[Politics] Labour has suspended former leader Jeremy Corbyn

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In 2013 Jeremy Corbyn was awarded the Gandhi International Peace Award for his "consistent efforts over a 30-year parliamentary career to uphold the Gandhian values of social justice and non‐violence".[600][601] In the same year, he was honoured by the Grassroot Diplomat Initiative for his "ongoing support for a number of non-government organisations and civil causes".

In 2017 the American magazine Foreign Policy named Corbyn in its Top 100 Global Thinkers list for that year "for inspiring a new generation to re-engage in politics". In December 2017 he was one of three recipients awarded the Seán MacBride Peace Prize "for his sustained and powerful political work for disarmament and peace".

Every Christmas Day for the past 30 years he can be found in a homeless centre serving up Christmas dinner not as a photo opportunity but because like all the things he does he feels it is the right thing to do.

He has been an advocate of anti war nuclear disarmament and has gone out of his way to engage with organisations and states that are not aligned with the UK government of the time his view being war never resolves anything but ultimately is talking that changes things.

sometimes he has been right other times not so as I believe that stopping Putin is as essential as stopping Hitler was in 1939

His time as labour leader saw the biggest rise in membership of the Labour Party one outstanding set of election results and another best not mentioned

He is fearlessly true to his beliefs being those of the left wing of the Labour Party which has always been as they say an inclusive big tent

Is he racist I don’t think he is but I cannot see inside someone’s head but why he would not accept the full international definition of ani semitism I find difficult to understand.

Sir Keir has removed the whip and suspended him going on to state he will not stand as a Labour candidate at the next election he says he will stand as an independent candidate which must greatly reduce his chances of reelection

As such we may be saying goodbye to one of the very last true left wingers left in parliament who has his faults but a principled individual and British politics will be the worst for it

British politics needs everyones views to be heard left right centre and extreme to truly and fairly reflect the views of all our current political system is broken beyond any meaningful repair, Labour is saying it will abolish the House of Lords and that’s a start but ultimately our political structure it’s institutions and archaic buildings are unfit for today let alone the future proportional representation, New Parliament buildings and a complete overhaul of what government role is

Reminds me of the story about a welshman.

"I do a lot of swimming. Do they call me Swimmer Jones?. No."
"I am a master builder. Do they call me Builder Jones? No."
"I have a lovely singing voice. Do they call me Tenor Jones? No."
















One sheep. It was just....one sheep.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In 2013 Jeremy Corbyn was awarded the Gandhi International Peace Award for his "consistent efforts over a 30-year parliamentary career to uphold the Gandhian values of social justice and non‐violence".[600][601] In the same year, he was honoured by the Grassroot Diplomat Initiative for his "ongoing support for a number of non-government organisations and civil causes".

In 2017 the American magazine Foreign Policy named Corbyn in its Top 100 Global Thinkers list for that year "for inspiring a new generation to re-engage in politics". In December 2017 he was one of three recipients awarded the Seán MacBride Peace Prize "for his sustained and powerful political work for disarmament and peace".

Every Christmas Day for the past 30 years he can be found in a homeless centre serving up Christmas dinner not as a photo opportunity but because like all the things he does he feels it is the right thing to do.

He has been an advocate of anti war nuclear disarmament and has gone out of his way to engage with organisations and states that are not aligned with the UK government of the time his view being war never resolves anything but ultimately is talking that changes things.

sometimes he has been right other times not so as I believe that stopping Putin is as essential as stopping Hitler was in 1939

His time as labour leader saw the biggest rise in membership of the Labour Party one outstanding set of election results and another best not mentioned

He is fearlessly true to his beliefs being those of the left wing of the Labour Party which has always been as they say an inclusive big tent

Is he racist I don’t think he is but I cannot see inside someone’s head but why he would not accept the full international definition of ani semitism I find difficult to understand.

