Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

Adisa said:
The government is taking this country into the gutter but Corbyn is the number one topic. Just feck off!. The NEC members deserve the sack.
Click to expand...

Sure, yet even if we ignore how utterly incredible it is to have a leader of the party having to insist he doesn't hate Jews, and look at the gutter this country is being driven to then there isn't really much there from Labour to get excited about anyway.

If it's not "I'm not antisemitic but.." it's the same "will of the people" shite we get from the Tories.
 
Oscie said:
Both right and left hard-liners see the moderates as the common enemy and expend more energy attacking them than they do each other.

Not so long ago politics used to be about how to spend record investment in the NHS, what more could be done to better the lot of young mum's, improve housing conditions for the less well off, LGBT equality, throwing-shitloads of money at education.

Then things "improved" the hardliners took over the controls of both parties and now it's blue passports, antisemitism, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Owen Jones.

I reserve the right to think that's shit. I don't think that's nostalgia either. Politics/political discourse and Britain itself was in a much better place when the grown-ups were in charge.
Click to expand...

This is a shocking distortion of the past. Blair's government achieved plenty but also failed to introduce any lasting, meaningful left-wing policy and basically gave in to the Thatcherite economic agenda while admittedly doing better on public investment. That same government also invaded Iraq and helped cause chaos in the Middle East after misleading the nation.

Cameron's government was classed as moderate for the Tory party but again implemented hardline austerity policy which has again caused chaos in Britain.

The reason political discourse has gotten worse is because there was a financial crisis and people haven't really benefited from the recovery. Inequality continues to persist and the shift on blame towards immigrants etc has resulted in Brexit, the right-wing media Blair spent years courting helping it along the way.

Politics isn't more polarising because people feel like just annoying each other. Specific social conditions and problems have led to the way things are at the moment.
 
Silva said:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...sted-event-likening-israel-to-nazis-6sb5rqd5x
In January 2010 when he was a backbencher, Mr Corbyn spoke at and opened a talk entitled Never Again — for Anyone. The event was part of a UK tour called Never Again for Anyone — Auschwitz to Gaza.

The main talk, entitled The Misuse of the Holocaust for Political Purposes, was delivered by Hajo Meyer, a Jewish survivor of Auschwitz who became a passionate anti-Zionist and repeatedly made the comparison between the Nazi regime and Israeli policy.
Click to expand...
:lol:
Click to expand...

Sweet Square said:
:lol:

Corbyn shouldn't have apologised.
Click to expand...
Silva said:
She didn't introduce any holocaust survivors so she can't be antisemitic.
Click to expand...
Okay, so I get you say criticism of Corbyn hosting that event on Holocaust Memorial Day is disproved because a Jew - Holocaust survivor - has apparently said things that would likely be deemed antisemitic by the vast majority of other Jews. It's so obvious and straight-forward to you that you think green smilies are all that's needed.

What's the difference between this stance and, say, that of a US right winger, who says racism charges against Trump followers are disproved because of what David Clarke says about Black Lives Matter, Charlottesville, etc.?
 
Synco said:
Okay, so I get you say criticism of Corbyn hosting that event on Holocaust Memorial Day is disproved because a Jew - Holocaust survivor - has apparently said things that would likely be deemed antisemitic by the vast majority of other Jews. It's so obvious and straight-forward to you that you think green smilies are all that's needed.

What's the difference between this stance and, say, that of a US right winger, who says racism charges against Trump followers are disproved because of what David Clarke says about Black Lives Matter, Charlottesville, etc.?
Click to expand...

I'm glad we're now at the stage where we are comparing a holocaust survivor who foughr against oppression to a US sheriff who fights for oppression with a straight face.
 
Corbyn is a disaster and has utterly failed to be an effective opposition leader at a time when a robust opposition is most required to give some checks and balances during the brexit debacle. He is as guilty as May in the utter shit show that is about to be inflicted on the country. That's aside from the dubious links he has had to IRA, Hamas and anti-semitism. It's a shame because I am a left-leaning person in general and I like the sound of some of his policies but he is so utterly inept that there is no chance of any of them being implemented, quite the opposite.
 
Synco said:
What's the difference between this stance and, say, that of a US right winger, who says racism charges against Trump followers are disproved because of what David Clarke says about Black Lives Matter, Charlottesville, etc.?
Click to expand...
:lol: You really don't realise how one-eyed you come across on here when it comes to Israel topics.
 
Sweet Square said:


:wenger:
Click to expand...


Whatever about that group, since when can't Jews be antisemitic? @berbatrick has shown in this thread that Netanyahu and his son have spread antisemitic tropes. I've mentioned the case of Gilad Atzmon a couple of times, he's an Israeli Jew who now claims that he despises "the Jew" in him and engages in the most vulgar forms of antisemitism.

