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

Honest John said:
The Labour party need to lose this joker and get themselves seriously electable - and quick. While they have this guy at their head the Tories will just bumble on. There needs to be a clear and present threat to the government that if they don't sort this Brexit business out then they'll be voted out of office. At the moment the notion of Corbyn as PM is just about the worse of the two evils.

Labour won't get a better opportunity. But they'll blow it with this guy. They need a moderate leader to pull the party back towards the centre with less radical policies. They need to adopt pro-europe (or at least a soft Brexit) agenda. If they can do that they'd win a landslide.

I'm right leaning and have voted so all my life. But even I can see the need for an electable opposition for the good of the country.
Click to expand...
Nah, that's bollocks. No way a party should shift its policies and political leanings to placate the electorate. The only reason people suggest this is because of our undemocratic voting system which punishes smaller parties and results in a big two. I didn't mind the Blairites too much (especially in comparison to now), but totally disagreed with their takeover of Labour.
 
Honest John said:
The Labour party need to lose this joker and get themselves seriously electable - and quick. While they have this guy at their head the Tories will just bumble on. There needs to be a clear and present threat to the government that if they don't sort this Brexit business out then they'll be voted out of office. At the moment the notion of Corbyn as PM is just about the worse of the two evils.

Labour won't get a better opportunity. But they'll blow it with this guy. They need a moderate leader to pull the party back towards the centre with less radical policies. They need to adopt pro-europe (or at least a soft Brexit) agenda. If they can do that they'd win a landslide.

I'm right leaning and have voted so all my life. But even I can see the need for an electable opposition for the good of the country.
Click to expand...

Corbyn's 'radical' policies are generally popular with the electorate so I don't see how the Labour party would do well out of trying to reclaim the centre at a time when centrist parties are in retreat. And as much as I agree that Labour should be advocating for no/soft-brexit (because without which they'll have no money to introduce any of their agenda) there's good reasons (as depressing as they are) why that's not a complete slam dunk.

I think the problems with Corbyn are mostly just problems with Corbyn rather than his platform as a whole.
 
altodevil86 said:
Nah, that's bollocks. No way a party should shift its policies and political leanings to placate the electorate. The only reason people suggest this is because of our undemocratic voting system which punishes smaller parties and results in a big two. I didn't mind the Blairites too much (especially in comparison to now), but totally disagreed with their takeover of Labour.
Click to expand...

Then they will remain in opposition.
 
I don't think he ever dreamed of becoming party leader. The tide against him strong right now and is causing a distraction. The pictures of him with these groups of people aren't helping and feeds into a narrative that he's either dodgy or incompetent.
For Labours sake, I hope it passes and we can get back to turning the screw on this shambles of a government.
 
Adisa said:
I don't think he ever dreamed of becoming party leader. The tide against him strong right now and is causing a distraction. The pictures of him with these groups of people aren't helping and feeds into a narrative that he's either dodgy or incompetent.
For Labours sake, I hope it passes and we can get back to turning the screw on this shambles of a government.
Click to expand...

He's the UK version of Donald Trump. He's bound by his racist base and is unimpeachable in the eyes of his supporters. He's going nowhere.

He won't be turning any screws either because he doesn't want to be in power with the poison chalice of Brexit in his hand. He'll continue to be quiet as a mouse hoping to seize power sometime after March next year when its all gone tits up.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Corbyn's 'radical' policies are generally popular with the electorate so I don't see how the Labour party would do well out of trying to reclaim the centre at a time when centrist parties are in retreat. And as much as I agree that Labour should be advocating for no/soft-brexit (because without which they'll have no money to introduce any of their agenda) there's good reasons (as depressing as they are) why that's not a complete slam dunk.

I think the problems with Corbyn are mostly just problems with Corbyn rather than his platform as a whole.
Click to expand...

His policies may be popular but they are wide open to fiscal scrutiny and would struggle in a GE situation. I actually agree with some of his proposals - like nationalizing the Railways.

Last time the Tories were complacent because of May's lead. They won't be next time.

I am not sure whether majority of populist sentiment in the UK is actually 'left-wing'. Many would say the opposite. At the end of the day the majority of people vote for centrist policies.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Surely it’s possible (likely?) he had no clue who the people “killed by Mossad agents in 1991” actually were? If that’s the case doesn’t it make what he did less problematic?
Click to expand...

It’s certainly possible, since he seems to have gotten a bit mixed up over who was killed where in 1991. On the other hand, given his politics and the kind of activities he’s engaged in throughout his entire political career, he doesn’t exactly deserve the benefit of the doubt here. He’s someone who has Palestine on the brain pretty much 24/7, it stretches it quite a bit to believe he was totally clueless here.
 