Sir Keir has removed the whip and suspended him going on to state he will not stand as a Labour candidate at the next election he says he will stand as an independent candidate which must greatly reduce his chances of reelection

As such we may be saying goodbye to one of the very last true left wingers left in parliament who has his faults but a principled individual and British politics will be the worst for it

British politics needs everyones views to be heard left right centre and extreme to truly and fairly reflect the views of all our current political system is broken beyond any meaningful repair, Labour is saying it will abolish the House of Lords and that’s a start but ultimately our political structure it’s institutions and archaic buildings are unfit for today let alone the future proportional representation, New Parliament buildings and a complete overhaul of what government role is

Serious reply - very well meaning bloke but utterly politically clueless.

I don't believe he is racist but what I believe is irrelevant.

He met with IRA terrorists weeks after the Brighton bombing when he was a back bencher with absolutely no influence on the process. Why?
He did not, however, go and meet Likud activists and 'settlers' when Israel committed one of their frequent incursions into the West Bank. Why not?
He endorsed a racist mural without looking at it, because it was a mural by an Islamist artist. Confirmation bias. Oops!

Personally I regard this as foolishness. He could easily have apologized for all this. He did withdraw his support for the mural after it was explained to him why it is racist, but why fall into the trap in the first place?

But the reason he did not ride into Westminster on the back of Shergar, and actually lost a general election to the fat fraud Johnson, is because he is a crap leader.

He was a ditherer. He surrounded himself with other strange, partial, lazy people - Macdonald and Abbott stand out. He had a whiff of 70s student politics about him. Surround yourself with your mates, lock yourself in the union offices and spark up a spliff. We've all been there.

And he has voted against the previous labour governments more times than many tories. Loyalty seems to end at home with him. How many times has he been married? Three or four? Hmmmm...

Politics is the art of the possible. It requires collaborating with people who do not share your views. It is about getting big things done. It is about prioritizing and compromise.

I know lots of people who do volunteer work, and campaign for the underdog. This serves a useful additional purpose in that it puts some pressure on the system and the leaders who make policy, and indeed it shines a light on issues for fellow voters to consider. But I personally don't think that working in a soup kitchen is the right thing for a prime minister to do at Christmas.

I have said this many times (jolly red giant disagrees): to pursue a left wing humanist agenda requires having a parliamentary majority. This is not possible if your policies are not popular with a majority of the electorate. So you have to temper your ambitions. It is a very difficult and subtle exercise staying true to your left wing principles and yet not frightening the horses.

Tories have learned that the easy pathway to power is to appeal to base instincts - fear and greed in particular. With Corbyn in charge the tories had (and would have had) an uncontested path to pursue their agenda.

It doesn't matter how nice Corbyn is, he has no leadership skills. He became labour leader because foolish labour MPs voted him on to a ballot for 'balance', expecting him to have no chance against other candidates, without realizing the membership is dominated by left wing idealists (doh!), and the labour constitution gave members too much of the franchise. Bosh!

You may argue that because a majority of labour members are on the left, the members should select the leader and policy (via the AGM) to reflect this. This is how it sort of used to be. That went well. It allowed a caricature to develop - tea and biscuits with the TUC, no interest in growing the nation, merely an endless cycle of striking and demands for perpetual job security with ever-decreasing hours and longer holidays. Disarmament. Anti business. Anti growth. That was the perception, a caricature, but with traction. And in came Thatcher....

The solution to this is a strong parliamentary labour party and a manifesto written by the leader and close allies. If the labour membership doesn't like this the there are ways and means of replacing the leadership. I am a party member. My view is that the best test of whether the labour leadership has got it right is the general election.

Corbyn lost. He lost to Johnson. That. Is. A DISGRACE! I don't care whether Johnson lied about Brexit and fooled the thicky voters into voting conservative. That on its own isn't how he won. He had no credible opposition. It is the job of the labour leadership to sell their policies. Corbyn didn't. No credible policy on Brexit. And he came across as a dweeby wanker. Pretending his phone had stopped working when an interviewer asked him a tricky question. He was tetchy and pissy. He used cronyism (Abbott being a former squeeze!). He was a leadership wrong 'un.

And he has gone. No tears shed by me. I want the tories out and I think Starmer could be a good PM.

 

[aolstudios]

Serious reply - very well meaning bloke but utterly politically clueless.

I don't believe he is racist but what I believe is irrelevant.

