UK
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
UK
The bolded part probably indicates why the media and the Tories would be hammering this accusation home at literally every single opportunity. I think back to the General Election in 2017 and Corbyn interviews in the run up, in which it was painfully clear that he was never going to be interviewed in the same way that May was. I specifically remember an interview with Kuessenburg in which she asked several times whether or not he condemns the killing taken by the IRA. Corbyn stated every single time that yes he condemned the actions from BOTH sides. The following morning the papers were absolutely piling it on with Corbyn refuses to condemn IRA murderers etc. The truth was that he condemned both sides and said that all of the killing was wrong, but this wasn't focused on at all and truthfully that is why he is so unelectable. It isn't because he is anti-semitic, it is because he and his party has been painted as such and the electorate tend to believe everything that they are told.
My question is what happens if the EHRC investigation returns a finding of no fault? i mean, i would imagine they will find something within the party, but lets just say that they find no fault with Corbyn specifically, how long do you honestly think it will be before a new scandal is 'discovered' and then banded around as if proven?
There is no room for a left wing party in this country in all honesty. The average working class person (at least of the hundreds i know) want to leave the EU without a deal and are happy to trust our immigration, economy, workers rights etc to a government that Boris Johnson is about to lead. They don't really give a shit about Ireland or Scotland or any of the complex issues facing our neighbours. They don't care that leaving without a deal will more than likely send us deep into a depression. The truth is they care about getting rid of a few brown people and THAT is the truth that nobody speaks about and they never will because Corbyn hates jewish people apparently.
This country deserves everything it's about to get, but hey, that's democracy for you.
That was his brother Pier’s defence. ‘How can Jeremy be anti-Semitic? We look Jewish, people ask us all the time if we’re Jewish, maybe we have some ancestry’.
Jeremy and Piers, huh ?
Fairly sure they didn't grow up in a terraced house in Gorton, but who knows....
He’s a complete whackjob.
They're upper middle class. That gives some details on their background.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/po.../Jeremy-Corbyn-the-boy-to-the-manor-born.html
He's a character alright, in the mad professor kind of mould. He's actually pro Trump and a climate adviser to Boris Johnson, the two are friends.
I've read a little bit about Piers and he certainly comes from this kind of conspiratorial direction of thinking where the dominant 'agenda' in political/cultural thought is there to mislead and sedate. He's insistent on his prediction that we're going into a period of global cooling soon and global warming will be proven to be a sham and his long range weather prediction methods will be vindicated.
He's 'mad' alright but seems like he'd be good company.
If no deal happens, history will judge Corbyns leadership to have been a factor. And I believe a different Labour leader would be doing much better in the polls - there is room for a left of centre party but it has to be led by someone competent and electable. Corbyn is evidently neither.
Making Jews responsible for the actions of israel, which is invalid, obviously does equate to anti semitism. Surely Labour party supporters can understand that?
That's a convenient and rather tin eared reading which ignores all the things that Jews have actually been complaining about for the last four or so years.
The argument is the opposite. If this was any other ethnic group Labour would have listened better / treated it more decisively. Labour haven't appeared to treat anti-Semitism equally to other forms of racism and that's what is so damaging.
would anything change in voting patterns if everything but labours foreign policy changed?
Wait til Johnson becomes leader. There will be a thread like this one for him, guaranteed. When you elect people with such target rich histories don't be surprised when people go hunting.
there is a lot of racism, sexism, transphobia, sexual abuse and so on in the labour party and they're all treated the same, if you're a no-name member or low level councillor there's a good chance you'll get shitcanned, if you've got a friend high up in the party you're fine. the major cause of this in the labour party is the professionalised corruption that's endemic in politics, if your parents are connected to or members of the upper ranks you get a job and you're protected in that job until there's a public expose
the only way you'll get around this is if you're voting for independents who aren't career politicians
Theresa May oversaw the home office while it was kicking British Citizens out the country on her orders and running explicitly racist campaigns in the streets of London and the public outcry lasted what, a fortnight?
Johnson reviles people in a way that May did not. He's unfit to be PM, like Corbyn. He has too many enemies here and in the EU and his honeymoon will end on 31 Oct.
you're in for a real shock if you think people will care more about johnsons racism than they cared about grenfell or windrush
Agreed....But there aren't too many of them around, unfortunately.
