Politics

[ewerk 30221]

Corbyn is refusing to commit to defending NATO allies in the event of an attack by Russia. Surely it has to be clear to anyone with half a brain that he can never lead the country?

[NJS 4365]

Corbyn is refusing to commit to defending NATO allies in the event of an attack by Russia. Surely it has to be clear to anyone with half a brain that he can never lead the country?

Is it the 80s again?

 

If Russia attacked any Eurpean country, the US would steam in - NATO is just a boys club/arms dealing social club and a complete waste of time/effort/money.

[ewerk 30221]

It his unwillingness to commit armed forces even under the most extreme provocation that is my problem.

 

But you already knew that.

[PaddockLad 17070]

It his unwillingness to commit armed forces even under the most extreme provocation that is my problem.

But you already knew that.

Can you vote for him in any sort of election though?... Edited August 18, 2016 by PaddockLad

[Renton 21234]

Is it the 80s again?

It appears so, yes. Do you remember what happened then?

[PaddockLad 17070]

It appears so, yes. Do you remember what happened then?

Yeah there was a split in the Labour Party and some old soaks fucked off in a huff to little or no effect, but those who remained reformed the party into a 21st century election winning machine by moving to the centre. Difficult to imagine that happening now, seeing as a lot of those who shifted the country to the right 2 months ago actively blame those same Labour reformers for letting thousands of refugees in.

 

The people of the U.K. are, being as sweepingly general as I can possibly be, conservative with a small "c". They're nice-ish, but easily lead and don't want immigration. I don't think a reformed centre ground Labour Party in 2020 stands a cat in hells chance of winning that crowd over, not that Jezza and the trots will ever give in until someone beats him to death with a rolled up copy of the socialist worker.

[Renton 21234]

Yeah there was a split in the Labour Party and some old soaks fucked off in a huff to little or no effect, but those who remained reformed the party into a 21st century election winning machine by moving to the centre. Difficult to imagine that happening now, seeing as a lot of those who shifted the country to the right 2 months ago actively blame those same Labour reformers for letting thousands of refugees in.

 

The people of the U.K. are, being as sweepingly general as I can possibly be, conservative with a small "c". They're nice-ish, but easily lead and don't want immigration. I don't think a reformed centre ground Labour Party in 2020 stands a cat in hells chance of winning that crowd over, not that Jezza and the trots will ever give in until someone beats him to death with a rolled up copy of the socialist worker.

 

Fair summary.

[PaddockLad 17070]

Paul Mason's annihilates Owen Smith, just for shits and giggles...

 

https://medium.com/mosquito-ridge/the-sound-of-blairite-silence-aed2ef726c8a#.3rckkelmw

[Rayvin 5164]

That is a fucking brilliant article.

 

It's pulled me right back from the brink on the whole affair, actually. I guess a lot of it is speculation, but we'll see how true it proves once the leadership 'contest' is finalised.

[ewerk 30221]

Seriously? The article lacks anything concrete at all.

 

He's lamenting the fact that the media aren't attacking Smith. One of the reasons that Corbyn's time is up is because his relationship with the media is entirely negative. A fresh start with the media is what the party needs.

 

He promotes Corbyn's management of Brexit as a positive. This is the man who wanted to invoke Article 50 the day after the vote. Apart from this what exactly has he contributed to the process?

 

Smith hasn't proposed a shadow cabinet? Corbyn as leader can't even cobble a cabinet together.

 

It's not a wonderful article. It's a badly written hatchet job that makes offers no attempt at balance or objectivity.

[Rayvin 5164]

 

 

It's not a wonderful article. It's a badly written hatchet job that makes offers no attempt at balance or objectivity.

 

 

I do agree that it's written in the same vein as what we see about Corbyn in the mainstream media, yes. But then again, it doesn't really matter whether or not the author can prove whether or not he's right. We'll see in due course if he is.

 

Something I'd been struggling with was what on earth the PLP thought that this leadership bid was going to achieve. Literally everyone knows Corbyn will win it. So why do it? It's doing more harm than good in terms of 'electability'. But this article puts forward a suggested reason. I'm happy to consider alternatives of course, but it sounds like the sort of Blair era spin/machinations that made them so successful, does it not?

Edited August 19, 2016 by Rayvin

[Rayvin 5164]

I have the feeling that a smackdown by Renton is on the way...