My father-in-law is an Arab and I've never encountered anyone, in real life or online, who hates Arabs more. No serious analysis of racism suggests that its targets are somehow uniquely free from its grasp. That group and the Holocaust survivor mentioned above may or may not be antisemites, or have spread antisemitic tropes, but their Jewish identity should not be the primary consideration when making that judgement.
 
2cents said:
Whatever about that group, since when can't Jews be antisemitic? @berbatrick has shown in this thread that Netanyahu and his son have spread antisemitic tropes. I've mentioned the case of Gilad Atzmon a couple of times, he's an Israeli Jew who now claims that he despises "the Jew" in him and engages in the most vulgar forms of antisemitism.

My father-in-law is an Arab and I've never encountered anyone, in real life or online, who hates Arabs more. No serious analysis of racism suggests that its targets are somehow uniquely free from its grasp. That group and the Holocaust survivor mentioned above may or may not be antisemites, or have spread antisemitic tropes, but their Jewish identity should not be the primary consideration when making that judgement.
Click to expand...
I agree that's why I did the :wenger:
 
Jews won't be happy until Corbyn as gone. Must be pro Israel and anti Palestine or you are anti-semitic . In that case then so am i.
 
2cents said:
Ah, my apologies then.
Click to expand...
It's mostly my fault(Sorry you had it write all that out) as looking at it now I can see why it looks like I posted it because I agree with it even if that wasn't the case(I've been up all night so I'm all over the place).

From the article

The wording of McDonnell’s motion specifically welcomed the charter, which critics said breached the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism twice, while also suggesting the Nazi holocaust was unexceptional.
Click to expand...

I mean does McDonnell read the stuff he signs
 
Cheesy said:
This is a shocking distortion of the past. Blair's government achieved plenty but also failed to introduce any lasting, meaningful left-wing policy
Click to expand...

Oh I dunno. Gay people got civil rights. Education and NHS all got massive spending increases. 3rd world debt was wiped off. Bank of England was made independent. Scotland got its own parliament. Hereditary peers were slashed. Minimum wage was introduced. Good Friday agreement. Banned fox hunting.

Plenty there the Tories would never have done.
 
Drifter said:
Jews won't be happy until Corbyn as gone. Must be pro Israel and anti Palestine or you are anti-semitic . In that case then so am i.
Click to expand...

That's a lovely straw man you are hiding behind there.
 
nickm said:
Oh I dunno. Gay people got civil rights. Education and NHS all got massive spending increases. 3rd world debt was wiped off. Bank of England was made independent. Scotland got its own parliament. Hereditary peers were slashed. Minimum wage was introduced. Good Friday agreement. Banned fox hunting.

Plenty there the Tories would never have done.
Click to expand...

I said in my post Labour's governments under Blair achieved plenty, especially socially, and that's something to be lauded.

On economic policy though they mostly ceded to the Thatcherite agenda though, something Blair himself acknowledged. Taxes remained mostly quite low. Spending increases were useful but didn't necessarily rectify social inequality or reduce it in the long-term.
 
Drifter said:
Jews won't be happy until Corbyn as gone. Must be pro Israel and anti Palestine or you are anti-semitic . In that case then so am i.
Click to expand...

"Jews won't"

What you just said is actually anti-Semitic.
 
Drifter said:
Jews won't be happy until Corbyn as gone. Must be pro Israel and anti Palestine or you are anti-semitic . In that case then so am i.
Click to expand...

For Israel, Corbyn is the gift that keeps on giving. Never in the history of the conflict has one man helped conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism by trying so hard to separate them.
 
Aboutreika18 said:
:lol: You really don't realise how one-eyed you come across on here when it comes to Israel topics.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with that perception when it comes to that type of anti-Zionism.
Shamwow said:
I'm glad we're now at the stage where we are comparing a holocaust survivor who foughr against oppression to a US sheriff who fights for oppression with a straight face.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware Clarke and Meyer have very different backgrounds. I was comparing the strategy of saying "It can't be antisemitic because a Jew said it too" to the strategy of "It can't be racist because black people are saying it too." That claim was the gist of the posts I quoted.

I also can't see that holding what's essentially a counter-protest to Holocaust Memorial Day, including comparisons of Zionist Jews to Nazis*, is "fighting against oppression". We're at a point where even the admission something like this is at least problematic - basically what Corbyn has done in his apology, regardless if honest or just PR - seems too much to ask from some.


*assuming Meyer has done this there, as it has been one of his main points for years
 
Drifter said:
Jews won't be happy until Corbyn as gone. Must be pro Israel and anti Palestine or you are anti-semitic . In that case then so am i.
Click to expand...

