One's about a campaign stop making oatcakes and how Corbyn's wife was supposed to have behaved (yes it's that interesting), the other was Corbyn thinking that the Prime Minister of Portugal had tabled an amendment in the Commons.What are the falsified stories from Left Out? My copy hasn't been delivered yet but I'm quite looking forward to it.
He’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy.
I've read it now. Obviously unsurprising that some are using those stories against it - though I'm still not sure why the oatcake story would have been made up by anyone? As you say it's an unintersting, incredibly incidental anecdote in the book.One's about a campaign stop making oatcakes and how Corbyn's wife was supposed to have behaved (yes it's that interesting), the other was Corbyn thinking that the Prime Minister of Portugal had tabled an amendment in the Commons.
Karie Murphy laying into McDonnell is real and delicious though.
I've read it now. Obviously unsurprising that some are using those stories against it - though I'm still not sure why the oatcake story would have been made up by anyone? As you say it's an unintersting, incredibly incidental anecdote in the book.
I thought Left Out was excellent. A great insight into what it feels like to be inside a political movement like this, and how difficult they must be to run, given conflicting egos, incentives and philosophies between the key figures within such a movement. While LOTO was clearly a dysfunctional and poorly run organisation (Milne appears to deserve a large chunk of the blame here), it feels like it potentially could have worked if it was topped with decisive and clear leadership. To that end, Corbyn's aversion to decision making and conflict was remarkable, and evidence that he clearly wasn't fit to manage any size of organisation, let alone a country. It's a shame the incompetence argument never cut through during his years in power - it seemed obvious by 2016, but the campaign in '17 was enough to keep him going for another two and a half years. Definitely an argument that the PLP (i.e. those who needs to work with and know the potential leader best) should be given more power, not less, even if that's at the cost of the enthusiasm of the membership.
In summary, I guess JC proved himself as a good campaigner, but a horrible leader. Starmer looks likely to be the other way around, and I'd say it's too early to tell if that's going to become too much of an over-correction.
– You can achieve both competent management of the PLP and enthusiasm of the membership if you have reselection / primaries. Unfortunately there is a significant cadre of the PLP who don't want that kind of democratic accountability, and see their role as being part of an appointed elite whose authority should be unquestioned. The failure of the left to get through reselection is one of the most enormous failings of the Corbyn era and is why the entire project, and the Labour Party itself, is for the forseeable future a lost cause.
EHRC Report to be made public tomorrow.
https://www.theweek.co.uk/107518/labour-ehrc-report-what-is-it-whats-in-it
about time the title changed againSuspended from the Labour party after the EHRC review.
On it.about time the title changed again
I think more for saying the issues were exaggeratedSo he was suspended for saying that he doesn't accept the whole of the report which was that Labour party was institutionally anti semitic under him?
He said that he did not accept all of the report’s findings, but added: “I trust its recommendations will be swiftly implemented to help move on from this period.”
“One antisemite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media. That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated,” Mr Corbyn said.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was challenged several times about Mr Corbyn’s statement during a press conference Thursday.
“I’ll look carefully at what Jeremy Corbyn has said in full but I’ve said a moment ago and I’ll say it again, those that deny it’s a problem are part of the problem.
“Those that pretend it’s exaggerated or factional are part of the problem and under my leadership we will have zero tolerance of antisemitism."
He deserves to be suspended for the stupidity of falling for the trap really. Starmer was always going to jump on anything.
The interview on Sky he rightly says the public perception was way out of whack with reality 0.3% members accused of anti-semtism compared to 33% believed to be the figure but facts don't matter.
He deserves to be suspended for the stupidity of falling for the trap really. Starmer was always going to jump on anything.
The interview on Sky he rightly says the public perception was way out of whack with reality 0.3% members accused of anti-semtism compared to 33% believed to be the figure but facts don't matter.
He was a Brexiter from the start, at least he can say he achieved that.Regarding the new thread title, was he ever really Labour? The party has only been in power for one 13-year spell in Corbyn’s 37 years as an MP, and in that spell he voted against the whip over 400 times. It’s a rather parasitical career, culminating in helping deliver Brexit for the nationalist loons in our country.
One question I have: How did the pro-Brexit parts of the left process the leadership of the nationalist right on the project?He was a Brexiter from the start, at least he can say he achieved that.
Sorry to be dim but I genuinely don't understand that question.One question I have: How did the pro-Brexit parts of the left process the leadership of the nationalist right on the project?
Sorry to be dim but I genuinely don't understand that question.
Exactly, thanks. (The pro-Brexit part of the left, that is.)I think: How do the left get behind something that was driven so fervently by such gross characters from the far right?
Right thanks, you would think they wouldn't, but if you go back to the days of Benn and the like that wing of the party was very anti-EU. It's why Wilson called his referendum, he couldn't reconcile the differences within the party and that was his way out. I don't believe Corbyn and McDonnell ever changed.I think: How do the left get behind something that was driven so fervently by such gross characters from the far right?
Regarding the new thread title, was he ever really Labour? The party has only been in power for one 13-year spell in Corbyn’s 37 years as an MP, and in that spell he voted against the whip over 400 times. It’s a rather parasitical career, culminating in helping deliver Brexit for the nationalist loons in our country.
He doesn't represent the party at all.His values are and have always been in line with the traditional values of the Labour party. He is at odds with much of the party because in those 37 years Labour has shifted from being a left wing workers' party to a centrist party. If you look at his record of voting against the whip, he was almost always right to do so. It is a good thing that he voted against the whip, and we should have more politicians that ignore the whip and vote based on their principles and beliefs. For me he represents the party better than anybody.
You're right, he doesn't. I meant that he represents what it should be, not what it is.He doesn't represent the party at all.
No, partly because the report didn't say that the party was institutionally anti semitic.So he was suspended for saying that he doesn't accept the whole of the report which was that Labour party was institutionally anti semitic under him?
Well that's down to personal opinion but Labour has always been a democratic socialist party, Corbyn is much farther to the left than that.You're right, he doesn't. I meant that he represents what it should be, not what it is.
Exactly, thanks. (The pro-Brexit part of the left, that is.)
Edit: As far as I understand the numbers, conservative voters also provided the largest share of leave votes in the 2016 referendum. So that's part of it too.
You're right, he doesn't. I meant that he represents what it should be, not what it is.
Clever trap. Set a trap for Corbyn to say what is mind-bogglingly obvious to anyone with half a brain, and then alienate the left who revere him. Genius.He deserves to be suspended for the stupidity of falling for the trap really. Starmer was always going to jump on anything.
The interview on Sky he rightly says the public perception was way out of whack with reality 0.3% members accused of anti-semtism compared to 33% believed to be the figure but facts don't matter.
Clever trap. Set a trap for Corbyn to say what is mind-bogglingly obvious to anyone with half a brain, and then alienate the left who revere him. Genius.
This is what people fail to realise, Starmer is playing the long game with this decision which will ultimately pay off in the long run. Hard to argue with based on the leadership being one of the reasons cited for people turning away from Labour at the previous election.
