The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[Jareth]

Just now, magnkarl said:

No, what he meant (according to some) was that she wasn't the victim of AS at all and that Luciana is just a delicate flower. Oddly it's people who label themselves anti-racist who is the decider in when a minority group is victim of racism.

Here's what she said in her resignation letter to Jezza - 

"You have served with great principle and have shown me nothing but kindness and courtesy since appointing me".

[magnkarl]

3 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Here's what she said in her resignation letter to Jezza - 

"You have served with great principle and have shown me nothing but kindness and courtesy since appointing me".

So which is it? The one where Corbyn says she was the victim of AS, or that one line in the resignation letter where she doesn't mention anything about AS?

Did you find out where Jeremy was when he took that picture with Roger 'Ukraine is full of nazis' Waters yet?

Edited February 27, 2023 by magnkarl

[OutByEaster?]

3 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

So which is it? The one where Corbyn says she was the victim of AS, or that one line in the resignation letter where she doesn't mention anything about AS?

It's both surely. Both are the same theme, the same thing. A man supporting a woman in a tweet after she'd been the victim of anti-semitism and then a woman thanking a man for having been kind and courteous throughout her time working with him. Why are these an either/or to you?

[Jareth]

Just now, magnkarl said:

So which is it? The one where Corbyn says she was the victim of AS, or that one line in the resignation letter where she doesn't mention anything about AS?

You have to concede, that there is always going to be a pro-Corbyn and never-Corbyn group and they will repeatedly fail to see each others opinions. I don't know about you but it's a bit boring - though perhaps there's a vacuum at the top of Labour where there's nothing to discuss these days. I think the real crux of it is that the millions who voted for him with their eyes wide open, made a conscious decision that the AS furore was being whipped up as a political trick, or it simply was less important to them than knowing that their NHS would be properly funded and protected and that their energy bills wouldn't be so high. I honestly think that is what riles the never-Corbyn block, that their concerns are not considered that important by a considerable number of the voting public.

[bickster]

7 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Here's what she said in her resignation letter to Jezza - 

"You have served with great principle and have shown me nothing but kindness and courtesy since appointing me".

But no-body has ever said that Corbyn was anti-semitic towards Berger. I'm not sure why you think people have said that.

What Labour under Corbyn didn't do was deal with the people who were anti-semitic towards her, which includes one party member whose husband has been a friend of Corbyn's for over 30 years.

[magnkarl]

6 minutes ago, Jareth said:

You have to concede, that there is always going to be a pro-Corbyn and never-Corbyn group and they will repeatedly fail to see each others opinions. I don't know about you but it's a bit boring - though perhaps there's a vacuum at the top of Labour where there's nothing to discuss these days. I think the real crux of it is that the millions who voted for him with their eyes wide open, made a conscious decision that the AS furore was being whipped up as a political trick, or it simply was less important to them than knowing that their NHS would be properly funded and protected and that their energy bills wouldn't be so high. I honestly think that is what riles the never-Corbyn block, that their concerns are not considered that important by a considerable number of the voting public.

In my opinion a leader of the Labour party should be able to hold several thoughts in ones head, ie.

a) the NHS needs funding and saving

b) Roger Waters, George Galloway and many of my mates are being bought by Putin, maybe I shouldn't join their events who portray a genocide and multiple breaches of human rights as Ukraine's fault?

c) My blinkered views on the world is seriously hindering my political career, maybe I should try to see both sides?

What angers me as a Jew is people who claim to be anti-racist who use their whole day down-playing AS (like you did with Luciana Berger), when it is frank racism. It doesn't compute in my head how one can call oneself anti-racist and support a man like JC who once again shows that his moral compass is wonky to no end. He's gone past the 'oops I was at a Hamas event' excuses, and people are still saying he's a pro-democracy, pro-rights figure when he spends his spare time supporting totalitarian regime men.

Edited February 27, 2023 by magnkarl

[Jareth]

Just now, bickster said:

But no-body has ever said that Corbyn was anti-semitic towards Berger. I'm not sure why you think people have said that.

What Labour under Corbyn didn't do was deal with the people who were anti-semitic towards her, which includes one party member whose husband has been a friend of Corbyn's for over 30 years.

Gosh this is going round and round - Labour HQ were intentionally slowing down the process. And as for everyone being at complete pains to say that Jezza wasn't AS (see Hodge) but it was Labour's failure to deal with it (see Labour HQ) - that just didn't happen, the shit was allowed to stick exactly by people being silent on this point who otherwise knew the actual truth of it. But as per the last post - you and I, and a couple of others will never agree. 