Starting a sentence with "Jews won't be happy until" is often a good way of communicating just that.
 
If you think Labour's diabolical situation is because of Jeremy Corbyn you're a "traitor".

If you think Labour's diabolical situation has nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn you have to answer the question: what's the point of him then?

If you don't think Labour is in a diabolical situation at all then you're mad.

I don't quite see how anyone doesn't fit into one of those three categories.
 
Oscie said:
If you think Labour's diabolical situation is because of Jeremy Corbyn you're a "traitor".

If you think Labour's diabolical situation has nothing to do with Jeremy Corbyn you have to answer the question: what's the point of him then?

If you don't think Labour is in a diabolical situation at all then you're mad.

I don't quite see how anyone doesn't fit into one of those three categories.
Click to expand...

But they aren't? I disagree with their stance on Brexit currently and don't think they're doing enough, but they're objectively doing alright in the polls at the moment and have edged ahead in some. We're hardly in a late-2016/early-2017 situation currently where the party is lagging behind the government substantially.
 
Ok maybe i should have said Jewish Leadership Council and the Board of Deputies of British Jews plus right wing media won't be happy until Corbyn as gone.
 
Cheesy said:
But they aren't? I disagree with their stance on Brexit currently and don't think they're doing enough, but they're objectively doing alright in the polls at the moment and have edged ahead in some. We're hardly in a late-2016/early-2017 situation currently where the party is lagging behind the government substantially.
Click to expand...


They're against the worst government we've ever seen, who are quite literally tearing themselves apart in the mid-term of a Parliament that they've been the party who has provided the occupant of number 10 for the past 8 years.

With that backdrop, on what planet is the opposition being (according to the 18/07 polling average) 0.9 percentage points ahead "objectively doing alright in the polls"?

There is absolutely everything there for any opposition to be absolutely rampant, to send the govt reeling every day, to set and lead the political agenda. Yet we start from a point where being pretty much tied with one of the most unpopular govts in probably more than 50 years is somehow "doing alright in the polls". It isn't even really principles and policies that get debated any more, it's people denying reality.

There isn't even an acknowledge of what's real. Worst government in 50 years, country on its knees, majority party tearing itself apart. How easier do circumstance need to be for an opposition to make headway? They're not and yet the new 'reality' is that this represents them "doing alright in the polls". It's an alternative fact if ever there was one.
 
Oscie said:
They're against the worst government we've ever seen, who are quite literally tearing themselves apart in the mid-term of a Parliament that they've been the party who has provided the occupant of number 10 for the past 8 years.

With that backdrop, on what planet is the opposition being (according to the 18/07 polling average) 0.9 percentage points ahead "objectively doing alright in the polls"?

There is absolutely everything there for any opposition to be absolutely rampant, to send the govt reeling every day, to set and lead the political agenda. Yet we start from a point where being pretty much tied with one of the most unpopular govts in probably more than 50 years is somehow "doing alright in the polls". It isn't even really principles and policies that get debated any more, it's people denying reality.

There isn't even an acknowledge of what's real. Worst government in 50 years, country on its knees, majority party tearing itself apart. How easier do circumstance need to be for an opposition to make headway? They're not and yet the new 'reality' is that this represents them "doing alright in the polls". It's an alternative fact if ever there was one.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they're doing brilliantly - just that they aren't in a 'diabolical' situation. Which is objective fact. Certainly they've been in much worse situations under Corbyn early on in his tenure.

Ideally they'd be ahead of the Tories but part of the problem with the current political climate of the country is that with anti-immigration and pro-Brexit sentiment being overtly against Brexit and for immigration isn't going to lead to a massive boost in the polls. Of course, ideally Labour would be helping to go against the tide of Brexit with the aim of swaying those sentiments, but it's not a particularly easy task and even with the unpopularity of this government, winning against them isn't necessarily easy while they placate the hard-right.
 
It's a fundamental disagreement on reality.

You consider being on par in the polls with this government as "doing objectively alright". I don't. Presumably you think the government are doing absolutely fecking amazing then, going through what they have and being neck and neck with an opposition you think are doing quite well.

Isn't a single govt who've had a record close to this ones who wouldn't take being level in polls with the opposition. Isn't a single opposition vs a govt with a record close to the one this one has and take being level with govt in the polls.

To refute that is to be either disingenuous, an idiot or a liar. But it's the only way Corbyn's leadership can be defended. Not only ignore reality, invent a new one.
 
Oscie said:
It's a fundamental disagreement on reality.

You consider being on par in the polls with this government as "doing objectively alright". I don't. Presumably you think the government are doing absolutely fecking amazing then, going through what they have and being neck and neck with an opposition you think are doing quite well.

