It's certainly keeping Nick Cohen's leccy on.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
It's interesting that Israel keeps getting brought up on this, because neither of the cases that sparked the latest row had anything to do with Israel or Zionism whatsoever. They were just straightforward jew-hate that got brushed aside.
Wilson was a weird one as well because he had one fairly moderate (for the time) government, and another pretty leftwing one. Would be interesting to get his take on recent history, for sure.
Yeah, post-war Labour in general is very interesting to look at. A huge mix of voices from all over the spectrum. I'd argue most are somewhat close to Corbyn on most economic issues, but a lot of the less left-wing ones (for that time) had a certain traditionalism and fondness for old imperial values that'd likely anger a lot of Corbyn fans. Attlee included.
From that standpoint I really like Bevan: https://speakola.com/political/aneurin-nye-bevan-trafalgar-square-1956
Aye, Bevan was one of the most solidly left-wing ones of the post-war lot.
How can you be following in someone's footsteps when you're going another direction?
Great speech, thanks for sharing that.
Just saw "Jewdas" and "Guido Fawkes" trending, and figured they must've taken a break from their usual immigration bashing to be offensive in new and exciting ways. Was correct.
The "no, not those jews" paragraph was my favourite part. It's like watching a minstrel explain why racism is bad.
This is the thing that gets me. People are always insisting that there's a distinction between criticism of Israel and antisemitism, and they're right. But whenever the discussion turns to antisemitism those same people only ever want to talk about Israel. Those who claim to want to avoid conflation are actually the ones who conflate all the time.
-We need to talk about antisemitism.
"Yes, different from opposing Israeli policy"
-Agreed. What do you think can be done to tackle antisemitism?
"Well...*3 hour rant on Zionism* "
His meeting with the group Jewdas (is that their actual name or a pun?...or both?) really wasn't well advised. When you're trying to convince people that you're taking the issue seriously it's really shitty PR to go and meet a group who don't think there is a problem to be taken seriously in the first place. Again it's one of those things where any advisor drawing a salary is negligent in his duties not to spot the potential problem there.
London has less 7% of the UK population, but 50% of its homeless population (150k)
Thats more than the entire homeless population of france.
The irony of this post is that despite Blair being to the left of the current Torries the gap between rich and poor grew under him, the erosion of the NHS by privatising elements started under him, equally low social house building and dregulated financial sector from the Thatcher years and in fact most of Thatcher's policies Blair simply followed through. To suggest Blairite policies would tackle the homelessness crisis is naive when you consider his policies helped create it.
Oh have a day off. Name me once in that post you quoted where I suggested Blairite policies would tackle homelessness. I didn't. I said there's an obsession with Tony Blair and the fact so many on the left want to do nothing but talk about Tony Blair at the expense of looking at the problems the current government is failing to address. This is underlined by the fact I raised an issue this current government is failing to address and the response is:
"But Tony Blair...."
Blair left office more than a decade ago. The most important thing to so many on the left shouldn't be to make sure everyone knows how much they disapprove of Tony Blair, yet increasingly it seems so many on the left literally couldn't give a massive shit about anything else. He is obviously going to be referred to from time to time because historically he's an important figure in modern politics. But its rather sad to see such a large number of people of the left who I think have allowed him (or namely their opposition to him) to completely and utterly define their politics to the point where unless they're talking about him or Iraq, they really don't have much else to say. It's that middle-aged guy on Question Time who puts his hand up during the debate on genetically modified crops and somehow manages to fit in the words '...illegal war in Iraq.' into his question. Move on.
Last edited:
Well to be honest I thought you wanted to talk about Tony Blair. The number of times you bring him up.
You mention him and it's only natural to respond with how much damage he left in his wake. For the people of the UK, for his party and other parts of the world.
You're an adviser to a leader who has faced criticism for perceived antisemitism in his party and who has released statement(s) trying to show that he's serious about antisemitism within the party. You're surely ultra sensitive to anything around this issue now and careful about what's said and done. You notice he has an engagement with a group who publicly don't think there's a problem with antisemitism within the party and the whole thing is a right-wing smear.