2cents said:
It’s certainly possible, since he seems to have gotten a bit mixed up over who was killed where in 1991. On the other hand, given his politics and the kind of activities he’s engaged in throughout his entire political career, he doesn’t exactly deserve the benefit of the doubt here. He’s someone who has Palestine on the brain pretty much 24/7, it stretches it quite a bit to believe he was totally clueless here.
Click to expand...
It’s not on his brain 24/7. It’s not being discussed because he’s putting it on the agenda, it’s being discussed because his enemies in the Labour Party and the right wing press are determined to keep us all talking about it.
 
Honest John said:
His policies may be popular but they are wide open to fiscal scrutiny and would struggle in a GE situation. I actually agree with some of his proposals - like nationalizing the Railways.

Last time the Tories were complacent because of May's lead. They won't be next time.

I am not sure whether majority of populist sentiment in the UK is actually 'left-wing'. Many would say the opposite. At the end of the day the majority of people vote for centrist policies.
Click to expand...
Not if you’ve been awake and watching the world for the last 10 years. Across Europe and in the States people are divided more and looking less to centrist politicians. The Conservatives big problem is that a generation of young people who are significantly worse off than their parents are growing up, are already in debt after student fees, and will be a huge force electorally. Momentum, Corbyn and McDonell have understood this and the Tories are way behind. The next U.K. general election will be a fascinating struggle between the Left and their youthful, social media savvy backing, and the Right with their traditional press power.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
He's the UK version of Donald Trump. He's bound by his racist base and is unimpeachable in the eyes of his supporters. He's going nowhere.

He won't be turning any screws either because he doesn't want to be in power with the poison chalice of Brexit in his hand. He'll continue to be quiet as a mouse hoping to seize power sometime after March next year when its all gone tits up.
Click to expand...
I don't want a leadership debate now. It doesn't help labour at all. I don't care for personalities. Just want a functioning opposition and hope he can do it at least for another year.
 
Nuts said:
Not if you’ve been awake and watching the world for the last 10 years. Across Europe and in the States people are divided more and looking less to centrist politicians. The Conservatives big problem is that a generation of young people who are significantly worse off than their parents are growing up, are already in debt after student fees, and will be a huge force electorally. Momentum, Corbyn and McDonell have understood this and the Tories are way behind. The next U.K. general election will be a fascinating struggle between the Left and their youthful, social media savvy backing, and the Right with their traditional press power.
Click to expand...
The Tories at the last GE ran the most diabolically rubbish campaign that I have ever seen in 40 years of voting. It saw a 20 point lead whittled away to barely nothing. There was nothing populist or radical about their manifesto they went on the 'strong and stable' ticket. Well, apart from the 'dementia tax' which was even more of a disaster. And even with Labour promising the earth and all it's riches to everyone in creation they couldn't oust them.

The majority of people vote safe.
 
Nuts said:
It’s not on his brain 24/7. It’s not being discussed because he’s putting it on the agenda, it’s being discussed because his enemies in the Labour Party and the right wing press are determined to keep us all talking about it.
Click to expand...

24/7 is obvious hyperbole, but it's far from a ridiculous point to suggest that Corbyn has been incredibly vocal and outspoken on Israel and Palestine for decades and that ignorance can hardly be an excuse.

And if Corbyn was genuinely as ignorant about a topic that he's spent a lot of his career talking about as he would need to be what does that say about the rest of his political platform?
 
NinjaFletch said:
24/7 is obvious hyperbole, but it's far from a ridiculous point to suggest that Corbyn has been incredibly vocal and outspoken on Israel and Palestine for decades and that ignorance can hardly be an excuse.

And if Corbyn was genuinely as ignorant about a topic that he's spent a lot of his career talking about as he would need to be what does that say about the rest of his political platform?
Click to expand...
How ‘incredibly vocal’ has he been about Palestine since becoming leader? He’s barely mentioned it. We’re talking about a photo that’s several years old. You keep asking how intelligent he is - do you think he’s going to do anything incendiary on this topic now?

He has, laudably in my opinion, made a career of being determined to speak to both sides in disputes, trying in particular to hear the less heard side very often. That’s now being used against him, unfairly, but it’s odd that you choose to use it as a way to retrospectively question his intelligence.

If you’re applying hindsight as a means to measure his judgement there are many examples which I’d say justify his judgement pretty emphatically.
 
Nuts said:
How ‘incredibly vocal’ has he been about Palestine since becoming leader? He’s barely mentioned it. We’re talking about a photo that’s several years old. You keep asking how intelligent he is - do you think he’s going to do anything incendiary on this topic now?

He has, laudably in my opinion, made a career of being determined to speak to both sides in disputes, trying in particular to hear the less heard side very often. That’s now being used against him, unfairly, but it’s odd that you choose to use it as a way to retrospectively question his intelligence.