[Jareth]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

In my opinion a leader of the Labour party should be able to hold several thoughts in ones head, ie.

a) the NHS needs funding and saving

b) Roger Waters, George Galloway and many of my mates are being bought by Putin, maybe I shouldn't join their events who portray a genocide and multiple breaches of human rights as Ukraine's fault?

c) My blinkered views on the world is seriously hindering my political career, maybe I should try to see both sides?

What angers me as a Jew is people who claim to be anti-racist who use their whole day down-playing AS (like you did with Luciana Berger), when it is frank racism. It doesn't compute in my head how one can call oneself anti-racist and support a man like JC who once again shows that his moral compass is wonky to no end.

Simply that JC isn't racist - he's a lifelong anti-racism campaigner - you will have seen his work supporting his local Jewish community over the years no? And I mean that point - you will have seen this right and not dismissed it? I agree he's a crap leader when it comes to orgainsing a party, but he certainly gave people something to vote for - which is a quality absent in the current leadership. That he lost in the end is regrettable for me, but understandable - some folks are not meant to be leaders. On Berger - I didn;t deny anything that happened to her - only that she allowed people to think it was all coming from the left, whereas a majority was from the right and that included the most serious cases - and this suited her and a few colleagues who were developing their own party. She's entirely within her rights to be sick of abuse and leave, but it was politically expedient to play it how it was played. 

[ml1dch]

21 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I agree he's a crap leader when it comes to orgainsing a party, but he certainly gave people something to vote for - which is a quality absent in the current leadership. 

If an election were to be held tomorrow, I'm pretty sure that a larger number of voters would find "something to vote for" in the current leadership than found it in the last one. 

[Jareth]

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

If an election were to be held tomorrow, I'm pretty sure that a larger number of voters would find "something to vote for" in the current leadership than found it in the last one. 

I think as it stands, people will be voting to get the tories out - though I expect to see some good policies closer to the time, some meat thrown to various groups. Biggest problem for Starmer is the ghost of Jezza - and for every month Starmer worked with Jezza it will be used as ammunition against him. On Berger - do you know that Starmer backed up Jezza at the time? Honestly, why is Starmer not deemed as co-sponsor of the dark times? The tories will certainly go with this.

[magnkarl]

15 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I think as it stands, people will be voting to get the tories out - though I expect to see some good policies closer to the time, some meat thrown to various groups. Biggest problem for Starmer is the ghost of Jezza - and for every month Starmer worked with Jezza it will be used as ammunition against him. On Berger - do you know that Starmer backed up Jezza at the time? Honestly, why is Starmer not deemed as co-sponsor of the dark times? The tories will certainly go with this.

Again, one of the culprits against Berger was a close mate of Corbyn. 

Let's do a hypothetical scenario, you have a friend that is openly racist/openly conspiracy theorist/openly pro-genocide in Ukraine with obvious connections to one of the worst dictators of modern times, do you keep going to his events and parties, or do you have a chat with them? You keep praising Corbyn for being anti-racist when it suits you, but he can't even seem to at least distance himself from said people when they show the exact characteristics that you claim he's so against. What does that say about JC?

If any of my friends were any of the above I'd have a serious talk with them and likely cut my losses, these aren't one offs with George Galloway, Milne, Livingstone, Williamson etc. The No To NATO, STWC connections are enough for me to put JC in a box that shouldn't ever be close to power, just like it shouldn't with any Tory MPs who has clear connections to authoritarian regimes paying to get power in our democracy.

Edited February 27, 2023 by magnkarl

[magnkarl]

44 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Simply that JC isn't racist - he's a lifelong anti-racism campaigner - you will have seen his work supporting his local Jewish community over the years no? And I mean that point - you will have seen this right and not dismissed it? I agree he's a crap leader when it comes to orgainsing a party, but he certainly gave people something to vote for - which is a quality absent in the current leadership. That he lost in the end is regrettable for me, but understandable - some folks are not meant to be leaders. On Berger - I didn;t deny anything that happened to her - only that she allowed people to think it was all coming from the left, whereas a majority was from the right and that included the most serious cases - and this suited her and a few colleagues who were developing their own party. She's entirely within her rights to be sick of abuse and leave, but it was politically expedient to play it how it was played. 

You called Luciana Berger a delicate flower earlier in this thread. If that isn't downplaying racism I don't know what is. What's your experience with receiving death threats because of your race, or having a bunch of momentum people standing outside your recidence banging pots and shouting 'ZIOOOO' into the night for weeks on end?

Again, as with Corbyn, the racism is obviously only the right kind of racism when it's not affecting ones political adversaries. If it's affecting your adversaries they're being delicate flowers.

Edited February 27, 2023 by magnkarl

[ml1dch]

4 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I think as it stands, people will be voting to get the tories out 

Well that's not really different to how millions of people vote in any General Election. I voted to get the Tories out in 2015, 2017 and 2019. I didn't do it with any massive enthusiasm about who would be in Government if I'd succeeded. 2024 will have lots of people like me. I'll be one of them again. 

