The Jeremy Corbyn thread

[Neville's Breakfast]

What has Farron done to impress you because I honestly haven't seen him in the press at all other than to praise Blair.

I think he has spoken well in articulating the views of the pro EU camp. That's not my side of the debate so it doesn't get my vote but he speaks for a lot of people. He also speaks well in opposing Tory welfare policy. No fireworks but no unpleasantness either. I wouldnt under estimate the Liberal party as a home for the anti Tory vote in 2020. If that happens it may be irreversible for 100 years because forming a Shadow Cabinet is a powerful political platform. This all happened in reverse many years ago. I'm not so much making a prediction I suppose rather flagging a threat that should not be ignored when selecting the next leader of the party.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

For some reason the phrase 'rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic' springs to mind.

Quite.

In order to move back to an orderly centre left position, labour first has to get Corbyn out. Because of the premium the 'members' have in the vote, the challenger HAS to be a lefty, sufficiently left to lure the likes of Herr Tubthumper to vote against Corbyn. Once Corbyn is gone, labour can change the election rules in favour of MPs and have another leadership election next year. So the fact that the current challenger is an empty suit doesn't bother me. He is merely a cross between a stalking horse and a key to the box that contains the master key.

The main flaw in the argument above is that the left now have a taste of 'real power' (which in their case means the power to do what the left always does - purge every orifice of unbelievers, while achieving absolutely nothing). This means they will vote for whoever is most left on the ballot. The only safeguard is that it is MPs who decide who goes on the ballot. Unfortunately all the while the current leader is 'automatically' on the ballot, they will NEVER get rid of Corbyn given that the 'general membership' is dominated by Socialist Worker types (neither socialists nor workers), bearded ponytailed fat Momemtum activists, and swathes of Tories happy to pay £30 a year to have the right to vote for Corbyn (and if I were a tory I would DEFINITELY pay my £30 for this absurd opportunity to poison the labour well).

Meanwhile there is nothing to challenge May, who seems to have rubbed her own lot badly up the wrong 'un already, with the Grammar Schools initiative and other signs of flakiness.

We are in for a very long period of faff. Not exactly what we need with the important business of Brexitting to navigate . . .

 

[Surf's Up]

Quite.

In order to move back to an orderly centre left position, labour first has to get Corbyn out. Because of the premium the 'members' have in the vote, the challenger HAS to be a lefty, sufficiently left to lure the likes of Herr Tubthumper to vote against Corbyn. Once Corbyn is gone, labour can change the election rules in favour of MPs and have another leadership election next year. So the fact that the current challenger is an empty suit doesn't bother me. He is merely a cross between a stalking horse and a key to the box that contains the master key.

The main flaw in the argument above is that the left now have a taste of 'real power' (which in their case means the power to do what the left always does - purge every orifice of unbelievers, while achieving absolutely nothing). This means they will vote for whoever is most left on the ballot. The only safeguard is that it is MPs who decide who goes on the ballot. Unfortunately all the while the current leader is 'automatically' on the ballot, they will NEVER get rid of Corbyn given that the 'general membership' is dominated by Socialist Worker types (neither socialists nor workers), bearded ponytailed fat Momemtum activists, and swathes of Tories happy to pay £30 a year to have the right to vote for Corbyn (and if I were a tory I would DEFINITELY pay my £30 for this absurd opportunity to poison the labour well).

Meanwhile there is nothing to challenge May, who seems to have rubbed her own lot badly up the wrong 'un already, with the Grammar Schools initiative and other signs of flakiness.

We are in for a very long period of faff. Not exactly what we need with the important business of Brexitting to navigate . . .

Excellent summary plus the Left will never willingly relinquish power now they have got themselves into such a strong position within the Labour party. And Corbyn is merely a stalking horse - the "acceptable face" of the extreme left. He's a man who has, by accident, emerged blinking into the sunlight and who hasn't got a clue how to think, act or behave as a party leader. That said, merely by dint of actually being a fairly decent if somewhat misguided human being he may survive a lot longer than many think but the trajectory of his survival will co-incide precisely with the trajectory of the demise of the Labour party. Its difficult to see how they can survive without a formal and final split.

 

[alfredmizen]

Possibly watching the Chelsea match. You?

On my way home from the Chelsea match.

 

[BLOCK F]

Quite.

In order to move back to an orderly centre left position, labour first has to get Corbyn out. Because of the premium the 'members' have in the vote, the challenger HAS to be a lefty, sufficiently left to lure the likes of Herr Tubthumper to vote against Corbyn. Once Corbyn is gone, labour can change the election rules in favour of MPs and have another leadership election next year. So the fact that the current challenger is an empty suit doesn't bother me. He is merely a cross between a stalking horse and a key to the box that contains the master key.