Is it too much to expect people advising the leader of the the official opposition to maybe flag that, or is thinking this a 'smear' also?
Is it too much to expect people advising the leader of the the official opposition to maybe flag that, or is thinking this a 'smear' also?
You're talking about the meeting with Jewdas? But you don't want him to listen and talk to just any Jewish people, it has to be the right Jewish people to suit you and the media? Oh okay.
I've seen that we have a wider problem with antisemitism in the Labour Party then first thought. Largely unconscious, unspoken and un-described. Of course it is going to take at least a few days to find it then.
How do you know that they didn't flag it up? They might well have and still come to the conclusion that the engagement is worth while?
Yeah I'm talking about the whole 'maybe meeting with people who don't think there's an antisemitism problem in the party isn't a good look at a time when our message is how seriously we're taking antisemitism within the party' thing.
The reaction to this is something that should be obvious to anyone not in a vegetative state. And yet, here we are. Again.
Even criticising the advice the leader gets that ends up heaping more criticism on him is a criticism too far for some people. They're there to manage his image, to put him in a good light. To get him good publicity. Anyone who wants to pretend that's what they're succeeding in doing is either a liar or completely deluded.
The reaction to this is something that should be obvious to anyone not in a vegetative state. And yet, here we are. Again.
Even criticising the advice the leader gets that ends up heaping more criticism on him is a criticism too far for some people. They're there to manage his image, to put him in a good light. To get him good publicity. Anyone who wants to pretend that's what they're succeeding in doing is either a liar or completely deluded.
Again, clearly referring to a remark someone has said but not quoting or replying to them.
As stated, it has to be the right group to suit you. As before with the Skripol poisoning and other situations Corbyn takes opinion from all sides of the debate, doesn't just listen to one side but of course he must make you and the media happy.
Then they're absolute idiots. Which I'm not dismissing by the way.
At times I just feel sorry for him because these are things that any paid adviser should see a mile away and avoid, particularly after the week he's just had. Constantly he's being kicked in the balls by people who are supposed to be there to help him because they're either too reckless to care how much damage this does to him, or too incompetent to know.
He really does have enough to contend with and doesn't need people who can look at the inevitable shitstorm this would cause but still think "Um...that's fine"
I don't know, I've only seen you and the telegraph bang on about it to be honest. And we all know he could be curing aids and the telegraph would still rip him to pieces for hurting the pharma industry... I don't think a lot of people will see his meeting with them as an endorsement for everything any member of them have ever said... There won't be many convinced that celebrating a Jewish holiday with Jews is somehow a worrying sign of his antisemitism.
I am glad he doesn't have a paid adviser telling him not to do the right thing. What is so wrong with him attending a Seder with Jewish constituents of his after he was invited? If the reason for not going would be that it gives a right-wing media an excuse to make a tenuous attack on him... well, quite frankly... feck them.
It does more damage to the people making these attacks because most intelligent people are able to see them for what they are. They can continue to chip away at their own credibility.
Corbyn needs to meet with Jews.
No, not those ones!
Corbyn needs to explain the content of comments on Facebook pages he goes on.
Here's a Guido Fawkes article, just don't look at the comment section.
No, not those ones!
Corbyn needs to explain the content of comments on Facebook pages he goes on.
Here's a Guido Fawkes article, just don't look at the comment section.
You're inaccurately portraying left wing politicians and commentators as having an obsession with Blair. They simply don't, I don't hear that and you seem to be the only one bringing it up this thread. Are some of the public going to mention the prime minster of Britian for a decade, who shaped the country and the world, yes, and many will mention Blair and Thatcher for those reasons.
Do the left have a voice on left wing issues such? Only in a tiny proportion of the media because the narative has become skewed to the right wing agenda.
While there maybe a handful of genuine anti-semitic comments from nobodies within the party there is a smear campaign from the enemies of the left and right wing Zionists who won't accept any criticism of Israel. Zionists, Tories and Blairites alike have jumped on it as a huge issue for obvious reasons.
