Well first of all, the Indian government needs to start protecting people who eat/sell/cook beef. Then women need to be protected and respected..
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.
Well first of all, the Indian government needs to start protecting people who eat/sell/cook beef. Then women need to be protected and respected..
Well first of all, the Indian government needs to start protecting people who eat/sell/cook beef. Then women need to be protected and respected..
Currently doing the rounds on twitter. I'm assuming that this was at some event, although Corbo's page doesn't shed any light on the matter.
ahhh. the famous guilt by association gambit.
When I read 'notorious Assad supporter and genocide denier' I thought he'd been hanging around with Michael Fallon.
Meh means feck all now.
This is the complete lack of self awareness we're dealing with. Hypocrisy doesn't even begin to do this justice.
More disturbing is how on earth the Tories got a single vote!! This disturbs me.
To be honest, I find this very weird.
I once spent an evening with a guy who, as it turned out, was a white 'Rhodesian' who said there was nothing better than 'shooting the black man in the bush' (Apparently I was ok because the South African blacks are a different breed to the rest of Africans).
Now, I think it is fair to say that I do not hold those person's views. It was at a mutual friend's (we had words after about why he was friends with such a person) event so I did not storm off on finding out those views. I did not research different guests' views prior to attending the event.
So why does someone being at the same event as someone/ sitting next to someone for an evening...suddenly become this horrible thing?
Given some of his past associations the particulars do bear closer scrutiny. Voters would care about those he considers his personal friends, or those for whom he has more than an incidental tolerance.
I was talking about this trend in politics in general, not specifically to Corbyn.
This is the point where we see the roll call of ministers sat with various despots and henchmen of the vilest nature.
Edit: People who moved from elsewhere to Labour followed the same pattern: Manifesto, Corbyn, and anti-Tory.
I don't get the point on a discussion board of just posting Tweets about Corbyn. Even if it's the Corbyn thread, this is a bit like what I imagine a teenage One Direction fan's MySpace page would have been like if MySpace was still at all popular when One Direction came out.
I'm sure there's rules elsewhere that Tweets have to be news-worthy/relevant and not just 'tweets I like'. The misty-eyed, Dear Leader appreciation thread seems pretty much (with the odd exception) to be a bizarre circle-jerk where we post nice Tweets about him and cat-call anyone who disagrees.
"Some disagrees! Purge them! Their hypocrisy isn't tolerated!"
It's left for the politician who left office a decade ago to try and put the anti-Tory Brexit case, meanwhile the leader of the opposition goes full-on Queen Mum and perfects waving to adoring crowds as supporters seek to eliminate dissenters. It's reasonably terrifying.
I'm sorry where are my manners:
Yeah! Crush the others and...etc. If you don't agree then I've got a football chant.
JEREMY CORBYN! OI OI OI! AND SO FORTH!
I'm sure there's rules elsewhere that Tweets have to be news-worthy/relevant and not just 'tweets I like'. The misty-eyed, Dear Leader appreciation thread seems pretty much (with the odd exception) to be a bizarre circle-jerk where we post nice Tweets about him and cat-call anyone who disagrees.
"Some disagrees! Purge them! Their hypocrisy isn't tolerated!"
It's left for the politician who left office a decade ago to try and put the anti-Tory Brexit case, meanwhile the leader of the opposition goes full-on Queen Mum and perfects waving to adoring crowds as supporters seek to eliminate dissenters. It's reasonably terrifying.
I'm sorry where are my manners:
Yeah! Crush the others and...etc. If you don't agree then I've got a football chant.
JEREMY CORBYN! OI OI OI! AND SO FORTH!
Last edited:
Here's Blair's article: http://institute.global/news/brexit-and-centre
He's basically making the argument for a return to centrism.
He's basically making the argument for a return to centrism.
Absolutely. Kick Labour members out for tweeting about how the Greens have a good policy that they wish Labour would adopt, or their love of the Foo Fighters, but don't even think about kicking people out who actively call for voting for another party, they're fine.
Of course he is. He's a walking turd that guy.
Because people are twats.
Blair is an intellectual giant compared to Corbyn. Just got round to listening to him on Radio 4 yesterday and the points he made simply aren't ever going to be made by Corbyn because he lacks the ability to make them.