But one of the biggest reasons of Corbyn making Labour almost unelectable when they should be pissing on the Tories is his entourage. People will not risk having a Government which reads as -
Prime Minister - Jeremy Corbyn
Chancellor - John McDonnell
Home Secretary - Diane Abbott
Foreign Secretary - Emily Thornberry
Corbyn chose and continues to support these three, who in Joe Public's eyes are even more incompetent than him.
those are the people that best represent the corbyn wing of the party, if he's going to make Hilary Benn chancellor, there's no point in Corbyn at all. if someone who would make hilary benn chancellor was in charge of the party, i'm not interested in voting for them
Yes....Quite understandable, but as politicians and potential Government ministers they're only appealing to the Corbynistas, not the 10 million or so voters that need to be convinced that Labour could be / would be better than the Tories at running the country.
they got 12.8 million votes 2 years ago
as to competence in politics: Which part of the Europe referendum, attempted coups, brexit negotiations, Chuka and pals party and current tory leadership campaign makes anyone think it gets any better
I don't think it's a comparative thing, I think Johnson has a ton of judgement flaws that office will expose, character flaws that his many enemies will seek to highlight, and his racism is part of that. Not dissimilar to Corbyn really where his blindness to anti semitism is only part of why he's disastrous.
I think we probably all know now that was the high point.
And that refusal to compromise is why Corbyns Labour won't ever be elected. Voters don't care about purity tests.
Last edited:
That would be the same economy that has been so shit it apparently required public service cuts that killed 130,000 people in recent years right? Why is it always Corbyn who is apparently the economic danger rather than the cnuts in office who are actually trashing the feck out of the country already?
Yep
When you say 'against the Israeli state' what do you actually mean? Do you mean against its actions, or its right to exist?
That still wasn't enough though was it. And Corbyn was still in his honeymoon period then, before the anti-semitism and Brexit stuff really started to hit home.
You've just given some of the many reasons why Labour should be miles ahead in the polls right now. Not Corbyn's fault they're not of course, oh no.
To be fair it wasn’t really a honeymoon period. He was low in the polls, getting hit from all sides by the media and his own party, and was seen as a joke basically. That election performance at that time was very impressive, although you could argue that at least some of the reasons for him being in that position to start with were his own fault.
Brexit has fecked him now though. No chance he repeats that performance with a large part of his own party demoralized and pissed off at him.
No other form of racism would have had the microscope on it like anti-semitism has so I don’t know how you can even begin to compare. You’ve got the likes of Margaret Hodge clogging up the complaints process by submitting hundreds of spurious complaints about people who aren’t even Labour members.
I cannot think of another form of racism that has so many people literally looking for it with a fine tooth comb in a single political party... and I mean even a mild hint of something they could twist as being anti-semitic. Among half a million members you will absolutely find anti-semites unfortunately, along with many others expressing anti-Israel sentiments with particularly clumsy language because they just aren’t very bright.
I’ve actually heard far more anti-semitic comment in the FIFA gaming community than I have seen on the likes of Twitter. People talking about “Jew goals” and the like. I’ve never heard anyone prominent condemn this. Ever. Kids literally using the word “Jew” for something they feel was underhanded.
Fair enough.
Although I notice that IPPR is run by the Hollicks, hardly neutral even though their funding does come from a wide spectrum of people and organisations.
The same could be said of this organisation -
https://fullfact.org/health/130000-preventable-deaths-austerity/
The IPPR doesn’t directly attribute the 130,000 deaths that could have been averted to austerity, but it does say that “prevention services and public health has been severely impacted by a decade of austerity”. It also identifies spending reductions in some more specific areas, for example early years, as negatively affecting public health.
Spending reductions aren’t the only factor that the IPPR picks out though. It also argues that better policy-making could help, and makes a number of recommendations.
So I suppose it depends on which of the two you feel tells more truth / less propaganda
I don't look at the Guardian's site and, surprisingly, haven't seen IPPR's Report mentioned anywhere else
If you can point me / help me to find the actual Report I'd appreciate it as I'm still struggling to understand how an additional 14,000 people have died each year since 2010 as a result of austerity / spending cuts - the UN would qualify that as genocide, not politics, and I'm sure we'd have heard / read about it more than we have done if a good percentage of those deaths are attributable to the Tories / Lib Dem coalition before the Tories were left to run the country on their own.
...and the Tories are not ruining the economy and driving people into poverty.
Corbyn - More funding for the NHS
Centrist voter(Who is in no way a TORY, repeat not a TORY) - Shut up you stupid commie, stop promising unicorns that will turn us into Venezuela with Chinese characteristics.
Centrist voter(Who is in no way a TORY, repeat not a TORY) - Shut up you stupid commie, stop promising unicorns that will turn us into Venezuela with Chinese characteristics.
No....
Last time the open minded, what's-in-it-for-me Centrist voter who is in no way a Tory, repeat not a Tory, said to themselves ' Corbyn's policies sound pretty good to me....I'll vote Labour '.
I'm not sure they will next time