True, but what I find strange is that everyone seems to think that it marks the end of the far left in the party. I suspect it's just the first shot of a long and bitter struggle to come. A necessary battle, but it won't be a quick one I'm afraid.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- 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.
The party will always have a spread of factions from center left to far left. And the balance of power will be cyclic.
But none of that matters while they are in opposition. And they have been out of government for far too long. Much of that time self inflicted.
The EHRC report was relatively balanced and identified some actions which need to be addressed and did actually recognise procedural improvements post 2018 under Corbyn
Starmers leadership on this however is completely imbalanced. Has the rule which has been broken by Corbyn even been confirmed by him yet? Starmer has acted without following due process.
I'll just tune in to Starmers leadership campaign video again to compare the man of unity he claimed to be versus what we have seen so far.
Starmers leadership on this however is completely imbalanced. Has the rule which has been broken by Corbyn even been confirmed by him yet? Starmer has acted without following due process.
I'll just tune in to Starmers leadership campaign video again to compare the man of unity he claimed to be versus what we have seen so far.
If I were to base my opinion of you on your posting in this thread, I'd say you're only interested in racism and antisemitism as a cudgel to use against the left, given how quick you are to make unfounded accusations against others, and how flippantly you post about it.
Antisemitism is vile and disgusting, and it's incredibly sad that it's still an issue, and here you are, all giddy and gleeful over being able to call people antisemites. It's extremely distasteful.
(I originally included a bit about all forms of racism, but doing so apparently means I'm as bad as actual racists now, so I took it out.)
Genuine question as some of the detail is confusing when you don't know the different sections of the Labour party:
I've seem some (including a poster above) say that Starmer "acted" in removing Corbyn, with others pointing out the irony of him interfering in the disciplinary process after such behaviour was criticised in the EHRC report.
At the same time I've seen Lisa Nandy say the decision was taken “by the Labour party and not by the leader’s office, as per the recommendation in the EHRC report that the leader should not interfere in these decisions”.
So who actually made the decision to suspend Corbyn and what is their role within the party?
I've seem some (including a poster above) say that Starmer "acted" in removing Corbyn, with others pointing out the irony of him interfering in the disciplinary process after such behaviour was criticised in the EHRC report.
At the same time I've seen Lisa Nandy say the decision was taken “by the Labour party and not by the leader’s office, as per the recommendation in the EHRC report that the leader should not interfere in these decisions”.
So who actually made the decision to suspend Corbyn and what is their role within the party?
It's some of the last shots of a long and bitter battle that began decades ago.
As he's a lawyer, I assume (and his comments today back this), that he'll have covered his back.
The party will have taken the decision to suspend (on paper) with Starmer the one who has decided to remove the whip.
Starmer got absolutely humiliated in the Q&A after his speech with regards to Corbyn questions so I've no doubt he came straight away from that and made the decision.
Lots of premature remarks in here. They'll have to reinstate Corbyn in a few days unless they convulate up another reason, this one won't hold any weight.
You think Momentum members and others of that ilk, the ones that hate 'red tories' and 'Blairites' will just give up and leave the party, and we'll all be home for Christmas?
I think they lost a long time ago and the last few years was a death spasm in relative terms, yes.
Fair enough, I hope you're right and I'm wrong about that one. I get you want otherwise and you're disappointed, but we'll never all think alike.
Unlikely, Starmer even if he does well is likely to lose to the Tories and i can only see the likes of Momentum growing with the call for climate change action.
It won't be the old leftists with their baggage thankfully.
Who will actually make the decision on whether to reinstate Corbyn?
I can't wrap my head around the structure of the Labour party which makes it hard to get a grasp on how it will likely play out. In simple terms, will it be down to members, unions, MPs, some committee that leans towards a given faction or a mixture of the lot?
I'm not disappointed now. My faith in any possibility of a left wing Government in the UK died in the 90s.
England isn't a country of the left and is unlikely to be so anytime soon. I am no mood to go into why.
It is for this reason, amongst others, that Labour is dead North of the Border. Our resident poster named after a Chinese philosopher and general would disagree but I couldn't engage him today without betting banned and I can't handle the nausea and upset he induces in me.
Britain is of the right. You won. We're dead already. Let's just get on with dismantling the post war welfare state and replicating the Republicans vs. The Democrats in the UK and be done with it.
The youth are my hope.
Hopefully. Momentum are like squatters who crawl in through your bathroom window one day when you're out at work, and then spend the next few years refusing to leave your house. Eventually, when you have had enough of stepping on cat's faeces and the walls smelling of regular faeces, you tell them to get the feck out because they're ruining the resale value of your house. But they just start shouting at you and telling you to get the feck out of the house. Your own fecking house.
