#rhythm of labour and #power question?

The Labour party has a bit of a power question, no?

As in being unelectable for having power?

As in being perceived as a party that can not govern?

Is this the labour crisis? Power?

Does labour need to think of getting power differently?

Maybe labour should be un-electable?

Maybe the whole question is rhythmical rather than that of power?

If one thinks of it, when we say “electable”, “able to be in power” – in terms of time, do we not talk about relatively near?

In the sense that we are not talking governing in 20-50 years time?

Yes.. In that sense, do we not talk of a rhythm rather than power?

In the way that “power” or “electability” might be something like a beat that people might fancy hearing now or slightly later?

Yes.. In a sense, perhaps the labour possible split might be viewed as an aesthetic question?

A question of sensations?

Sensing of power?

Maybe.. But perhaps even before the power.. Say you hear 3 by 4 beat played very fast.. Know how it feels like you need to hear the last beat – else its missing?

But they all say that they fancy power rather nowish – def not in 20-5 years time.. No?

They do.. However, can it be that the ones that seem “unelectable” – can it be that their sensations are operating on longer, or slower, beats than the ones that want labour to get power Now?

Is that why the current leadership is easy to depict as “strange”? Having some slightly different rhythm?