>>2612348let's say you're right and that people don't want change:
so what? on what planet do you live where things happen in these isles because a majority of the public
want them to?
the era-defining failure of british state management is its refusal to bribe the proletariat. (pedantry, at this point, obliges me to point out in passing that you claim here that the proletariat is bribed, but claim in
>>2612318 that there is no proletariat.)
the thing that may finally destroy the quote-unquote labour party for good is its failure to bribe, its failure to even pretend to bribe, it being the first to remind you at every turn that there is no money for bribes: not for the proletariat, not even for the professional managerial class. its solution to everything is more crackdowns and bans, the stick and not the carrot.
even in non-monetary terms, a labour government committed to social liberalism and a rhetoric-heavy action-light anti-genocide line could probably assemble a minimum-viable "bribe", and they will not do even that. they will not do it because they do not give a damn what the public want and they certainly do not give a damn what the
labour voting public want.
your depressive theory papers over a much more depressing reality:
nobody likes the status quo. it is true that nobody
really wants particularly radical change, but almost nobody is being bought off either. the public exist to be subjugated, disciplined, and excluded, not bought off. even the notion that we live under a
for profit system is wildly optimistic: elderly care, water, electricity, gas, rolling-stock companies, buy to let landlords, and god knows what else, are not
really for-profit firms in a productive sense. they are
badly run subsidy junkies sucking up rent from the public for doing little of value and doing it poorly, desperately throwing bribes at politicians in the hope that politicians can discipline an unruly public. they owe more to a strawman of the late soviet union than to anything you'll find in even a half-functioning european country.
even the people who run one set of these bastard firms hate the incompetence that comes from interacting with the others. this is a society and an economy creaking at the seems, desperately trying to delay a reckoning of one kind or another. it takes a certain optimism to imagine that we've merely the american problem, the australian problem, of living under capitalism and the profit motive.
blaming the public for their own subjugation is the easy way out. 69 million guilty men are suffering? (perhaps more? perhaps our view generalizes to the entire first world, treatlerites all.)
good. god is in his heaven, all is right in the world.
far better to believe that than to accept that this country is deeply anomalous even by the standards of capitalist hellholes. far better to share the blame across 69 million people than to accept that this country is run by-and-for a small and shrinking number of people and that everyone else is a helot.