The main flaw in the argument above is that the left now have a taste of 'real power' (which in their case means the power to do what the left always does - purge every orifice of unbelievers, while achieving absolutely nothing). This means they will vote for whoever is most left on the ballot. The only safeguard is that it is MPs who decide who goes on the ballot. Unfortunately all the while the current leader is 'automatically' on the ballot, they will NEVER get rid of Corbyn given that the 'general membership' is dominated by Socialist Worker types (neither socialists nor workers), bearded ponytailed fat Momemtum activists, and swathes of Tories happy to pay £30 a year to have the right to vote for Corbyn (and if I were a tory I would DEFINITELY pay my £30 for this absurd opportunity to poison the labour well).

Meanwhile there is nothing to challenge May, who seems to have rubbed her own lot badly up the wrong 'un already, with the Grammar Schools initiative and other signs of flakiness.

We are in for a very long period of faff. Not exactly what we need with the important business of Brexitting to navigate . . .

Generally agree with all this, Harry, but for one thing.
I am a Tory voter, but I definitely wouldn't pay £30 to poison the Labour well. I would love to see the back of Corbyn, because I believe that whatever party is in power, the electorate deserve to have a strong opposition to hold the Government of the day, to account.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Quite.

In order to move back to an orderly centre left position, labour first has to get Corbyn out. Because of the premium the 'members' have in the vote, the challenger HAS to be a lefty, sufficiently left to lure the likes of Herr Tubthumper to vote against Corbyn. Once Corbyn is gone, labour can change the election rules in favour of MPs and have another leadership election next year. So the fact that the current challenger is an empty suit doesn't bother me. He is merely a cross between a stalking horse and a key to the box that contains the master key.

Not sure I agree with this bit. I see it as not a battle between left and right but more ideological purists versus people that actually want to make a difference. The Labour party has always been a voice for the working classes but I don't think JC and friends actually like or understand working class people.

 

[Gwylan]

the rump of Socialist Worker infiltrated Labour under JC will disappear to the back benches for ever.

they will NEVER get rid of Corbyn given that the 'general membership' is dominated by Socialist Worker types (neither socialists nor workers), .

You ascribe far too much power and influence to the SWP. They've had a big exodus of members in the last few years and one claim is that there are only 200 members left. Even if we count up everyone who's been in the SWP,you're probably going to get no more than 5,000 people (and that's being generous) - and many of them wouldn't be seen dead in the Labour Party.

And as they're generally the sort of people who can start an argument in an empty room, I can't see many sticking with the party.

Even if yoy add the members of the two Socialist parties to the mix you're not adding more than a few thousand (and the official Socialist Party policy is not to join Labour). I'd say that no more than 5 percent of people voting in the election are members of other parties ... unless some of them are Tories of course

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Corbyn clearly isn't ideal but I think you are wrong if you believe a vote for Smith will get Smith (who is an empty suit anyway). It's much more likely a vote for Smith will get you Kendall or Umunna in the fullness of time, the PLP and NEC will gut the democratisation of the party as well. I don't believe you want that.

Does Smith have the members on side? We will know in a week.

To be honest, now, for me it's more about challenging and then ultimately getting the Tories out. This is my main aim. I don't really care which lLabour leader does it. Get the Tories out then worry about the details.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Let's hope your pragmatism is the norm rather than the exception. If not then I predict that the Liberals will become the official opposition and the rump of Socialist Worker infiltrated Labour under JC will disappear to the back benches for ever.

Possibly. I like the idea of a left leaning coalition though. This might be a new way forward.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

You ascribe far too much power and influence to the SWP. They've had a big exodus of members in the last few years and one claim is that there are only 200 members left. Even if we count up everyone who's been in the SWP,you're probably going to get no more than 5,000 people (and that's being generous) - and many of them wouldn't be seen dead in the Labour Party.

And as they're generally the sort of people who can start an argument in an empty room, I can't see many sticking with the party.

Even if yoy add the members of the two Socialist parties to the mix you're not adding more than a few thousand (and the official Socialist Party policy is not to join Labour). I'd say that no more than 5 percent of people voting in the election are members of other parties ... unless some of them are Tories of course

I'm sure you're right but equally I suspect that the majority of the new members have values more in keeping with the SWP and various single issue pressure groups than with traditional Labour values.

