Thread by @shaunjlawson

There's a fair amount of competing passions flying around just now. A lot of people are hurting deeply. Quite right too given what was at stake and how much so many have given. And it's also because of fear: of what the Tories will do, and what a post-Corbyn Labour will look like

So many people only came home to Labour after decades away because of Corbyn. So will all the things which turned them away now return?

Well, no. The Labour right is dead. Most of Corbynism's loudest critics have gone. But in that, there's a salutary lesson for all of us.

I took some stick yesterday for merely mentioning Keir Starmer's name as a potential next leader. I'm encouraged to see him doing well in the poll I tweeted out - not because I want him (it's way too early; I have no idea who I want), but it's evidence of plenty of pragmatists.

Pragmatism in politics is not - or at least, doesn't have to be - a dirty word. It is to so many on the left because of their experiences under New Labour. So the kneejerk response is "we must choose the most left-wing candidate! Anyone who doesn't is a Blairite sellout!"

Which rather begs the question: what does 'most left wing' even mean? I often see people saying all our offers should be rooted in class analysis - but the problem with Corbyn and McDonnell is their brand of left wing politics no longer works with working class people.

There's all kinds of reasons for that. The Tories have had control of the economic narrative not just for a decade, but four decades... and counting. They target working class communities with never-ending lies, dark ads and bullshit. New Labour abandoned those communities.

And yet... just offering handouts is to patronise those communities. Really patronise them. They don't need a handout; they need a hand UP. And they expect any government to behave in an economically balanced, sensible way.

More than that: neoliberalism has so atomised traditional forms of work - so many of which are now flexible, insecure, individual - that it's both almost impossibly difficult for Labour to represent organised labour as it once did, and when we try to, it doesn't represent reality

It doesn't bear any connection to the day to day reality of working class people. It's like a bunch of sixth form or university students coming up with a policy prescription without having lived those experiences first.

I loved the manifesto because these are my politics. These are Corbyn's supporters' politics. But elections are won by appealing to far, far, far more people than that.

There's a lot of Gramsci in all this. We know capitalism is steadily failing. But no alternative has appeared

And in its absence, we quite naturally look backwards - to when socialism/social democracy did work in the UK - than forwards, with something different. Something radical and distinctive, but which is balanced and real.

Let me put it this way.

In 2015, Labour offered the electorate... egg and chips. This was rejected, greatly because it was communicated so completely ineptly.

In 2017, Labour offered the electorate... double egg and chips. As it was communicated effectively, this went down well

In 2019, Labour offered the electorate... triple egg and chips. Which the electorate just could not stomach. It threw up instead.

Based on this, the answer is NOT to offer the electorate... quadruple egg and chips.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't offer any egg and chips. Egg and chips are popular; the electorate likes egg and chips in moderation.

But alongside, we also need to offer... water with which to wash it down. A side salad. Dietary advice with which to work the calories off.

We have to be both hard headed AND soft hearted. And being hard headed is a greater challenge than ever given the old solutions just don't work at all, and offer nothing.

Which brings me to New Labour, the bane of so many of my followers' lives. Understandably so too.

So here's a controversial idea. New Labour can be simultaneously responsible for a huge amount of the mess Britain's in now AND have done a very good job for huge numbers of people, including the most vulnerable. Both propositions can be true.

Here's another controversial idea. New Labour can be both damned for all time by Iraq, AND have done a very good job domestically in many areas.

And another: PFI was a disaster, but the job New Labour did with the NHS was mostly excellent.

People who insist that New Labour did nothing right for anyone ever are every bit as ridiculous as those New Labour types who condemn us as a 'cult'. It's like two mirror images.

The reality is: New Labour got plenty right. But longer term, it caused serious structural problems.

Problems which are so serious, so deep-rooted, that nothing New Labour did back in very different times would work now. And it wouldn't be voted for either - by anyone. Like Corbynism, it's a thing of the past, not the future.

What is the future? Well my friends: that's for all of us - everyone in the Labour Party, everyone in Britain too - to determine. But it starts with cool, reasoned analysis: which takes on board all points of view, as long as they're made in good faith.

It looks at our own role in all this: my role, your role. Because we all got stuff wrong too; in my case, lots of it. It looks at people viewing us from outside thinking we're some kind of sectarian sect. Too many people think this for us not at least to reflect on it.

It looks at the campaign itself - where was Thornberry? Where was Starmer? Why were they isolated? Have you seen how much we fell by in Remain seats too? - its lack of organisation and obvious communication problems. And it looks at what went right too: which policies especially.

Tony Blair ceased to be Prime Minister well over 12 years ago. Jeremy Corbyn will probably no longer be Labour leader a few months from now. Can we not all move on now? Stop calling each other 'Blairites' or 'Corbynites' and focus on what we all have in common?

If we don't do that, on what planet do we think the public would ever vote for us? And here's the thing: if we won't do that, we won't deserve the public's support either.

Done properly, the next few months of reflection could prove extremely valuable. Could lay the groundwork for an effective message rooted in the realities of so many people's lives.

Or we could just carry on shouting at each other and only hearing what we want to hear.

It's up to us. All of us. And to remember, above all: it's not about you. It's not about me. It's about the whole country. And putting together a platform, communicated through a leader, which works for the whole country. Not just those who think like us - but those who don't too