisis-centre-left-takes-power
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/16/centre-left-revival-keir-starmer-labour
https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/20240705-uk-s-labour-sweeps-to-power-as-leader-starmer-vows-to-bring-change
https://www.france24.com/en/20200404-britain-s-labour-party-picks-keir-starmer-as-its-new-leader
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/how-labour-can-navigate-the-pitfalls-of-moving-from-opposition-to-government/
Labour's membership of the main alliance of centre left parties in Europe: https://pes.eu/member/labour-party/
A statement from Labour's website that 'Labour will introduce a new industrial strategy', language that is inconceivable for a centre right or centrist neoliberal party in a western political system would use because it represents support for some state direction of the economy to achieve policy outcomes such as Labour's statement it will 'Make Britain a clean energy superpower' by establishing a new state led energy company, some of its other policies like free breakfast clubs at schools and public ownership of railways are the type of thing that would be firmly associated with centre-left politics
Here is the obviously centre-left Socialist Party (France) congratulating Labour on its victory and saying it gives 'a new impetus on the left': https://x.com/partisocialiste/status/1808984915813277743
The fact that Starmer chose a cautious and unambitious campaign and manifesto does not mean that it is not a fundemntally centre left party full of politicians who would identify that way (even Stammer said he describes himself as a Socialist) and voted for by the same kind of people who vote for centre-left parties across Europe. The fact that it upsets some editors who clearly align with the faction of the party that is more left wing than CENTRE-left and who are unhappy Starmer moved away from them and suspended Corbyn does not mean it is not the party that occupies the centre-left space in British politics, will shift between different centre-left tendencies and levels of radicalism over time and is affiliated with trade unions. Wikipedia can only reflect reliable sources which have a very clear consensus, if this changes the political position can change but so far it has not.Ncnub (talk) 15:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
None of this has any bearing on the fact that this discussion is NOT over, as is evidenced by the fact that you just contributed to it, so please stop removing the under discussion label on the infobox. Besides, people are arguing that Labour should be centre to centre-left in the infobox, not right-wing. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
To be fair, we are talking about the Labour Party here. Everyone fundamentally disagreeing about its political identity and never reaching a firm conclusion is a fundamental part of its internal culture. GuernseyIndependenceParty (talk) 16:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Also some of the people proposing the discussion didn't want centre-centre left even though there are no reliable sources for the centre bit. They were talking about centre-right which demonstrates the extent to which they are obviously extremely bitter Corbynites who are offering ideological diatribes and not any correctly interpreted reliable sources to back up there assertions. The discussion is unserious and has no prospect of success. Ncnub (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Assume good faith and don't make personal attacks. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
The discussion has not been contributed to except for your comment for a couple days and it shows no conensus for a change that is proposed based on personal ideologicaly driven opinions rather than reliable sources. My comment was to justify edit. Reliable sources describe labour exclusively as centre-left, not centrist (some may say it has 'become more centrist' which is not the same thing). I can imagine in the future if the Conservatives drift to the populist right to chase Reform and parties like the Greens grow on the left Labour could be seen to represent a broader political centre and this would then be reflected in reliable sources that could be used to change the position on wikipedia. However, it is currently still the party that represents the centre-left of British politics and seen as analagous to other quintescently centre-left sister parties such as SPD,PSOE and PS which all have 'centre-left' and 'social democracy' as there political positions and ideology. Labour has the same kind of people as politicians and voters as these parties and is in international groupings with them as well as its political traditions and history and trade union affiliation marking it as the centre-left force in British politics. This must remain the case as longs as reliable sources reflect it. Ncnub (talk) 16:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Look at the other topics on here discussing the democratic socialism label. Those are finished discussions, whereas this one is not and until the discussion is over the infobox should reflect this. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Examples of how this pointless discussion that petered out days ago is based on ideological editors and has no prospect of success:
One editor brought up how 'Starmer favors Britain's current first-past-the-post voting system and opposes proposals for electoral reform, such as the adoption of proportional representation'. This has been the position of the Labour Party since the day it was founded and so is clearly compatible with some traditions of centre-left thought.
They bring up quotes they claim praise Margret Thactor without the context the authors of these quotes later made clear they strongly opposed Thactor and there argument was that,like Atlee and Blair, her government was one that left a lasting legacy like they want their one to.
They bring up Labour's not supporting full abolition of the house of lords (but proposing some reform) despite the fact that previous Labour leaders have often taken this position. They bring up opposing a second Scotish independce referendum which was Labour's position in the Corbyn years and is simlair to the PSOE position on Catalonia. They bring up Labour supporting NATO and nuclear weapons which was the position even in the Corbyn years.
A different editor said they are proposing 'centre, centre to centre-right' which highlights how these are the ideolgical diatribes of bitter Corbynites not serious arguments backed up by reliable sources with a chance of sucess.
Another said 'the party itself says it is pro-business, which is mutually exclusive with being pro-worker'. This ignores the fact that working with business is a core tenent of social democratic and third way centre-left politics. There are no reliable sources to sustain a shift and no arguments with any more substance than 'because it is not left wing- far left it cannot be centre-left'. With no reliable sources and the discussion not showing any consensus for a change the discussion must be brought to a close. Ncnub (talk) 16:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Closing this discussion