 

[5ways]

To be honest, now, for me it's more about challenging and then ultimately getting the Tories out. This is my main aim. I don't really care which lLabour leader does it. Get the Tories out then worry about the details.

What if it were a Europhile Tory and Euro-sceptic Labour?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

To be honest, now, for me it's more about challenging and then ultimately getting the Tories out. This is my main aim. I don't really care which lLabour leader does it. Get the Tories out then worry about the details.

You mean along the lines of 'let's get us out of the EU and then worry about the detail' ? Something many of outters were accused of by people such as you HT !

 

[Gwylan]

I'm sure you're right but equally I suspect that the majority of the new members have values more in keeping with the SWP and various single issue pressure groups than with traditional Labour values.

I'm sure they haven't. At their peak, all the far left groups between them couldn't muster much more than 15,000 people - the far left just isn't that strong in this country. And many single issue pressure groups, particularly environmental ones, are more attracted to the Greens these days.

I would say the vast majority of them are people who would be on the left of the Labour Party about 20 or 30 years ago - with a few oddball lefties and single issue protesters mixed in with them

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I'm sure they haven't. At their peak, all the far left groups between them couldn't muster much more than 15,000 people - the far left just isn't that strong in this country. And many single issue pressure groups, particularly environmental ones, are more attracted to the Greens these days.

I would say the vast majority of them are people who would be on the left of the Labour Party about 20 or 30 years ago - with a few oddball lefties and single issue protesters mixed in with them

Thirty years ago the left of the Labour Party were Militant Tendency. I would suggest that, to paraphrase: these youngsters/new members by not understanding history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[Surf's Up]

Possibly. I like the idea of a left leaning coalition though. This might be a new way forward.

I agree with this, although I suspect getting to the point where this could become a reality will be a bumpy ride.

 

[Hastings gull]

To be honest, now, for me it's more about challenging and then ultimately getting the Tories out. This is my main aim. I don't really care which lLabour leader does it. Get the Tories out then worry about the details.

I think you might find that the details may have to be sorted out first before there is any chance of electoral victory . .

 

[Bolton va va]

Excellent summary plus the Left will never willingly relinquish power now they have got themselves into such a strong position within the Labour party. And Corbyn is merely a stalking horse - the "acceptable face" of the extreme left. He's a man who has, by accident, emerged blinking into the sunlight and who hasn't got a clue how to think, act or behave as a party leader. That said, merely by dint of actually being a fairly decent if somewhat misguided human being he may survive a lot longer than many think but the trajectory of his survival will co-incide precisely with the trajectory of the demise of the Labour party. Its difficult to see how they can survive without a formal and final split.

Saying that Corbyn is fairly decent if somewhat misguided is like saying that Stalin had a bit of a temper. I'd say that Corbyn is a thoroughly nasty little shite who sees no problem in the usual unpleasant far left attempted bullying & intimidatory behaviour, this time targeted at the more moderate Labour members & MP's.

Without looking at anything else, his past support for the IRA & his present inability to unequivocally condemn current terrorists marks him down as a grade A **** ( & also makes him & a labour party led by him, unelectable )

 

[Hampster Gull]

Saying that Corbyn is fairly decent if somewhat misguided is like saying that Stalin had a bit of a temper. I'd say that Corbyn is a thoroughly nasty little shite who sees no problem in the usual unpleasant far left attempted bullying & intimidatory behaviour, this time targeted at the more moderate Labour members & MP's.

Without looking at anything else, his past support for the IRA & his present inability to unequivocally condemn current terrorists marks him down as a grade A **** ( & also makes him & a labour party led by him, unelectable )

I am torn btw thinking he is just a bit of a k**b and out of his depth to him being a nasty piece of works and out of his depth

 

[Hastings gull]

Saying that Corbyn is fairly decent if somewhat misguided is like saying that Stalin had a bit of a temper. I'd say that Corbyn is a thoroughly nasty little shite who sees no problem in the usual unpleasant far left attempted bullying & intimidatory behaviour, this time targeted at the more moderate Labour members & MP's.

Without looking at anything else, his past support for the IRA & his present inability to unequivocally condemn current terrorists marks him down as a grade A **** ( & also makes him & a labour party led by him, unelectable )

I would also add that his recent train antics show him not to be the squeaky-clean politician that he tries to make out that he is.

 

[Redundant Gigolo]

I would also add that his recent train antics show him not to be the squeaky-clean politician that he tries to make out that he is.

He's also presiding (and some say implicitly encouraging) the brutal bullying tactics in the party of some of the moderate labour MP's by the fanatical far left. He's therefore complicit in the farce that is the Labour Party today and not fit to lead.