House.
Happy Christmas pidgy.
Happy Christmas to you too.I believe the NEC (committee) will take legal advice and make a decision. It's possible the party might make a political decision that they'd gain from a court battle.
can they expel Corbyn and all his supporters and expect to win the next election?
Personally I really hope this happens.
What a surprise.
I'm not sure they can expect to win an election at all tbf.
Suspending Corbyn seems to have split the party. Not suspending Corbyn today would have done damage too, you'd think, given suspending him seems to have been a popular decision outside the party. So seems they're generally knackered as a party.
And if the below is true then I'm not sure who is walking in whose trap, or prompting it to come to a head. Maybe they both are. Bloody Labour.
The chances of winning are already slim to none so i wouldn't have thought we can afford the added risk.
The "win at all costs" folk on here seem very happy at the prospect of a split which really undermines their claims of a focus on electability.
It's a united party or a tory party.
You could get kicked out of the party for saying this and apparently that's ok with a lot of "liberals" on here.
Hell world 2020!
All I want is a non tory government who care about anyone other than rich people, why is that so much to ask for?
We all clearly do not deserve nice things.
Pretty close to my sentiments
Kind of happy to draw a line under Corbynism, but also in no mood for a smug Centrist victory lap that seems like just another antagonistic cog in the long mechanical grinding down and disenfranchisement of a growing (and largely fecked) younger generation, or indeed anyone on the left who was naive enough to hope for actual change (or at least good faith engagement)
Corbyn was absolutely the wrong person to lead them to that, but they’ve been offered nothing but scorn and bad faith intransigence from his opponents. I certainly don’t feel sorry for him, but i do for some of his supporters. It was an optimistic youth driven movement at one point, that was immediately treated with illegitimacy and contempt by the party establishment... and attempts to gleefully purge his support will only cement that as the lingering legacy for some. Just tentatively worth pointing out before we all get too giddy about becoming the party of landlords and luvvies again.
Hopefully Starmer finds a way in the next 4 years of enthusing them again. Because upwardly mobile, home owning centre-leaning liberals who love establishment professionals aren’t exactly a growing voter base anymore. At least he has good hair... young people like good hair. And a car.
Last edited:
The disaster that is Corbyn just keeps on giving.
Somewhat ironic for McCluskey to call for Unity after he has constantly been in the press prior to all this making statements and threatening to remove funding. That man is a toxic stain on the Labour Party.
Sad isn’t it. Just gives Tories an excuse to distract from their mess.
It has been a disaster and i honestly don't know how anybody can defend him at this point.
I understand the discussion has moved on, but I’d just like to point out that Mearsheimer is not Jewish, he’s of German and Irish descent. He also infamously wrote a blurb for a book by an unhinged antisemite -https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/245518/
Agreed. Him and all those guys just need to go form their own socialist party, get very few votes and disappear into obscurity.
That's why there will be no significant split. I can imagine Burgon getting giddy enough to stride out into obscurity but the likes of Abbott won't leave the party.
He threatened to (and did) reduce funding after Starmer refused to oppose a bill which sought to legitimise practices like unions being infiltrated by state agents for nefarious means. I'd say the toxic stains are the ones who are okay with such practices.
The Labour party will be fecked if that happens, the votes might not go to the new party but they'll move away from Labour. Enough to split the votes in our FPTP system.
At least you won't have to listen to actual socialist views anymore eh!
That is what I find so odd about all of this - they know for a fact that they can never get into power on a hard left socialist platform - that just is not possible in the UK yet they still push for it knowing it will never get them into power. Surely common sense would tell you that you need to focus on winning an election first to get into power to affect change - it may need to be a watered down version of what you really want but surely that is infinitely better than to hand power to the Tories again and again. Perhaps they are hoping the Tories will do so much damage to the country that people will rebel against them strongly enough to let a hard left Labour government get in. Guess what, that has never happened and it never will. The fact is, like it or not, the Tories remain the most powerful and well supported party in the UK - why else do they keep winning?
You are making assumptions about my own views unnecessarily. I'm a realist - whether I support socialist type policies or not I can see that they are never going to win an election.
Unfortunately the incentives are misaligned within the hard-left of Labour. People within that part of the party are praised/rewarded for perceived ideological purity rather than electoral success or achieving actual change. Inevitably this leads to a self-reinforcing system which makes it very difficult for politicians and candidates who derive their support from unions and activist groups to adopt political positions which are actually likely to appeal to a plurality of the British electorate.
It's what leads some people even now to see Corbyn as a noble and righteous martyr for the cause, rather than the utter disaster for the Labour movement that he proved to be.