I think it's time we draw this one to a close, too. While I was certain of the consensus of the last discussion, I'm less so here. I'd be inclined to say it's no consensus to change, but it's less clear to me. Do we have a consensus, or should we raise it at WP:CR for an uninvolved third party to give their verdict? My only hesitation is that CR has a notoriously long wait time. — Czello (music) 16:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd say we close it but as Labour are now in power and can implement their policies, perhaps we should revisit this discussion in a few months' time? Maurnxiao (talk) 16:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Happy to come back in the new year (2025) once they've had the first budget and some time to begin implementing policies. GuernseyIndependenceParty (talk) 16:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
That seems reasonable to me. Maurnxiao (talk) 16:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Time to close discussion, see my final comment in discussion that dissects how arguments made lack any substance, reliable sources or chance of success. Going through discussion makes clear that consensus will not be reached in favour of change. No point in continuing so I will close. WP:BOLD Ncnub (talk) 17:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
No, not time, for the reasons I explained on your talk page. I count over a dozen people who have been involved in this discussion, and given that the consensus is unclear we should give them a chance to have input. Given that you already have a report open at EWN I suggest you drop stop edit waring. — Czello (music) 17:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
@Czello I think there's no consensus, yeah. A Socialist Trans Girl 04:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Talking of which, I'm going to ping a few people to get their input. @The Four Deuces:, @Takis S1: @GlowstoneUnknown: @A Socialist Trans Girl: @Kowal2701: @Autospark: — Czello (music) 17:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

You're handling this very functionally, thank you. I think no consensus is most accurate, with a closing remark that the premise of future discussions need to be on reliable sources. I agree that January 2025 would be a good time to reopen discussion when we have more sources Kowal2701 (talk) 17:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
No consensus and moratorium on further discussions until January 2025, it seems to be, if others agree. — Czello (music) 17:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
@Czello I do NOT agree with a moratorium, I see no need for one, especially since there's no consensus one way or the other. Also I think until January is too long. May I ask your reasoning for supporting a moratorium? A Socialist Trans Girl 04:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I wasn't the first person to suggest it (that was Maurnxiao, but then endorsed by GuernseyIndependenceparty, Ncnub, and Kowal2701). However I do support it because right now there are clearly not enough sources to achieve a consensus, and part of the reason for this is that the sources are all from before they were in government. After 6 months we might have a clearer direction of travel. — Czello (music) 07:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
It strikes me that changing the position of one of Europe's quintessentialy centre-left parties, universally agreed to be centre-left by reliable sources and that is beginning to implement a centre-left program of government and has a unanimously center-left set of politicians and party members as well as a voter base typical of centre-left parties because of the ideological position of a few editors clearly a lot more left wing than centre-left politics and social democracy and a discussion that has not reached consensus for change would generate a major backlash from other editors if it were to be done. Time to end discussion because the outcome is obvious. Ncnub (talk) 17:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Not for the first time I will see WP:AGF. The opinions of other editors shouldn't be disregarded because of their perceived political views. — Czello (music) 17:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
See some of my previous comments which explain how it is possible British politics could develop in a way over the next 5-10 years that could see reliable sources start to provide a basis for a change in political position however right now they do not because Labour occupies the centre-left space in British politics as agreed by all recent reliable sources. Ncnub (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
changing the position of one of Europe's quintessentialy centre-left parties
Political parties can change ideologies. Democrats used to support state rights to own slaves while Radical Republicans led the effort against slavery and southern seccession. Maurnxiao (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
They can, but right now all reliable sources agree on Labour being centre-left. It has merely shifted between different strands of centre-left politics. It is also notable it maintains close connections with Europe's other quintessentialy centre-left parties, many of whom congratulated Labour on its victory. That fact that it is one of the quintesential standard bearers of the European tradition of centre-left politics and social democracy and a member of the Party of European Socialists means that changing its position would be particularly monumental and cannot be done while all recent reliable sources agree it is centre-left. There have been many goverment of these kind of parties that have perused very moderate policies such as those of Gerhard Schröder and Tony Blair that have not resulted in their parties political positions being changed- this is because just like Keir Starmer they represent a strand of centre-left politics. Ncnub (talk) 18:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
You claiming Schröder or Starmer represent this or that is a matter of personal opinion. There are sources that point towards Labour's status as a centre to centre-left party, and it is diplomatic for leaders and political parties to congratulate election victors. Maurnxiao (talk) 18:10, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't mean countries leaders diplomatically congratulating them on their elections, I mean political parties congratulating and welcoming another ones victory because it aligns with their ideology. This is what has happened with Labour (see the tweet I linked from the centre-left Socialist Party (France)) and this is relevent as a reflection of the kind of politics the party is seen to represent. It is not relevant my personal opinion of various leaders but it is relevent that Wikipedia did not change their parties political positions becuase of them and I would recomend reading a bit about the governments of Schröder in particular if you think he was any more left wing than Starmer. All the sources brought up to support a change have ever been misunderstood (as explained by previous editors) or say something like 'Labour has become more centrist' which is not incompatible with it being centre-left. In contrast, there is an overwhelming bulk of recent reliable sources that say it is centre-left Ncnub (talk) 18:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
No consensus and moratorium on further discussions until January 2025 Ncnub (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ncnub It's fine if you disagree with the proposal, but you shouldn't assume that those who support it support it because they're much further left and want to rebrand a type of party as centre or center-right; that's not the case. Nobody's trying to make PSOE or Socialist Party (Portugal) centre or cente-right. The reason they do for labour is because of a massive shift of policy in recent years, especially in regards to social policy. A Socialist Trans Girl 04:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

