Explaining “Who Should Lead the Labour Party?” article

“That which cannot be said must be passed over in silence” is a aphorism that demonstrates the wisdom of the twentieth century’s greatest philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. In 21st century politics silence is yet another utterance open to misinterpretation. This is my post to ensure my previous silence isn’t laced with ambiguity.

My silence is an indication that Labour lacks any sort of figure capable of leading it. No one has shown their capable of grabbing the national agenda by the scruff of the neck and then defining it how they want it defining, the hallmark of a great political leader. The party has effectively split, obviously not formally, and in troubling times like this leaders announce themselves. They don’t wait in hiding, waiting for the opportune moment. They make the opportune moment. The dearth of leadership in Labour has meant only one thing, that the left have demonstrated the resolve to reclaim the Labour party. The left doesn’t contain leaders, but opportunists.

I’m not a supporter of any factions within the Labour party currently. All bring shame to what they’re supposed to promote. Hence the silence of my last blog post, it’s a silence not of ignorance, nor of despair, but of contempt towards the current state of Labour.

Gareth Mawer
I consider myself a left libertarian committed to promoting the philosophy of liberty, even though I do not always support proposals that are normally considered libertarian. Georgism and mutualism have had profound influences over my beliefs, though I'm not afraid to digress from them were necessary. My mains interests are politics, economics and philosophy.