He met with IRA terrorists weeks after the Brighton bombing when he was a back bencher with absolutely no influence on the process. Why?
He did not, however, go and meet Likud activists and 'settlers' when Israel committed one of their frequent incursions into the West Bank. Why not?
He endorsed a racist mural without looking at it, because it was a mural by an Islamist artist. Confirmation bias. Oops!

Personally I regard this as foolishness. He could easily have apologized for all this. He did withdraw his support for the mural after it was explained to him why it is racist, but why fall into the trap in the first place?

But the reason he did not ride into Westminster on the back of Shergar, and actually lost a general election to the fat fraud Johnson, is because he is a crap leader.

He was a ditherer. He surrounded himself with other strange, partial, lazy people - Macdonald and Abbott stand out. He had a whiff of 70s student politics about him. Surround yourself with your mates, lock yourself in the union offices and spark up a spliff. We've all been there.

And he has voted against the previous labour governments more times than many tories. Loyalty seems to end at home with him. How many times has he been married? Three or four? Hmmmm...

Politics is the art of the possible. It requires collaborating with people who do not share your views. It is about getting big things done. It is about prioritizing and compromise.

I know lots of people who do volunteer work, and campaign for the underdog. This serves a useful additional purpose in that it puts some pressure on the system and the leaders who make policy, and indeed it shines a light on issues for fellow voters to consider. But I personally don't think that working in a soup kitchen is the right thing for a prime minister to do at Christmas.

I have said this many times (jolly red giant disagrees): to pursue a left wing humanist agenda requires having a parliamentary majority. This is not possible if your policies are not popular with a majority of the electorate. So you have to temper your ambitions. It is a very difficult and subtle exercise staying true to your left wing principles and yet not frightening the horses.

Tories have learned that the easy pathway to power is to appeal to base instincts - fear and greed in particular. With Corbyn in charge the tories had (and would have had) an uncontested path to pursue their agenda.

It doesn't matter how nice Corbyn is, he has no leadership skills. He became labour leader because foolish labour MPs voted him on to a ballot for 'balance', expecting him to have no chance against other candidates, without realizing the membership is dominated by left wing idealists (doh!), and the labour constitution gave members too much of the franchise. Bosh!

You may argue that because a majority of labour members are on the left, the members should select the leader and policy (via the AGM) to reflect this. This is how it sort of used to be. That went well. It allowed a caricature to develop - tea and biscuits with the TUC, no interest in growing the nation, merely an endless cycle of striking and demands for perpetual job security with ever-decreasing hours and longer holidays. Disarmament. Anti business. Anti growth. That was the perception, a caricature, but with traction. And in came Thatcher....

The solution to this is a strong parliamentary labour party and a manifesto written by the leader and close allies. If the labour membership doesn't like this the there are ways and means of replacing the leadership. I am a party member. My view is that the best test of whether the labour leadership has got it right is the general election.

Corbyn lost. He lost to Johnson. That. Is. A DISGRACE! I don't care whether Johnson lied about Brexit and fooled the thicky voters into voting conservative. That on its own isn't how he won. He had no credible opposition. It is the job of the labour leadership to sell their policies. Corbyn didn't. No credible policy on Brexit. And he came across as a dweeby wanker. Pretending his phone had stopped working when an interviewer asked him a tricky question. He was tetchy and pissy. He used cronyism (Abbott being a former squeeze!). He was a leadership wrong 'un.

And he has gone. No tears shed by me. I want the tories out and I think Starmer could be a good PM.

Agreed.
But although in his own tragic, narcissistic way, I'm sure he believes he's always on the right side of history', he's a racist.
An obsessive, career long, copper bottomed racist

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Agreed.
But although in his own tragic, narcissistic way, I'm sure he believes he's always on the right side of history', he's a racist.
An obsessive, career long, copper bottomed racist

Maybe. He has behaved in a racist way, which is all that matters. And he's history. Well, a small footnote in history. A Michael footnote perhaps.

 

[borat]

Maybe. He has behaved in a racist way, which is all that matters. And he's history. Well, a small footnote in history. A Michael footnote perhaps.