It ultimate boils down to whether you believe any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic or not because we've had an Israeli on this thread state any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic.
Yes.I wonder if his flight will come via Diego Garcia, for old times' sake.
I actually consider that to be anti-semitic/racist in itself. Why shouldn't a Jewish man or woman have sympathy with the plight of the Palestinians? Apparently that's the type of Jew who shouldn't be worthy of a public opinion and Labour shouldn't bring into consultations? Apparently all Jews should have the same opinion and if they don't 'they aren't real Jews'.
I'm sure they'll be organising a march against themselves before the day is out.
Gah no it doesn't, it really really doesn't, as the stuff the provoked all this recently had nothing to do with Israel.
I really can't imagine this degree of bad faith being ascribed to any other minority group, either.
"I for one am pleased the Labour leader has such poor advice and those around him are so awful at handling the media so that everything he tries to do is constantly overshadowed by one PR mess after another."
I don't really get that unless the person saying it is not a fan of Corbyn. I'm not a fan of Corbyn and even I wouldn't say it.
I don't really get that unless the person saying it is not a fan of Corbyn. I'm not a fan of Corbyn and even I wouldn't say it.
Whatever Corbyn wanted the political news agenda to be this morning it presumably wasn't everyone talking about his meeting last night. There's only so long supporters can plausibly deny dissatisfaction at his team's frequent failings at media handling. Especially because that is acting as a huge distraction to whatever else it is he or his party wanted to say today. Struggle with the idea anyone can see the guy they support so routinely drowned out and overtaken by events either caused by or not sufficiently anticipated by those around him, and still pretend to be pleased with it fearing expressing any other view would somehow be seen as disloyal.
Nobody can look at the press coverage Corbyn has received this morning and pretend they're pleased with it simply because it shows he isn't surrounded by spin doctors of any competency.
Nobody can look at the press coverage Corbyn has received this morning and pretend they're pleased with it simply because it shows he isn't surrounded by spin doctors of any competency.
Change the record for gawd's sake. You're clearly trolling because while others address your points you carry on with the same broken recording @Oscie
Yes in a thread full of Corbyn supporters the one guy who is critical is the broken record.
Maybe I should just be that poster who does nothing but find irrelevant pro-Corbyn tweets and posts them at random intervals. You know, to avoid not being a broken record, and stuff.
Maybe I should just be that poster who does nothing but find irrelevant pro-Corbyn tweets and posts them at random intervals. You know, to avoid not being a broken record, and stuff.
The real irony of course is that Corbyn attended a Passover night with a bunch of anti-zionsists, no doubt getting high on the escape from slavery part but not so cool with the final destination.
Cognitive dissonance at it's best.
Yeah, but you still don't respond to points made. Just repeat your own.
When your points are: "Maybe Labour can't afford an advisor who knows how to look at Facebook" and "Jeremy does oppose Brexit he's just chosen not to be vocal about it at this time", there's a chance I'm not really going to bother responding directly to them.
As if that's all I've said. He wasn't very apparent leading up to the Referendum - was he? You are the one always going on about paid advisors especially to help him with his diary and events and social media, ok, we get it, why don't you apply? You'll not make any headway here, you need an application form maybe.
just admit you're here to troll.
David Icke tweeing support for Corbyn over this.
The protesters were said to have had their cause undermined because they were supported by the likes of Norman Tebbit. I wonder how many people are going to claim Corbyn's case is undermined because it's supported by Icke? Or is it one of those 'guilt by association only if I say it is', things?
For the record I think that neither case is undermined simply because of who happens to also share the same view. Be interesting though to hear from those who thought one was, why the other isn't.
The protesters were said to have had their cause undermined because they were supported by the likes of Norman Tebbit. I wonder how many people are going to claim Corbyn's case is undermined because it's supported by Icke? Or is it one of those 'guilt by association only if I say it is', things?
For the record I think that neither case is undermined simply because of who happens to also share the same view. Be interesting though to hear from those who thought one was, why the other isn't.