@A Socialist Trans Girl The Social Democratic Party (Romania) is labelled as centre -left despite social conservatism being one of its ideoligies. The mainstream of British politics is more sceptical of trans rights in particular than e.g Spain so it makes sense the centre-left party reflects this and Labour is typically on the centre left of British politics on social issues e.g: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/04/labour-plans-extend-equal-pay-rights-black-asian-minority-ethnic-staff https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-plans-simplify-process-change-231853344.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADApARmL-_m5yBdew3Enza-fzmmZHFXnQ4jOVM24SP2Zg2HST7eK2gumR0g8vosiJ-bWh70KJwIvkoaaIAKeBl4Ar1uN-QMR8anpE9SHkyDSVu46kxr1t3zkb7eDK9paBW1iudD9kyxXYqvaEwQichhrclw7w7qayTGezRMv_-No https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/mayor-unveils-commission-to-review-diversity https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/27/labours-race-equality-act-south-africas-apartheid-badenoch/ Furthermore, when I explained how the way Labour talks about the economy is aligned with traditional centre left rhetoric and distinct from how e.g a centrist neolibreal or centre right parties would frame things, and that the (few) policies they have announced are in line with typical centre-left governance you did not help this conversation by making a bizarre reference to the Nazis. Additionally, the starting point for the massive shift in policy is Corbyn Who is way to the left of the parties you mentioned. Is it such a massive shift from the centre-left governments of Blair or Scholz? 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncnub (talk • contribs) 14:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add socialism as a historical ideology?

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

before new labour, the party was more about actual socialist ideas and not just centre left democracy. it should be added to the infobox ManU9827 (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

More of Democratic socialism maybe in theory "socialism" but it was said so in a broad manner not in an overthrow the current regime and establish a communist utopia manner. Takis S1 (talk) 20:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

labour blocked investigations into child rape cases in oldham seven times

Latest comment: 1 month ago13 comments3 people in discussion

ive added this to the oldham council page and am wondering if i should add a single line somewhere on this page mentioning this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldham_Council#Controversy_around_Child_Sexual_Exploitation NotQualified (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It is probably not significant to the party overall. Is it an issue that the national leadership has been confronted with? TFD (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
no more regional to manchester, i say it warrants a one line mention cause the case was pretty massive and 100s of kids were raped. NotQualified (talk) 22:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Policy says that the significance of any information depends on its coverage in reliable sources. I don't remember for example the topic being discussed in the recent election. TFD (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
labour exists beyond just the recent election. regardless, it has been covered by the BBC, the telegraph, sky news, etc. all of which are linked in the oldham article as references. NotQualified (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Lots of stories get coverage, you have to show that it has been significant to the Labour Party. Did the police investigate Labour HQ in London? Is Keir Starmer under investigation? TFD (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
right but due weight now come on, a political party blocking investigations into mass child rape is a big deal NotQualified (talk) 01:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
See Balancing aspects: "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject."
It's not what you or I consider significant, but what the sources do. Reasonable people will of course disagree on what weight sources should provide, which is why the policy was developed. If you think the sources are neglectful, you have to take it up with them, or get the policy changed. TFD (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
im proposing literally a single line to be added here NotQualified (talk) 02:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
This insinuates that the central Labour party had some part in those decisions, which is untrue. Although the local Labour party was absolutely responsible for repeatedly voting against an independent investigation, there is nothing to show the national party was involved in those decisions. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
right, so i should post this in local labour party pages (assuming they exist?) NotQualified (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
You've already posted it to the Oldham Council page, which is the closest thing the local Labour party would have to a page. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 08:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
okay thanks, good to know. NotQualified (talk) 14:14, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Labour_Party_(UK)/Archive_15&oldid=1243086889"