Isn't a single govt who've had a record close to this ones who wouldn't take being level in polls with the opposition. Isn't a single opposition vs a govt with a record close to the one this one has and take being level with govt in the polls.

To refute that is to be either disingenuous, an idiot or a liar. But it's the only way Corbyn's leadership can be defended. Not only ignore reality, invent a new one.
Click to expand...

If you actually read my post, you'd see I stated that this government are a shambles, and I think Labour can do better. But I've also outlined why that isn't particularly easy, and that there are certain reasons that the popularity of this government persists in spite of how shambolic it is.

There's also a certain fondness for nostalgia going on here though where you're ignoring how poor governments of the past were. Major and co are seen respectably now, but were mired by scandal and infighting back in the 90s. Blair had Iraq. Brown - while I think he dealt respectably with the financial crisis to a point - was often lambasted and seen as a poor premier. Thatcher was unpopular at points during her first term and was probably saved to an extent by the Falklands.

I don't see this government receiving a revival in times to come because it quite obviously is crap, but it's always easier to dismiss political opponents of the now as rubbish compared to ones of the past, because we're looking at past politicians in a more objective light with a fuller knowledge of what they did, why they did it, and what the lasting outcome of their actions were.
 
It's cognitive dissonance.

Terrible government, unpopular PM, country divided, party even more divided. Public services on their knees, absolutely no Brexit plan and stumbling between one day to the next like a drunk on a stag to. 39% in the polls. "Look at this shower, they're a disgrace"

Opposition leader against a terrible government, an unpopular PM, country divided and party of government even more divided. Public services on their knees, government with absolutely no Brexit plana nd stumbling between one day to the next like a drunk on a pub crawl. 39% in the polls. "Objectively they're doing quite well"

That's the Corbyn paradox in a nutshell.

My fear is that not only is there a lack of interest in Labour ever really becoming a credible alternative government, but that we're slowly moving to a place where we're told that we're being stupid if we even expect them to try. And we've come close. The whole 'losing an election is the same as winning and election' and 'opposition parties are supposed to only make tiny incremental gains in mid-term council elections, dummy!' things we've been spoon-fed and accused of being "Tories" and "traitors" if we question it.
 
Oscie said:
It's cognitive dissonance.

Terrible government, unpopular PM, country divided, party even more divided. Public services on their knees, absolutely no Brexit plan and stumbling between one day to the next like a drunk on a stag to. 39% in the polls. "Look at this shower, they'e a disgrace"

Opposition leader against a terrible government, an unpopular PM, country divided and party of government even more divided. Public services on their knees, government with absolutely no Brexit plana nd stumbling between one day to the next like a drunk on a pub crawl. 39% in the polls. "Objectively they're doing quite well"

That's the Corbyn paradox in a nutshell.
Click to expand...

Do you actually read any posts you respond to? I don't mean this to come across as obtuse or as a dick - I'm genuinely asking because I'm literally outlining reasons as to why the polls are as they are right now, and why it's not so simple for Labour to move ahead in them.

I want Corbyn to take a more pro-Europe stance. Indeed I don't think it helps that even if he's privately for a soft Brexit that he's publicly evasive about what he really thinks. But the general public support for Brexit demonstrates that taking a stance which supports freedom of movement and close association with the EU is controversial and divisive. I'd like the opposition leader to try and turn the tide against that, but it's not particularly simple, or as easy as you suggest.

I'm genuinely interested in what your approach would be? And how that would avoid alienating Labour supporters who voted for Brexit?
 
Cheesy said:
I didn't say they're doing brilliantly - just that they aren't in a 'diabolical' situation. Which is objective fact. Certainly they've been in much worse situations under Corbyn early on in his tenure.

Ideally they'd be ahead of the Tories but part of the problem with the current political climate of the country is that with anti-immigration and pro-Brexit sentiment being overtly against Brexit and for immigration isn't going to lead to a massive boost in the polls. Of course, ideally Labour would be helping to go against the tide of Brexit with the aim of swaying those sentiments, but it's not a particularly easy task and even with the unpopularity of this government, winning against them isn't necessarily easy while they placate the hard-right.
Click to expand...

doesn't make sense in any way
 
Trending on Twitter or being an "absolute boi" isn't the definition of a politician doing well. He doesn't win elections, he isn't capable of landing a single blow on the worst PM in living memory, yet we're told that he's an "absolute boi" because he's currently trending on social media just beneath people talking about capes. He's not Dave from the chippy getting on the background of a Sky Sports News report on transfer deadline day. He's the leader of the Labour party.

And here's the point where everyone accuses me of being condescending but it's for these reasons that I don't think his supporters fully realise what politics is or understand what it's supposed to be.

It isn't this:

B8n5Z56IAAAcWJb.jpg:large
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.