Corbyn's shtick is to smile and save and reel off plattitudes
"A brighter future for all!
"Prosperity for the man not the few!"
"A better world where we can all live together in peace!"
I stand corrected but I cannot remember a single speech, article, statement or interjection into the political debate that he has ever made that hasn't been a vague, meaningless soundbite. Whatever you think of Blair it'd be nice if Corbyn was capable of being similarly articulate or nuanced in his contributions to the political debate. But he simply isn't.
For the next few months all he will offer on the debate about Brexit is soundbites interspersed with visits to crowds of sympathetic people where he'll smile and wave. The reason why the heat has died down on May, a PM looking just a few weeks ago to look to be close to drawing her last breath, is because no matter how big the crowds are it's no substitute for a proper opposition and a leader capable of making an argument.
If Corbyn was capable of articulating himself like Blair and making an actual case on the EU rather than this ridiculous situation where he has to pretend that he wanted us to stay but actually opposes any real mechanism through which a Tory hard Brexit could be halted, then I'd be thrilled. Instead it's all utterly ridiculous, meaningless catchphrases that are generally almost unanimously agreeable but don't actually mean anything. More frustratingly it's a debate we can't even have because so many of the left think "I know a chant, it's 'Oh Jeremy Corbyn! and that's right good that is", is a 'drop the mic' political argument.
Won't pretend I'm at all sympathetic but if the left has mobilised it really has to be careful that it hasn't done so simply to form big crowds to cheer each other on and indulge in the football-style chanting. If it has then the right (within whom I symapthise even less) will be delighted. I really don't see much else in the way of effecting real change, especially on Brexit coming from the left. All the opposition to hard Brexit seems to be coming from the moderates in the cabinet and former leaders. Besides waving at crowds and being on the receiving end of a song, what exactly has Corbyn's contribution been either to oppose Brexit or to seek to shape public debate and discourse on the subject?
Corbyn's shtick is to smile and save and reel off plattitudes
"A brighter future for all!
"Prosperity for the man not the few!"
"A better world where we can all live together in peace!"
I stand corrected but I cannot remember a single speech, article, statement or interjection into the political debate that he has ever made that hasn't been a vague, meaningless soundbite. Whatever you think of Blair it'd be nice if Corbyn was capable of being similarly articulate or nuanced in his contributions to the political debate. But he simply isn't.
For the next few months all he will offer on the debate about Brexit is soundbites interspersed with visits to crowds of sympathetic people where he'll smile and wave. The reason why the heat has died down on May, a PM looking just a few weeks ago to look to be close to drawing her last breath, is because no matter how big the crowds are it's no substitute for a proper opposition and a leader capable of making an argument.
If Corbyn was capable of articulating himself like Blair and making an actual case on the EU rather than this ridiculous situation where he has to pretend that he wanted us to stay but actually opposes any real mechanism through which a Tory hard Brexit could be halted, then I'd be thrilled. Instead it's all utterly ridiculous, meaningless catchphrases that are generally almost unanimously agreeable but don't actually mean anything. More frustratingly it's a debate we can't even have because so many of the left think "I know a chant, it's 'Oh Jeremy Corbyn! and that's right good that is", is a 'drop the mic' political argument.
Won't pretend I'm at all sympathetic but if the left has mobilised it really has to be careful that it hasn't done so simply to form big crowds to cheer each other on and indulge in the football-style chanting. If it has then the right (within whom I symapthise even less) will be delighted. I really don't see much else in the way of effecting real change, especially on Brexit coming from the left. All the opposition to hard Brexit seems to be coming from the moderates in the cabinet and former leaders. Besides waving at crowds and being on the receiving end of a song, what exactly has Corbyn's contribution been either to oppose Brexit or to seek to shape public debate and discourse on the subject?
Hang on. You're praising Blair for not being a soundbite politician?
That's like, I mean, WHAT?!
Blair's articulating usually involves making up stories. I briefly listened to this and he seems to be arguing we could stay in the EU and limit freedom of movement, which is BS.
Corbyn doesn't actually believe in the EU project like Blair does, he sees it as a corporatist project.
As for Blair being more articulate, he isn't, if you believe Corbyn's speeches and social commentary boil down to what you state then you simply haven't bothered to listen to them.