[ewerk 30221]

It really isn't in the same vein as the mainstream media. The mainstream media attack Corbyn for shit that he does and says. Yes they go OTT but Mason is basically pulling stuff out of his arse here. 

[Rayvin 5164]

It really isn't in the same vein as the mainstream media. The mainstream media attack Corbyn for shit that he does and says. Yes they go OTT but Mason is basically pulling stuff out of his arse here. 

 

I did myself concede that it was largely speculation, so I don't disagree. But it raises some really interesting points, nonetheless.

 

Chiefly, as I said, why ARE we having this pointless leadership election? If this goes down in a similar way to what Mason is suggesting, I think it'll be fair to say he had them bang to rights. We don't really need to worry about whether he's right or not, time will prove it one way or the other.

[Renton 21234]

Paul Mason's annihilates Owen Smith, just for shits and giggles...

 

https://medium.com/mosquito-ridge/the-sound-of-blairite-silence-aed2ef726c8a#.3rckkelmw

Yeah, really well thought out and balanced piece that, with talk of the neoliberal elite and Corbyn as a victim. There's 2 things that genuinely confuse me about this Corbyn love in. Firstly, why his supporters , many of which are on here and who ironically tend to be very middle class, cannot understand, or do not care, that there is a difference between party support and electability. That article even blamed Smith for the poor polls, quite frankly it's amazing they can't see what the primary issue is here for most voters. Hint: it begins with C.

 

But secondly, I have no idea why on earth Corbyn commands the respect he does from his supporters. He's done nowt with his career except bitch and whine from the back benches, opposing virtually everything labour did in opposition and power, and now pretends he wants to be a unity leader. For me he's like the high sparrow of politics, an outwardly agreeable (but not remotely charismatic) leader of a cult, but really as malevolent as they come.

 

Here's a counter article about the poor victim Corbyn for shits and giggles.

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/08/10-times-jeremy-corbyn-used-dark-arts-spin-devastating-effect

Edited August 19, 2016 by Renton

[Rayvin 5164]

Yeah, really well thought out and balanced piece that, with talk of the neoliberal elite and Corbyn as a victim. There's 2 things that genuinely confuse me about this Corbyn love in. Firstly, why his supporters , many of which are on here and who ironically tend to be very middle class, cannot understand, or do not care, that there is a difference between party support and electability. That article even blamed Smith for the poor polls, quite frankly it's amazing they can't see what the primary issue is here for most voters. Hint: it begins with C.

 

But secondly, I have no idea why on earth Corbyn commands the respect he does from his supporters. He's done nowt with his career except bitch and whine from the back benches, opposing virtually everything labour did in opposition and power, and now pretends he wants to be a unity leader. For me he's like the high sparrow of politics, an outwardly agreeable (but not remotely charismatic) leader of a cult, but really as malevolent as they come.

 

Here's a counter article about the poor victim Corbyn for shits and giggles.

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/08/10-times-jeremy-corbyn-used-dark-arts-spin-devastating-effect

 

I'll read that article momentarily but just to advise on your second point; for me, it has nothing to do with Corbyn and everything to do with the wholesale failure of New Labour to stand up for young people, poor people, and the generally disadvantaged when they waved through austerity without challenge. And as I've said on here for the past 3 years at last, austerity failed in general, failed in particular the groups I just mentioned, and was nothing other than a cover for Tory small state ideology. Corbyn was literally the first Labour MP to be elected to a leadership position who was going to stand up to it and call it for what it was - a lie.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Rayvin

[Christmas Tree 4679]

The savvy kids at momentum are pulling at lot of people's pants down and Corbyn is simply the Trojan horse.

 

Labour will be unrecognisable in a few years and totally insignificant to modern politics.

[Rayvin 5164]

Yeah, really well thought out and balanced piece that, with talk of the neoliberal elite and Corbyn as a victim. There's 2 things that genuinely confuse me about this Corbyn love in. Firstly, why his supporters , many of which are on here and who ironically tend to be very middle class, cannot understand, or do not care, that there is a difference between party support and electability. That article even blamed Smith for the poor polls, quite frankly it's amazing they can't see what the primary issue is here for most voters. Hint: it begins with C.

