Awol Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 3 minutes ago, bickster said: Entryism as espoused by Leon Trotsky in 1934 would be the more accurate term Sorry, yes. My bad. Ed Miliband's 3 quid revolutionaries. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 Meanwhile, the 600k entryists hell bent on hostile takeovers and wot-not, only went and voted by a majority for Starmer as leader. They must have forgotten their mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 Schrödinger's entryist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 34 minutes ago, bickster said: Yes of course. Stalin executed about three quarters of a million people in his purge of 1937, this compares so accurately with that. 10 minutes ago, bickster said: Entryism as espoused by Leon Trotsky in 1934 would be the more accurate term LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 Stalinist purge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 29, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2020 Should we start a new thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 On 25/08/2020 at 20:40, Chindie said: I could make a sardonic comment about either deeply cynical weaponisation of a heinous prejudice, or something about if you squint at it right, it's a purge. But why bother. It's so laughably self evident you can't add any more humour to it. The thing that has always annoyed me most about this whole farce is Corbyn, for his many faults, is clearly a good bloke on the whole prejudice/racism front, and has been for literally decades. The attack is so clearly nasty, underhand and wrong, it kinda morally infuriates me. And there was no arguing against it, because it was s useful tool against someone many unerringly hate for many reasons, and for some they just heard the never ending attacks and that was enough. It is a really, really grim moment in our current time and should cast trust in an awful lot of organisations, people, powers etc into the fire forever more. A person rose to power that they didn't like, and after a series of botched attempts there wasn't a bar too low to stab at. Sorry for the self quote but this is only more relevant to how I feel as this charade goes on. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 (edited) No sympathy to be honest. If he didn't want to support the findings, he should have kept his mouth shut, instead he sticks his head back up to dispute it, after the allegations under his leadership dragged the party through the mud. He's like a bad smell that won't go away, 4 years of that incompetent **** dragging the party down is enough, enjoy your backbench and shut the **** up. This is the last thing you want from a former party leader tbh. Rightly or wrongly, contesting the report does nothing but damage the party more, IMO. Edited October 29, 2020 by Davkaus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 It's quite simple for Starmer, become the anti-Jezza, big-up his and Labour's patriotism, be more competent than the Torys. All very achievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 22 minutes ago, Davkaus said: No sympathy to be honest. If he didn't want to support the findings, he should have kept his mouth shut, instead he sticks his head back up to dispute it, after the allegations under his leadership dragged the party through the mud. He's like a bad smell that won't go away, 4 years of that incompetent **** dragging the party down is enough, enjoy your backbench and shut the **** up. This is the last thing you want from a former party leader tbh. Rightly or wrongly, contesting the report does nothing but damage the party more, IMO. Nah it’s probably the best thing that could have happened for Starmer. I’d go so far as to say he probably knew Corbyn wouldn’t be able to keep his mouth shut and used that to lay the preparations for his demise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 Bit of a fumble really.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 Tories couldn’t wish for a better opposition. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 29, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2020 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: Tories couldn’t wish for a better opposition. I'm not sure that's true at all tbh. The Tories prefer the Corbyn version without a doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 5 minutes ago, bickster said: I'm not sure that's true at all tbh. The Tories prefer the Corbyn version without a doubt Let’s review this after the next 6 months of Labour arguing over internal party racism and factionalism. Why bother doing what you’re paid for, fighting against this awful government that the public distrust, when you can disappear up your own arse again arguing over the wording of Chapter 1.VIII.5 or whatever bollocks they’ll all think is more important than covid, economic collapse, brexit, education, housing and feeding the hungry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 29, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2020 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: Let’s review this after the next 6 months of Labour arguing over internal party racism and factionalism. Why bother doing what you’re paid for, fighting against this awful government that the public distrust, when you can disappear up your own arse again arguing over the wording of Chapter 1.VIII.5 or whatever bollocks they’ll all think is more important than covid, economic collapse, brexit, education, housing and feeding the hungry. I wouldn't disagree with that though. But it was Corbyn who deliberately decided to present the nation with a divided party today. No-one else. Aparently Rayner and others on the left attempted to get him to retract but he refused 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted October 29, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2020 I think the Tories preferred the Corbyn version; the Corbyn version didn't appeal to their voters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted October 29, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 29, 2020 (edited) Corbyn's main bone of contention is that the scale of the problem and the number of antisemitic members was overstated by adversaries inside the party and outside of it - and that was then amplified by media. He's not wrong (unless someone can provide the stats to disprove him?). Meanwhile Starmer wants to deal with the issue by accepting everything levelled at the party and moving on. And that's why Labour will be screwed forever more, two sides who feel they are helping their party, but are completely at odds to each other. I'd recommend moving to Scotland or Wales, England will forever be Tory. Edited October 29, 2020 by Jareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 29, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2020 27 minutes ago, Jareth said: Corbyn's main bone of contention is that the scale of the problem and the number of antisemitic members was overstated by adversaries inside the party and outside of it - and that was then amplified by media. He's not wrong (unless someone can provide the stats to disprove him?). Meanwhile Starmer wants to deal with the issue by accepting everything levelled at the party and moving on. And that's why Labour will be screwed forever more, two sides who feel they are helping their party, but are completely at odds to each other. I'd recommend moving to Scotland or Wales, England will forever be Tory. Come to Liverpool Riverside and say that, whilst you're here you can say it in Wavertree too Both CLPs are rife with Antisemites, the older one's are mostly ex-Militant too, which actually gives some context to my entryism comment earlier Thats Labour's own report in the pictures. Read the conclusion and then ask why they did nothing about it but accepted the report 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts