subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
On what basis do you make this judgement?

Sounds a lot like the classic "People think..." to mean "I think...".

From all the Labour meetings, forums, groups, etc, I'm part of. There's never anyone who thinks Tom is doing a good job. The ubiquitous story among the membership - which also applies to me - runs as : "I voted for Tom as deputy leader in 2015, and now I want the chance to vote him out again." But it's really difficult under current party rules to trigger a deputy leadership election unless Tom puts himself up for it, which he is definitely not going to do because he'd get absolutely trounced.
 
Last edited:

DannyL

Wild Horses
That dynamic goes way beyond Corbyn, and it's frustrating that everything is couched in terms of a single personality. If he resigned tomorrow, that struggle/tension would still be the central theme within Labour.

I'm not sure about this. Personally I like a lot of the domestic policy, what I know of it (and obvs not going to hear about it now, 'cos the news will be dominated by internal ructions - nice one, Momentum). For me, its foreign policy stuff (and Brexit obvs but let's not go there). For a lot of "the establishment" I think it would be security concerns also (probably best illustrated by his response to the Skirpal posioning). If he were to resign and take his top advisors with him, I'd feel happy about voting Labour again.

I think this is from today's times (a friend just posted it online):

'In another coded attack on Milne, who shares Corbyn’s belief that the West is to blame for the world’s ills, Fisher complained that a recent tweet drafted for Corbyn after the Russian bombing of hospitals in Idlib chose instead to condemn US bombings in Syria. “I kid you not,” he wrote.

Fisher is just the latest senior Labour figure to tire of Milne and Murphy, the key axis at the heart of LOTO — the leader of the opposition’s office. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, and Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, have both called for Corbyn to remove the pair.

Milne is accused of regularly intervening to overrule decisions taken by other aides or the shadow cabinet to maintain Corbyn’s ambiguity towards Brexit and to impose a highly aggressive general election strategy that one insider characterised as “shit or bust”.

One leader’s office source said: “Seumas is the problem. Andrew is unable to cope with it any more. Others are unable to cope with it any more.”



How terrible would it be if if Labour were to take a moral position on the world's biggest ongoing tragedy? Far too much to ask.
 
Last edited:

DannyL

Wild Horses
Corbyn has opened up Labour to a load of cranks IMO. Conspiracy theories run rife. Momentum (to their credit actually) produced a video telling the members tone it down with the bloody Rothschild stuff (I was on JC4PM when a moderator told people something similar - the reaction was .... illuminating). I mean, why the fuck is Williamson still in the party? Never mind the anti-semitism he tweeted his support for a leading Assadist and 9/11 truther. These people are fucking nuts and they are there 'cos of JC.

That's what concerns me about Labour anyway, I could give a fuck about their redistributive vision. All this stuff makes me glad he won't be PM (assuming that outcome doesn't happen) which goes against my economic self-interest.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
(that last bit obvs only if I believe that Labour will actually have the competence to implement it's programme and won't be engaged in years of infighting with whoever is unlucky enough to be in coalition with them. Colour me sceptical).
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
I'm not sure about this. Personally I like a lot of the domestic policy, what I know of it (and obvs not going to hear about it now, 'cos the news will be dominated by

...endless bullshit. For example:

I think this is from today's times

I note the words "from today's times" there. And all the anonymous sources. In other words, it's basically propaganda ffs. Seamus Milne isn't some machiavellian mastermind running Corbyn. He's just some guy trying to do his job.

But as for Labour policies, if you really want to know about that, click here:


And as for:

How terrible would it be if if Labour were to take a moral position on the world's biggest ongoing tragedy? Far too much to ask.

Labour has already committed to a massive green overhaul to combat climate change. But if you meant Brexit... given that the referendum was virtually 50/50, what's more moral than trying to reach common ground between two increasingly polarized positions? Anything else is amoral half-the-country can fuck off politics.

Corbyn has opened up Labour to a load of cranks IMO.

Yes, the 500,000 of us desiring a fundamental once in a generation change in UK economics and politics are all just cranks. But okay it's a fair enough opinion, seeing as you're getting your perspective from the Times.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Labour has already committed to a massive green overhaul to combat climate change. But if you meant Brexit


No, neither. I meant Syria. As in "it would be nice if the Labour Party could condemn the indiscriminate bombing of civilians by Russia". I'm not surprised it's a blind spot for you, as it is for Labour leadership and most Corbyn supporters.

This is the statement once again - I'll repost it as you're in the habit of dismissing any inconvenient news: In another coded attack on Milne, who shares Corbyn’s belief that the West is to blame for the world’s ills, Fisher complained that a recent tweet drafted for Corbyn after the Russian bombing of hospitals in Idlib chose instead to condemn US bombings in Syria. “I kid you not,” he wrote.

Now, if this was untrue and made up as you're alleging Labour could sue right? At the very least, they'd be shouting from the rooftops that this is a lie. But what happened Corbyn's interview today - it'a all happy families apparently, a mere "workplace dispute". Siding with an autocratic regime committing genocide and choosing not to condemn a campaign of mass murder that has left 10s of thousands dead is a "workplace dispute". Good on Fisher for walking, what a shame he's not able to call the shots on this one. If you knew anything about the subject, you'd know that this is exactly the position that has been attributed to Milne over and over again over the years.

I don't think that all Labour supporters are cranks at all. Most I'd imagine are well intentioned people - but I do think a fucking lot of cranks, conspiracy theorists, genocide deniers, and the worst sort of wanker Leftists rode in on his coat-tails, and unfortunately they are are still there at the very top.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
I'm not sure about this. Personally I like a lot of the domestic policy, what I know of it (and obvs not going to hear about it now, 'cos the news will be dominated by internal ructions - nice one, Momentum). For me, its foreign policy stuff (and Brexit obvs but let's not go there). For a lot of "the establishment" I think it would be security concerns also (probably best illustrated by his response to the Skirpal posioning). If he were to resign and take his top advisors with him, I'd feel happy about voting Labour again.
.

While obviously this is the case for you and no doubt quite a few others, I think it's very far from being the dominant gripe vs Corbyn. The same anti-Corbyn dynamic was there from the moment it was clear he was a serious candidate for leader - a lot of people are precisely opposed to the domestic policy he proposes, are very opposed to any return to a Labour that does not endorse the standard neoliberal, pro-privatisation line. If he were to be replaced by anyone else proposing the same domestic policies, they would be attacked from the get-go.

Fwiw, I agree with you about his international policy - it's often terrible. And yep, he's been a disaster on brexit.

I'm very dubious that most of the Establishment are genuinely that bothered about British security either - the events of the past two months have cast that into serious doubt. Many are more than willing to see the country implode, and be subject to much, much more danger (from US, Russia, China and possibly others) than a poisoning incident. As long as they're safe, and richer than ever.
 
Last edited:

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
No, neither. I meant Syria. As in "it would be nice if the Labour Party could condemn the indiscriminate bombing of civilians by Russia". I'm not surprised it's a blind spot for you, as it is for Labour leadership and most Corbyn supporters.

Well, no. IIRC Corbyn has condemned all military action in Syria, all bombing, all use of chemical weapons, and called for a return to diplomacy.

Now, if this was untrue and made up as you're alleging Labour could sue right? At the very least, they'd be shouting from the rooftops that this is a lie.

No. Labour could say it's a lie, but saying so never gains any traction. And suing just heightens the media onslaught. The clear strategy is to ignore all such stuff. Maybe not the best strategy, but it's hard to see a good strategy really.

Okay, there's a sort of truth in this:

Milne, who shares Corbyn’s belief that the West is to blame for the world’s ills

But more exactly: They think that we in the West are equally culpable for the world's ills, that we therefore occupy no moral high ground, and consequently claims about atrocities by non-Western forces (e.g. Russia) need to be verified by independent witnesses on the ground rather than taken instantly as fact. Yes, that evidence exists for Russian atrocities in Syria.

but I do think a fucking lot of cranks, conspiracy theorists, genocide deniers, and the worst sort of wanker Leftists rode in on his coat-tails, and unfortunately they are are still there at the very top.

They really aren't.
 

luka

Well-known member
I suppose it's just a symptom of an ageing board but there's been a vague, unprincipled centrist consensus on dissensus for years now. Good to see subvert challenging it a bit.
 

sadmanbarty

Well-known member
Is this right?

Anarcho-syndicalist

Droid


Commie

John Eden, Thirdform, Otherlife

Sadrist

Sufi

Socialist

Big Knob Blissblog, baboon


Space Rasta

Luke

Social Democrat

Tea, Danny L, (secretly Luke)

New Labor

Barty, Craner (retd.)


Toby Young

Vim


Goblin Nonce

Joe
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Whatever you think of him as a person, party leader etc, the fact is that, as was true in 2015, Corbyn's proposed domestic policies are still very threatening to a very large number of people who just want a return to supposedly 'safe' 2000s centrism i.e. social liberalism and right-wing economics (eg the disastrous PFI continuation, which is now a major reason for the struggles of the NHS, because it was one of the worst deals imaginable).

I'm not sure I get you - if such people are threatened by Corbyn then how can you possibly fault them for not supporting him? Would you support a politician who threatened you?

Or are you using that as a shorthand for "people who feel threatened by Corbyn, but wouldn't if they weren't unfairly biased against him by the MSM"?
 

luka

Well-known member
DannyL out of curiosity, how come you're so involved with syria?

