Taking into account points that have been made by fellow Mumsnet correspondents in Messages posted to this thread
It is the human experience of politics - in particular in an open multi-Party democracy - that people are separated into the categories of being Manipulators, Zealots or Followers and if that appears ludicrous then deny that you have met examples of each of the three types during your long and glorious lives
Britain granted a degree of tolerance to the activities of Trades Unions in the 1860s and waged employees joined industrial organisations in order to improve their pay and industrial conditions but then it was decided that their case would be advanced by representation in Parliament and that led to a relationship with the Labour Party
It was fallacious to believe that being termed as 'working-class' caused any individual to become automatically a supporter of the Labour Party
It may have become a tradition in some areas of northern England not to vote for the Conservative Party but that did not prevent its electoral successes during the 20th and into the 21st Centuries
It was possible for the Conservative Party to be triumphant because it defended the status quo - it would not disrupt life but manage competently the capitalist economy and maintain the culture, heritage and beliefs of the people of Britain which it claimed to share and so it could satisfy the three basic human motivations of money, power and sex
It may have been the case that membership of the Trades Unions inspired a certain allegiance to the Labour Party on the part of sections of the "working-classes" but the notion that they were necessarily philosophical Socialists was an error of belief and an illusion
Forming an attachment that was not entirely symbiotic, the industrial organisations and the political Party remained distinct - it would be difficult to envisage of eight 'proletarian' leaders of the Trades Unions of the 1960s possessing First-Class Degrees from the University of Oxford to compare with the children of the 'petite bourgeoisie' who were members of the Cabinet in the Labour government of the day
It was a idle comparison made in 2010 between David and Ed Miliband and the former comedy duo the late Mike and Bernie Winters
David Miliband resembled obviously the Mike Winters character - handsome, urbane, talented, aloof and not having any choice Ed was Bernie as he was irreverent, engaging, energetic and intuitive
David Miliband was comfortable with power and perhaps his hopes of becoming Prime Minister dissipated because of the two occasions on which he was expected to resign as Foreign Secretary but failed so to do and to challenge Gordon Brown for the leadership of the Labour Party
Ed Miliband had the substantial character required to challenge his elder brother for the leadership of the Labour Party to the annoyance of many of its members and of his own family and in some instances perhaps forgiveness may not have been entirely forthcoming
Ed Miliband led the Labour Party to electoral defeat in 2015 with a deficit of 99 seats against the Conservatives
David Miliband may have proved to be a distant, remote and somewhat bland personality in terms of the impression he made on people during a General Election campaign and with his leadership perhaps the Labour Party would have won only 99 seats in the House of Commons
Ed Miliband was advised poorly by his team of office juniors at the General Election of 2015 - they failed to understand that rising waves of nationalism in Scotland and England were pulling the two countries in opposite directions but he could have restored order to the situation by making the point that he needed to win 326 of the 500 constituencies in the southern part of Britain to form a majority Labour government
Ed Miliband may not have a base of support within the Labour Party these days or any avowed ambition for power but it ought to be noteworthy that on the two occasions he should have been given the position that his stature and ability merit - Treasury Spokesman or in effect Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer - Sir Keir Starmer has refused to make that appointment
Boris Johnson and the Conservatives appear entrenched in power and there is not the prospect of a change of government for some years
It would be difficult to conceive of the Liberal Democrats as a Party of government but thy were in Coalition with the Conservatives as late as 2015
It happened that over the course of many years Labour supporters would lend their votes to the Liberal Democrats if that Party appeared more radical and progressive on certain issues but leadership crises and a loss of political identity caused a significant change that did not seem to register with the electorate
Nick Clegg and the 'Orange Book' generation were more moderate than their predecessors and willing to take Liberal Democrats into a Coalition with the Conservatives when the situation required with the consequent loss of the support of radicals and progressives
It does not matter if the Labour Party cannot command any longer the affection and loyalty of some of its traditional supporters - it is more a question of practicalities and judgments
Boris Johnson was criticised by his scientific advisors for the removal of restrictions on movement by the people of Britain in June and July 2020 when the Coronavirus pandemic was not entirely subdued and for opposing the imposition of new regulations when the number of deaths was increasing and if he is proven to have made also callous remarks about the situation then his position could become untenable and life may be difficult for a Cabinet that did not challenge his authority
It will become evident in future years whether medical and scientific judgments were subordinated to political expediency and that could be a factor in deciding the course of a future General Election but these shall be matters at the time for the people of the United Kingdom