Behaved in a racist way lol.

If you defend Palestinian rights and are critical of Israeli Apartheid that smear is applied liberally and casually.

Black, arabs, brown people/those subjucated dont matter to the current Labour Party - see the minimisation of the Forde report and look at the number of Labour Front benchers that are members of 'Labour friends of Israel''. Regardless of the apartheid, its current government is turning ever authoritartian and fascistic

Jews are just political pawns with Starmer expelling over 60 because they don't tow the line on Israel. He doesnt give a toss about anyone except himself and getting to a position of power.

 

[Hugo Rune]

He doesn’t give a toss about anyone except himself and getting to a position of power.

This is not true.

But even if it is, the intention to get Labour into power should override everything at this point, the Country cannot handle another Tory government. We’re going in the direction of becoming an Eastern European, racist, corrupt, marginalised and poorer Country (Polish level economy), this needs to stop at the next election. The Tories are still desperately trying to divide us, it’s sickening. Someone needs to put the ‘Great’ back into Britain.

 

[jcdenton08]

Why are Corbyn supporters so terrified of Labour winning an election?

 

[pocketseagull]

An obsessive, career long, copper bottomed racist

Not a fan of Corbyn but what's the evidence of him being a career long racist?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not a fan of Corbyn but what's the evidence of him being a career long racist?

He has done racist things as noted above, arguably through confirmation bias and carelessness rather than maliciousness but the statement is challenging.

I am thinking now about the programme David Baddiel made recently where he elegantly demonstrated how the bar for calling something racist is set much higher for Jews than black people. I know that there is plenty of evidence that Corbyn has said and done things to oppose antisemitism. And yet.... if I could be arsed I might look up his statements on Israel, look for mention of 'Jew' and swap 'black' and see how it reads.

The most recent issue of his that annoyed me was his repeated refusal to condemn anti-Semitism, instead repeating that he opposed all forms of racism. Then when he finally did condemn antisemitism he back tracked, inadvertently aligning himself with those in old labour who had quite specifically demonstrated antisemitism (whence he lost the labour whip).

Imagine a catholic priest who, when asked if he believed in god, said that he respected all forms of religion. But I'm not going to think too much about this anymore because, after all, who the f*** is Jeremy Corbyn, now?

 

[clapham_gull]

Regardless of the apartheid,

Regardless of what "apartheid" ?

On the Labour front bench ?

 

[clapham_gull]

Why are Corbyn supporters so terrified of Labour winning an election?

Terrified of being proved wrong.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Why are Corbyn supporters so terrified of Labour winning an election?

Because they are utterly obsessed with Israel/Palestine. Nothing else matters to student politicians. Labour is now being run by grown ups but as this thread shows there are likely still quite a few members that need to be shown the door.

 

[Blue3]

Serious reply - very well meaning bloke but utterly politically clueless.

I don't believe he is racist but what I believe is irrelevant.

He met with IRA terrorists weeks after the Brighton bombing when he was a back bencher with absolutely no influence on the process. Why?
He did not, however, go and meet Likud activists and 'settlers' when Israel committed one of their frequent incursions into the West Bank. Why not?
He endorsed a racist mural without looking at it, because it was a mural by an Islamist artist. Confirmation bias. Oops!

Personally I regard this as foolishness. He could easily have apologized for all this. He did withdraw his support for the mural after it was explained to him why it is racist, but why fall into the trap in the first place?

But the reason he did not ride into Westminster on the back of Shergar, and actually lost a general election to the fat fraud Johnson, is because he is a crap leader.

He was a ditherer. He surrounded himself with other strange, partial, lazy people - Macdonald and Abbott stand out. He had a whiff of 70s student politics about him. Surround yourself with your mates, lock yourself in the union offices and spark up a spliff. We've all been there.

And he has voted against the previous labour governments more times than many tories. Loyalty seems to end at home with him. How many times has he been married? Three or four? Hmmmm...

Politics is the art of the possible. It requires collaborating with people who do not share your views. It is about getting big things done. It is about prioritizing and compromise.