 

4 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Biggest problem for Starmer is the ghost of Jezza - and for every month Starmer worked with Jezza it will be used as ammunition against him. On Berger - do you know that Starmer backed up Jezza at the time? Honestly, why is Starmer not deemed as co-sponsor of the dark times? The tories will certainly go with this.

I'm sure you're right. Which is an absolutely massive part of the reason why Starmer has gone so hard on pushing Corbyn away. It's not all about "purging the left", it's about neutralising potential attacks that could see an election lost. My (entirely unscientific) view is that Starmer probably doesn't care one way or the other whether Corbyn is in the party or not. He does care about winning the next election though, and if hanging his predecessor out to dry helps then he sees it as acceptable collateral damage. 

[Jareth]

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

I'm sure you're right. Which is an absolutely massive part of the reason why Starmer has gone so hard on pushing Corbyn away. It's not all about "purging the left", it's about neutralising potential attacks that could see an election lost. My (entirely unscientific) view is that Starmer probably doesn't care one way or the other whether Corbyn is in the party or not. He does care about winning the next election though, and if hanging his predecessor out to dry helps then he sees it as acceptable collateral damage. 

100% agree - he's done a good job blunting the tory attacks - it was irksome at the start but I concede it was necessary. Even the lack of policies is classic BoJo in the run up to 2019, I mean I don't think we'll see Starmer hiding in a fridge, but I'm quite optimistic about the policies that are to come. It gives me joy to think we could see the back of the tories, we are so close to them cementing themselves at the top by hook or by crook - i.e. voter ID. Deseprately want Labour to introduce PR, the last poll shows the tories on 17 MPs total - there has never been a better time to change the system for the better.

[Jareth]

10 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

You called Luciana Berger a delicate flower earlier in this thread. If that isn't downplaying racism I don't know what is. What's your experience with receiving death threats for because of your race, or having a bunch of momentum people standing outside your recidence banging pots and shouting 'ZIOOOO' into the night for weeks on end?

I'd suggest heading to DMs and save everyone else this back and forth - but in all honesty I'm not at your level of angry, I'm a bit indifferent to what you are loudly and repeatedly expressing. Corbyn's not your cup of tea - move on fella, for your own sanity. 

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Even the lack of policies is classic BoJo in the run up to 2019

At this stage in the election cycle, the lack of specific policies is absolutely standard behaviour across the political spectrum. You don't get specifics until the manifesto is published and the manifesto isn't published until there's an election.

It absolutely shouldn't be a criticism at this stage.

What he ius doing is laying out the groundwork for the way he want's to head, brief outlines of their direction. Again, this is absolutely the correct approach.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I'd suggest heading to DMs and save everyone else this back and forth - but in all honesty I'm not at your level of angry, I'm a bit indifferent to what you are loudly and repeatedly expressing. Corbyn's not your cup of tea - move on fella, for your own sanity. 

He was criticising your language not Corbyn's. You were the one downplaying what happened to Berger. Maybe you should address that?

[Jareth]

Just now, bickster said:

He was criticising your language not Corbyn's. You were the one downplaying what happened to Berger. Maybe you should address that?

Okey dokey - delicate flower = a description of Berger being hounded out by the left - only able to return to frontline politics once AS has been taken care of in the Labour party. In reality, the opportunity was simultaneously used to launch a new political party, the truth of the matter is that she was not a delicate flower - but allowed that to be the perception. Have never denied the abuse she got - only where she allowed people to think it came from. I hope that covers it. 

[Jareth]

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

At this stage in the election cycle, the lack of specific policies is absolutely standard behaviour across the political spectrum. You don't get specifics until the manifesto is published and the manifesto isn't published until there's an election.

It absolutely shouldn't be a criticism at this stage.

What he ius doing is laying out the groundwork for the way he want's to head, brief outlines of their direction. Again, this is absolutely the correct approach.

Bojo in fairness went on to publish the shortest manifesto every launched by the tories - intentionally vague so that he could do what he wanted at a later stage without contradicting his offer. Starmer in some ways might do similar - he has sold himself as a centrist - but you yourself described him as fundamentally the most left wing leader since the 60s. And he loves a caveat as much as Bozza. 

[bickster]

1 hour ago, Jareth said:

Bojo in fairness went on to publish the shortest manifesto every launched by the tories - intentionally vague so that he could do what he wanted at a later stage without contradicting his offer. Starmer in some ways might do similar - he has sold himself as a centrist - but you yourself described him as fundamentally the most left wing leader since the 60s. And he loves a caveat as much as Bozza. 

I described Starmer as the most left wing leader that will get elected as PM since the 60s. That’s a fundamental difference