[Matl]

So it's based purely on party labels? Political parties are not static and is clear that Labour has been moving further and further away from a left platform.

I mean they tried to cut benefits for disabled people, supported Israeli war crimes in Gaza and prosecuted pro-Palestinian activism, sneakily increased taxes on the working class, clamped down on immigration to try and undercut the rise of Reform, I am honestly not sure of a single left policy they enacted, granted I haven't been paying super close attention to that shitshow.

Blarite/neoliberal fits them much more I'd say.

[OJFord]

> I am honestly not sure of a single left policy they enacted, granted I haven't been paying super close attention to that shitshow.

I'm likewise fairly disengaged, but off the top of my head: increased taxes, and removal of the two-child benefit cap.

Israel does not really fit on a left-right spectrum, nor even really (though slightly better?) on two (economic & liberty) axes. The Liberal Democrats & Greens are the only (somewhat significant) parties consistently, err, anti-Zionist if that's fair to say, pro-two-state, accusing of war crimes, etc.

[crote]

Today's Labour is even actively promoting anti-LGBT policies.

[teh64]

Also their anti-trans stance.

And any party that is pro-monarchy could not reasonably be described as left wing.

[zsizsi]

> Also their anti-trans stance.

Pro-women stance actually, though mostly because it would be electoral suicide to abolish single-sex spaces in law.

Third spaces are the most sensible compromise going forward, and are what trans activists should have been asking for in the first place if they'd had any foresight.