I know lots of people who do volunteer work, and campaign for the underdog. This serves a useful additional purpose in that it puts some pressure on the system and the leaders who make policy, and indeed it shines a light on issues for fellow voters to consider. But I personally don't think that working in a soup kitchen is the right thing for a prime minister to do at Christmas.

I have said this many times (jolly red giant disagrees): to pursue a left wing humanist agenda requires having a parliamentary majority. This is not possible if your policies are not popular with a majority of the electorate. So you have to temper your ambitions. It is a very difficult and subtle exercise staying true to your left wing principles and yet not frightening the horses.

Tories have learned that the easy pathway to power is to appeal to base instincts - fear and greed in particular. With Corbyn in charge the tories had (and would have had) an uncontested path to pursue their agenda.

It doesn't matter how nice Corbyn is, he has no leadership skills. He became labour leader because foolish labour MPs voted him on to a ballot for 'balance', expecting him to have no chance against other candidates, without realizing the membership is dominated by left wing idealists (doh!), and the labour constitution gave members too much of the franchise. Bosh!

You may argue that because a majority of labour members are on the left, the members should select the leader and policy (via the AGM) to reflect this. This is how it sort of used to be. That went well. It allowed a caricature to develop - tea and biscuits with the TUC, no interest in growing the nation, merely an endless cycle of striking and demands for perpetual job security with ever-decreasing hours and longer holidays. Disarmament. Anti business. Anti growth. That was the perception, a caricature, but with traction. And in came Thatcher....

The solution to this is a strong parliamentary labour party and a manifesto written by the leader and close allies. If the labour membership doesn't like this the there are ways and means of replacing the leadership. I am a party member. My view is that the best test of whether the labour leadership has got it right is the general election.

Corbyn lost. He lost to Johnson. That. Is. A DISGRACE! I don't care whether Johnson lied about Brexit and fooled the thicky voters into voting conservative. That on its own isn't how he won. He had no credible opposition. It is the job of the labour leadership to sell their policies. Corbyn didn't. No credible policy on Brexit. And he came across as a dweeby wanker. Pretending his phone had stopped working when an interviewer asked him a tricky question. He was tetchy and pissy. He used cronyism (Abbott being a former squeeze!). He was a leadership wrong 'un.

And he has gone. No tears shed by me. I want the tories out and I think Starmer could be a good PM.

I agree with your post I am also a party member and I know others who joined the party for the very fact of Corbyen being the leader and quite a few subsequently left when he did, I voted for Sir Keir as leader in the hope of stabilising the party and that once actually in power Sir Keir would come out and be more charismatic…….at this time I am still waiting

 

[WATFORD zero]

I agree with your post I am also a party member and I know others who joined the party for the very fact of Corbyen being the leader and quite a few subsequently left when he did, I voted for Sir Keir as leader in the hope of stabilising the party and that once actually in power Sir Keir would come out and be more charismatic…….at this time I am still waiting

Charisma comes way, way down any list of requirements I have from a political leader.

Honesty, Integrity, Competence and a bit of Intelligence would be a f***ing massive step forward from where we currently are

 

[Screaming J]

It doesn't matter how nice Corbyn is, he has no leadership skills. He became labour leader because foolish labour MPs voted him on to a ballot for 'balance', expecting him to have no chance against other candidates, without realizing the membership is dominated by left wing idealists (doh!), and the labour constitution gave members too much of the franchise. Bosh!

I agree with you up to a point, Hazzer. The other reason he became leader is that - if you remember that Labour Leadership contest - all the other candidates spoke little but management bullshit and vague platitudes. He was the only candidate who actually talked specifics; and Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper in particular should hang their heads in shame as to how they performed.

But he does have no leadership skills, and imho the way he dealt with the Brexit Referendum and it's aftermath in particular shows that. I mean when you consider some of the utter wazzocks and headbangers he has stood on platforms with over the years; but then 'on principle' he wunt get on stage with David Cameron - for all his faults - merely to advocate staying in the EU. Cah! At that point he was dead to me....