If you’re applying hindsight as a means to measure his judgement there are many examples which I’d say justify his judgement pretty emphatically.
Click to expand...

He isn't reborn when he becomes Labour leader, and what he says and thought are relevant. In exactly the same way we rightly criticise Theresa May's disastrous spell in charge of the Home Office and didn't wipe the slate clean when she became leader. Could you imagine if in the early days of her job as PM a Tory voter on here had tried to make the argument along the lines of: 'well she hasn't shown a nasty authoritarian streak and attempted to abolish human rights because someone had a cat since she became PM so we can say that's in the past'? They'd have been laughed at and rightly so.

Besides, if the argument is that he's intelligent enough not to hang around with anti-semites, be in anti-semitic facebook groups, laud terrorists, or like anti-semitic art now that he's leader, then the argument explodes the favoured defence of him as somehow an extraordinarily unlucky man who repeatedly happened, through no fault of his own, to be repeatedly drawn in to these controversies. It suggests rather that he did know what the people he was associating with were doing and saying and thought that no impediment to being associated with them.

And for all the talk of Corbyn 'being determined to speak to both sides' I can't seem to recall much or any evidence of him speaking alongside controversial speakers from the other side of this debate.
 
NinjaFletch said:
He isn't reborn when he becomes Labour leader, and what he says and thought are relevant. In exactly the same way we rightly criticise Theresa May's disastrous spell in charge of the Home Office and didn't wipe the slate clean when she became leader. Could you imagine if in the early days of her job as PM a Tory voter on here had tried to make the argument along the lines of: 'well she hasn't shown a nasty authoritarian streak and attempted to abolish human rights because someone had a cat since she became PM so we can say that's in the past'? They'd have been laughed at and rightly so.

Besides, if the argument is that he's intelligent enough not to hang around with anti-semites, be in anti-semitic facebook groups, laud terrorists, or like anti-semitic art now that he's leader, then the argument explodes the favoured defence of him as somehow an extraordinarily unlucky man who repeatedly happened, through no fault of his own, to be repeatedly drawn in to these controversies. It suggests rather that he did know what the people he was associating with were doing and saying and thought that no impediment to being associated with them.

And for all the talk of Corbyn 'being determined to speak to both sides' I can't seem to recall much or any evidence of him speaking alongside controversial speakers from the other side of this debate.
Click to expand...
What’s your endgame? Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is racist, a terrorist sympathiser?

There’s so much wrong with our society that could be addressed by a socially aware and compassionate Labour Party and you’re prepared to just destroy those hopes over tittle tattle and possible Facebook likes?!
 
Classical Mechanic said:
He's the UK version of Donald Trump. He's bound by his racist base and is unimpeachable in the eyes of his supporters. He's going nowhere.

He won't be turning any screws either because he doesn't want to be in power with the poison chalice of Brexit in his hand. He'll continue to be quiet as a mouse hoping to seize power sometime after March next year when its all gone tits up.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate?
 
Nuts said:
What’s your endgame? Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is racist, a terrorist sympathiser?

There’s so much wrong with our society that could be addressed by a socially aware and compassionate Labour Party and you’re prepared to just destroy those hopes over tittle tattle and possible Facebook likes?!
Click to expand...

I don't really have an end game. I'm simply interested in discussing the merits of the accusations against Corbyn and the defence for him.

My 'end game', if I have one, is not to excuse Corbyn for a whole list of things that we would absolutely crucify figures on the right for as if the values we say we hold dear are to be meaninglessly traded away in pursuit of the supposed greater good.

As I've said before, I'm increasingly unconvinced of Corbyn's suitability as leader of the Labour party most of the posters who regularly post in here (myself included) wanted and continue to want, and am worried by some of the mental gymnastics being employed to defend Corbyn against an unfortunately increasingly convincing case for the prosecution.
 
Honest John said:
The Tories at the last GE ran the most diabolically rubbish campaign that I have ever seen in 40 years of voting. It saw a 20 point lead whittled away to barely nothing. There was nothing populist or radical about their manifesto they went on the 'strong and stable' ticket. Well, apart from the 'dementia tax' which was even more of a disaster. And even with Labour promising the earth and all it's riches to everyone in creation they couldn't oust them.

The majority of people vote safe.
Click to expand...

The Tories were promising to implement a hard Brexit, which is just about as far as you can possibly imagine from a 'safe' vote.

I'd have gotten this stuff a few years ago but anyone who's observing the world at the moment should be able to see people are increasingly abandoning typically 'safe' options. Or are at least to a certain extent considering outside ones.
 
Much as there's been plenty of nonsense printed about Corbyn in the past, if he's genuinely done this then I feel like mentioning how it's the Daily Mail or talking about what Boris has done don't work well as deflections. Should be held accountable like anyone else.
 