My theory is he had his kid at about the same time Syria was hitting the news and he was in this vulnerable hyper impressionable state and so took an abnormally strong imprint on all that horrible undiluted misery and pain.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
You're correct to say that Corbyn has called for ceasefires - but he's only ever asked for things to be done via the UN where Russia exercises a veto (they issued, I think their 13th veto on Syria related matters a few days ago) so this calls are ultimately toothless. He knows they won't do anything but it gives him the cover of plausible deniability, and gives yourself a little nugget to throw around in internet arguments. Try and find something he's said that'd lead to substantative active in Syria and then compare that to his statements about Israel, KSA etc. It's pretty clear what his basic point of view is. The only time he ever got exercised was when Trump bombed an empty airbase.

I was involved in a picket outside the STW conference a few years ago, organised by Syria Solidarity. I remember talking to one guy who was super keen to denounce us as warmongers and I remember a friend asking him what his solution would be. He said "well, all sides should withdraw". Like Russia would just pull out, retire from the field like honest gentleman. I realised then that he didn't actually give a damn about Syrian lives, they didn't even factor into his thinking. It was all about enacting his post-Iraq rage at our establishment. I'm certain this guy would be known to JC and very probably on first name terms, and I'm sure the worldview would be pretty much the same.

I don't want to ruin my evening arguing about this stuff so I'll leave is here. It's a video of Corbyn siding with Russia and Assad in wake of the chemical attacks in Syria in 2013. This was the Ghouta massacre which killed 1400 people and violated Obama's "red lines". Assad did it, yet Corbyn here is happy to parrot Russian propaganda, a classic "useful idiot". The story is the rebels gassed one of their own towns in an attempt to create a "false flag". It's stuff like this that makes him unfit to be PM in my view, not any purported tax increases for the rich.


They really aren't.


That just popped up in my timeline funny enough. A 9/11 Truther and Assadist invited to speak to a CLP.

This may not be characterise of mainstream Labour grassroots opinion. You would know better than me. But I think the pass this stuff is given by Corbyn, Milne et al and the embattled way that the Corbyn supporters dismiss any criticisms against him as plot (MSM, Blairities, take your pick) lends this stuff legitimacy. I'm pretty sure that you'll be more tempted to side with Corbyn and co. than me, and are already mentally rehearsing a litany of rebuttals, maybe your mouse finger is twitching looking for counter-arguments. If you fully commit to it, you can convince yourself ithe whole war and revolution is was dreamt up by M15 before you go to bed.

People trust these people, have their hopes for the future pinned on them. and as you have evidenced upthread are totally willing to dismiss competing claims on this emotional basis. People will contort themselves like mad to convince themselves the terrible, terrible positions that Corbyn et al hold are legitimate. That's why I don't want him in No 10.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
I'm not sure I get you - if such people are threatened by Corbyn then how can you possibly fault them for not supporting him? Would you support a politician who threatened you?

Or are you using that as a shorthand for "people who feel threatened by Corbyn, but wouldn't if they weren't unfairly biased against him by the MSM"?

I don't understand your point at all, I'm afraid (except the second paragraph trademark attempt to put words in someone else's mouth, which I understand very well by now).
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I don't understand your point at all, I'm afraid (except the second paragraph trademark attempt to put words in someone else's mouth, which I understand very well by now).

It's a simple enough question: what do you mean by "many people are threatened by Corbyn"? Do you mean that many people are really liable to be worse off if Corbyn were PM (in which case, as I said, it's hardly surprising that they don't support him), or do you mean that lots of people *think* they would be worse off (but actually wouldn't), because they have a distorted idea about his policies from a biased media?
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
BTW the Tweet I posted above takes you direct to a Tweet about Chris Williamson. On the subject of Labour and are they/aren't they conspiracy happy, I think support for Williamson is a canary in the coalmine. He deliberately trolled the Jewish community, repeatedly, and tweeted his support for leading Assadist and conspiracy theorist Vanessa Beeley.

This is his Tweet:
Great to meet
@VanessaBeeley
today and a privilege to hear her speak at the #BeautifulDays2018 festival about her experiences of reporting from Syria


Beeley has said - meeting Assad was the proudest moment of her life, the Zionists run France. 9/11 was an inside job and has devoted her life to smearing the White Helmets, Syria's first responders. Her stuff gets massive amplification through Russia's media networks and has shaped a lot of the discourse. Williamson has repeatedly informed about this and has done nothing, the Tweets still there. I guess he got suspended so the party did do something though that was for anti-semitic comments. It's material like this that absolutely sours me on the Labour Party, no matter how much I like their domestic policy. If the bulk of members support Williamson, then I think my characerisation of the party as full of cranks isn't unfair. I'm aware of a few other voices who are strongly against this bullshit though - people like Jade Azim who wrote this last year: https://labourlist.org/2018/08/the-real-battle-for-labours-soul-lansmanites-vs-cranks/ but I dunno which faction carries the most weight.
 
Top