 

[jcdenton08]

I agree with your post I am also a party member and I know others who joined the party for the very fact of Corbyen being the leader and quite a few subsequently left when he did, I voted for Sir Keir as leader in the hope of stabilising the party and that once actually in power Sir Keir would come out and be more charismatic…….at this time I am still waiting

But this is a good thing. It’s fantastic that people who support Corbyn aren’t members of the Labour Party any longer. Labour can and should win this next election comfortably by winning over the middle ground. With hard left Corbyn supporters no longer shouting nonsense from the corner of the room, this gets more and more likely.

 

[Machiavelli]

He has done racist things as noted above, arguably through confirmation bias and carelessness rather than maliciousness but the statement is challenging.

I am thinking now about the programme David Baddiel made recently where he elegantly demonstrated how the bar for calling something racist is set much higher for Jews than black people. I know that there is plenty of evidence that Corbyn has said and done things to oppose antisemitism. And yet.... if I could be arsed I might look up his statements on Israel, look for mention of 'Jew' and swap 'black' and see how it reads.

The most recent issue of his that annoyed me was his repeated refusal to condemn anti-Semitism, instead repeating that he opposed all forms of racism. Then when he finally did condemn antisemitism he back tracked, inadvertently aligning himself with those in old labour who had quite specifically demonstrated antisemitism (whence he lost the labour whip).

Imagine a catholic priest who, when asked if he believed in god, said that he respected all forms of religion. But I'm not going to think too much about this anymore because, after all, who the f*** is Jeremy Corbyn, now?

Looks like you're engaging in confirmation basis and carelessness in this response.
Corbyn liked or re-tweeted an anti-semitic image. Beyond that, I haven't witnessed anything that demonstrates he's a racist and/or anti-semite. Happy to be shown some evidence, but it would be nice if those that write long posts insisting that he is an anti-semite and/or racist could substantiate their claims.

 

[clapham_gull]

Looks like you're engaging in confirmation basis and carelessness in this response.
Corbyn liked or re-tweeted an anti-semitic image. Beyond that, I haven't witnessed anything that demonstrates he's a racist and/or anti-semite. Happy to be shown some evidence, but it would be nice if those that write long posts insisting that he is an anti-semite and/or racist could substantiate their claims.

I would go so far as saying either.

But Cornyn clearly has a blind spot regarding anti-semitism, at least treating as a "lesser form" of racism.

It's his achilles heel.

It's clearly all there in his

1) Nuanced responses to allegations.
2) His defence of the mural (he didn't just "like" it), he likened it to another painting that was destroyed by Rockefeller because it contained an image of Lenin. Corbin is quite happy to conflate the conspiracy of Jewishness, Banking and Capitalism as threats to the working class.
3) The books he chose to write forwards to.
4) His comments at a conference about "zionists" lacking a sense of "English Irony". Whatever Corbyn defines a "zionist" as, they can obviously be English and born here and not the "alien other".
5) Nuanced reaction to Ken Livingstone awful remarks.

I'm sure they are more examples. He is clearly a very nice principled man, but blimey he is stubborn about admitting his faults and correcting them.

Not all your enemies are Blairites or International Bankers Jeremy.

 

[dangull]

Never mind all this, I just came back to this thread to see if there was anyway back for Swansman

 

[Weststander]

I would go so far as saying either.

But Cornyn clearly has a blind spot regarding anti-semitism, at least treating as a "lesser form" of racism.

It's his achilles heel.

It's clearly all there in his

1) Nuanced responses to allegations.
2) His defence of the mural (he didn't just "like" it), he likened it to another painting that was destroyed by Rockefeller because it contained an image of Lenin. Corbin is quite happy to conflate the conspiracy of Jewishness, Banking and Capitalism as threats to the working class.
3) The books he chose to write forwards to.
4) His comments at a conference about "zionists" lacking a sense of "English Irony". Whatever Corbyn defines a "zionist" as, they can obviously be English and born here and not the "alien other".
5) Nuanced reaction to Ken Livingstone awful remarks.

I'm sure they are more examples. He is clearly a very nice principled man, but blimey he is stubborn about admitting his faults and correcting them.

Not all your enemies are Blairites or International Bankers Jeremy.

Thank you.