I wish Bliar would never speak again, only Oscie is listening
If we're talking soundbite politicians then Blair's pretty much regarded as the master - someone who utilised spin doctors to a high degree and was very polished in his political presentation.
Corbyn will resort to soundbites as all politicians do but his message isn't as simple as you're making it out - he's arguing that the economic recovery has not benefited significant portions of the working population who have been hurt by austerity, and that the best way to tackle this is not through further tax cuts but through increasing taxes on the rich and trying to renationalise key industries in order to help those in need.
Blair may be an intelligent guy, but on Brexit/Corbyn his arguments seem to boil down to ignoring the public because he doesn't really like the decisions they've made. Which isn't particularly productive.
Bliar may be a good orator but so was Obama, look at the shit he left behind.
@Oscie why on earth would Corbyn want to topple May? The Tory field is thin, but May has already shown she's complete election poison to their brand. The Tories are currently entering into a process that is going to cause them huge damage internally and with the public. The next election is likely to be at fairly short notice, and if May is still at the helm when that happens then Corbyn will stroll into number 10. If she falls just before the election then the Tories have to campaign with a new leader still finding their feet and with no time to coalesce the party behind them. The best strategy for Labour is exactly what they're doing, jabbing the Tories regularly, building the Corbyn momentum, and letting the Tories self destruct.
What shit would that be?
A nation completely dominated from top to bottom by his opponents, the GOP, who now have the presidency, both houses, 2/3 of all governorships, 2/3 of all state houses and are on the cusp of dominating the supreme court for the next generation.
The uncomfortable truth is that there's zero difference between the Corbyn and Tory position on Brexit.
None.
It's articulated differently but both front benches effectively support withdrawal from the EU, withdrawal from the customs union and withdrawal from the single market with 'the best possible deal' reached to conclude each negotiated exit. This is the problem I have with Corbyn on Brexit. For all the Queen Mum-style waving at large crowds there's no difference.
When the vast majority of young people (and Labour voters of all ages) don't support hard Brexit at all, why the hell is "Shut up Blair" the only thing people care about and not the fact that Corbyn are as effectively hard Brexit as anyone else. Isn't a leader supporting a hard Brexit despite most people who voted for him and his party not, more of an issue than people thinking for some reason Blair should be the only person not entitled to express his views?
Else tell me how Corbyn differs substantively from Boris, Davis and Fox on Brexit. They all seem to want same thing: withdraw from everything with ridiculous promises that they alone can get the better deal.
None.
It's articulated differently but both front benches effectively support withdrawal from the EU, withdrawal from the customs union and withdrawal from the single market with 'the best possible deal' reached to conclude each negotiated exit. This is the problem I have with Corbyn on Brexit. For all the Queen Mum-style waving at large crowds there's no difference.
When the vast majority of young people (and Labour voters of all ages) don't support hard Brexit at all, why the hell is "Shut up Blair" the only thing people care about and not the fact that Corbyn are as effectively hard Brexit as anyone else. Isn't a leader supporting a hard Brexit despite most people who voted for him and his party not, more of an issue than people thinking for some reason Blair should be the only person not entitled to express his views?
Else tell me how Corbyn differs substantively from Boris, Davis and Fox on Brexit. They all seem to want same thing: withdraw from everything with ridiculous promises that they alone can get the better deal.
I'm in favour of Blair talking as much as he likes, he just needs to be stood in the dock while he does.
Well for one, Corbyn never lied during Brexit. Boris and the rest most certainly did, so already that's a pretty big difference...
Corbyn may well have wanted us to leave, that's his opinion. What I took exception too during Brexit was how the Right misled the general public, not with small minor lies, but campaign leading lies. That to me is despicable and how they are still involved in office despite misleading the country like that frustrates and angers me. They should be in court explaining why they lied, not continuing to be in Government. This is why politics in this country is a sham, they can do what they like with minor consequences.
You've not answered Oscie's point though, what's the current difference in position on Brexit between Corbyn and the Tories?
Not much of which you can lay at Obama's door. His continuing support for Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was foolish and contributes heavily to the parties decline, but the Republican strategy of dominating at a local level and building up was long in the making. At a national level he was obstructed by the Republicans from the day he took office. Probably the only other major misstep was trying to be bipartisan when he was elected. That was time and momentum wasted and cost him the window during which he had a big majority in both houses.