Cheesy said:
The Tories were promising to implement a hard Brexit, which is just about as far as you can possibly imagine from a 'safe' vote.

I'd have gotten this stuff a few years ago but anyone who's observing the world at the moment should be able to see people are increasingly abandoning typically 'safe' options. Or are at least to a certain extent considering outside ones.
Click to expand...
There's never a guaranteed safe vote. Only that which the silent majority perceive. Last election they were faced with get poor or get poorer still.
 
Honest John said:
There's never a guaranteed safe vote. Only that which the silent majority perceive. Last election they were faced with get poor or get poorer still.
Click to expand...

But it still contradicts your idea that people would vote safe. The country as a whole didn't vote safe with Brexit - they instead opted for one of the biggest changes we'll have seen in British society since the war.
 
Honest John said:
It looks from that as though Brexit wasn't an option for Labour voters who were polled.
Click to expand...

The majority of Labour supporters voted Remain so it wouldn't have been the main reason anyway. If anything that would've put some off.
 
Last edited:
How do you deliver a left wing govt that would presumably want to invest heavily in public services if you drive the economy off a cliff by pushing ahead with a 'let's just assume Nadine Dorries is right' Brexit?
 
Outside of his associations there isn't anything radical about Corbyn. He champions causes that make him an outlier but bringing train companies back under state control and a moderate increase on what the Tory party are planning on NHS spending isn't the radical, reformative, left wing agenda people seem to think it is or want it to be.

What I've found frustrating and surprising is the lack of ideas that this 'revoluion' has spawned. It's been treading water. The illusion of fresh and exciting policy ideas but other than accusing everyone of conspiracy...where are they? More money for schools isn't 'neoliberal' when Blair does it but a socialist dawn when Corbyn does.
 
Oscie said:
Outside of his associations there isn't anything radical about Corbyn. He champions causes that make him an outlier but bringing train companies back under state control and a moderate increase on what the Tory party are planning on NHS spending isn't the radical, reformative, left wing agenda people seem to think it is or want it to be.

What I've found frustrating and surprising is the lack of ideas that this 'revoluion' has spawned. It's been treading water. The illusion of fresh and exciting policy ideas but other than accusing everyone of conspiracy...where are they? More money for schools isn't 'neoliberal' when Blair does it but a socialist dawn when Corbyn does.
Click to expand...

Most people aren't really arguing that he's particularly radical though. I'd argue most sensible people just agree he's more left-wing than what the country's had for a while, and that if you align on the left-side of the spectrum then that's a good thing. If you were wanting to point out areas where he differs greatly from the mainstream though, could argue his outspoken criticism of our association with the Saudi government and current atrocities in Yemen is an example of that.

Blair may have upped public spending (eventually) but he was also in power when PFI became increasingly more prevalent with the NHS, and also oversaw the continuing deregulation of the financial sector. A lot of the economic work was done by Brown anyway due to his power as chancellor, and he always had more socialist-leaning credentials than Blair.
 
berbatrick said:
He said the far left Labour policies would turn off voters. That is very obviously not the case.
Click to expand...
You thought it noteworthy enough to post a link showing that in 2017 Labour voters voted for the Labour manifesto, as opposed to Conservative voters who voted for Brexit.

When you know Brexit was endorsed in that very manifesto then the distinction becomes a little less sharp, don't you think?
 
Last night:



Today:



Who runs the Labour Press Team, Milne?
 
What I don't get is why would the Mail and the Tories want rid of Corbyn? Surely any center left Labour party wins the next General Election. I think Blair would have won another. I think Dave Milliband would have beaten Cameron, as opposed to the more left Ed Milliband. Corbyn gives the Tories their best shot at retaining power.
 
redmeister said:
What I don't get is why would the Mail and the Tories want rid of Corbyn? Surely any center left Labour party wins the next General Election. I think Blair would have won another. I think Dave Milliband would have beaten Cameron, as opposed to the more left Ed Milliband. Corbyn gives the Tories their best shot at retaining power.
Click to expand...

Probably not in the current climate - with current economic inequality etc we're seeing people generally driven more to extremes on either side. I reckon a fairly charismatic individual could maybe overcome that but only if they've got a proper message that extends beyond merely wanting power for the sake of it, which is a trap most of the Labour centrists have fallen into in recent years. As it stands, Labour's moderate wing doesn't really have anyone particularly remarkable or impressive. Starmer I'd argue is maybe the best of that lot and would perhaps be a semi-okay bridge between both wings of the party since he seems to get on alright with Corbyn but other than that I don't see anyone else.
 
So.. he WAS there... which shows at best incredibly poor judgement, at worst, terrorist sympathies. Then he lied about it.

He has to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.