 

But secondly, I have no idea why on earth Corbyn commands the respect he does from his supporters. He's done nowt with his career except bitch and whine from the back benches, opposing virtually everything labour did in opposition and power, and now pretends he wants to be a unity leader. For me he's like the high sparrow of politics, an outwardly agreeable (but not remotely charismatic) leader of a cult, but really as malevolent as they come.

 

Here's a counter article about the poor victim Corbyn for shits and giggles.

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/08/10-times-jeremy-corbyn-used-dark-arts-spin-devastating-effect

 

Some of those points are interesting and I suspect true, some are ridiculous - the one about his policies for instance. Prior to his election, I read the full policy outlines for all 4 candidates and decided that his were the ones that made most sense to me based on my values - so I know he has policies, I did the reading. Whether I believe any of them or not to one side, if Corbyn is this superbly gifted PR guy, able to counter spin so effectively against the well versed core PLP team, 1) why was he not identified for this purpose years ago and 2) how can that narrative exist alongside the one of him being incompetent with manipulating media opinion?

[ewerk 30221]

I'll read that article momentarily but just to advise on your second point; for me, it has nothing to do with Corbyn and everything to do with the wholesale failure of New Labour to stand up for young people, poor people, and the generally disadvantaged when they waved through austerity without challenge. And as I've said on here for the past 3 years at last, austerity failed in general, failed in particular the groups I just mentioned, and was nothing other than a cover for Tory small state ideology. Corbyn was literally the first Labour MP to be elected to a leadership position who was going to stand up to it and call it for what it was - a lie.

 

Labour's lack of opposition to austerity was indeed a failure but the swing to the swing to the far left was a mistake. This is pretty much Souness replacing Robson all over again.

[Rayvin 5164]

The savvy kids at momentum are pulling at lot of people's pants down and Corbyn is simply the Trojan horse.

 

Labour will be unrecognisable in a few years and totally insignificant to modern politics.

 

A Trojan horse for what, exactly? 300,000 Trotskyites?

 

Agree on the last bit though, the whole game is fucked now.

[ewerk 30221]

A Trojan horse for what, exactly? 300,000 Trotskyites?

 

Wasn't Mason himself a Trotskyite?

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3809]

It seems Labour are completely unable to learn from the past and so insular they can't recognise the need to make any changes anyway. Anybody who wants to be an MP has to go through the motions of party, councillor / work for MP then MP or they can leapfrog all of that if they do PPE at Oxford or are related to an MP. It saddens me how shit they have become.

[Rayvin 5164]

Labour's lack of opposition to austerity was indeed a failure but the swing to the swing to the far left was a mistake. This is pretty much Souness replacing Robson all over again.

 

If it was a mistake, and I'm prepared to accept that it might well have been even though we'll never actually know how things would have turned out if the PLP had actually just supported the guy, it should have been allowed to run its course and collapse of its own accord. The PLP, in resisting in the way they are, have ensured that Labour (as CT says) won't get a sniff. Corbyn in power might have cost them one election. What they've done now has probably destroyed the party. If this was a mistake, it was compounded on all sides by political incompetence.

 

I disagree with Corbyn on a number of things and frankly would be happy enough with Smith in and of himself - but the PLP... even if Labour survived this and got rid of Corbyn, I don't think I could vote for them again.

[Renton 21234]

Labour's lack of opposition to austerity was indeed a failure but the swing to the swing to the far left was a mistake. This is pretty much Souness replacing Robson all over again.

That's a good anology. Labour have massively over reacted to the Miliband defeat and are in the process of committing electoral suicide. We know where it ends, relegation.

[Renton 21234]

If it was a mistake, and I'm prepared to accept that it might well have been even though we'll never actually know how things would have turned out if the PLP had actually just supported the guy, it should have been allowed to run its course and collapse of its own accord. The PLP, in resisting in the way they are, have ensured that Labour (as CT says) won't get a sniff. Corbyn in power might have cost them one election. What they've done now has probably destroyed the party. If this was a mistake, it was compounded on all sides by political incompetence.

 

I disagree with Corbyn on a number of things and frankly would be happy enough with Smith in and of himself - but the PLP... even if Labour survived this and got rid of Corbyn, I don't think I could vote for them again.

Have a listen to those podcasts I mentioned which Alex linked to. Place yourself as an elected labour MP. After his Brexit no show could you accept his leadership? I honestly couldn't. When the likes of Alan Johnson are that critical, you know something is seriously wrong.