Jump to content

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


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

What a **** mess the current Labour party are.

Worst government in history and they're too busy fighting themselves to do anything. 

Because the leader is a bigger enemy than the Tories.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Corbyn just too unconvincing. He cannot effectively put to bed the antisemitism issue, has too many skeleton's in his closet and appears to be too busy attempting to censor and purge those within his party who disagree with him.  I'd imagine that a Labour government would be pretty catastrophic. 

It's fairly clear the anti-Semitism thing isn't going to be allowed to be put to bed. I don't think there's much censorship or purging going on.

A Labour government would be problematic though. Influential members of the party hate the leader more than their opponent. The leader himself isn't a very good politician (ironically this is arguably a selling point for him).

He wouldn't get the chance to be Prime Minister though so it's all moot. All the current stuff is about making sure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Because the leader is a bigger enemy than the Tories.

And also because "Blairites" and "centrists" and "the media" and etc. are a bigger enemy than the Tories. Everybody fighting everybody else while giving a free pass to the actual enemy.

Catweazel's hiding in the potting shed on his allotment, only occasionally popping out to explain or apologise for some unfortunate incident with some murderers, then running away to hide again before anyone can ask him about Brexit.

Opposition. Pah!  

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, blandy said:

"Blairites" and "centrists"

Happy with their inside track investments in private healthcare and other PFI projects.

These c***s need to go, or it is just more of the same.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Xann said:

Happy with their inside track investments in private healthcare and other PFI projects.

These c***s need to go, or it is just more of the same.

QED. Fighting and hating them instead of the actual tories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, blandy said:

And also because "Blairites" and "centrists" and "the media" and etc. are a bigger enemy than the Tories. Everybody fighting everybody else while giving a free pass to the actual enemy.

Catweazel's hiding in the potting shed on his allotment, only occasionally popping out to explain or apologise for some unfortunate incident with some murderers, then running away to hide again before anyone can ask him about Brexit.

Opposition. Pah!  

catweaz.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Leave them in and the party isn't in opposition to the Tories.

Isn't it the centrists like Umunna and Leslie that are doing the actual opposing at the moment, while Corbyn et al wave through Conservative party legislation that will banjax the country?

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Leave them in and the party isn't in opposition to the Tories.

Take them out and it still wouldn't be. If there's something I learned in my few years in the Labour Party (80's), socialists will always find someone they disagree with more than the Tories, even in an empty room. The Labour Party has always been the Party of the Popular Front of Judea and the Peoples Popular Front of Judea and... they'll always argue more with themselves more than they will argue with the Tories. Life of Brian got it spot on. Even the Trotskyites by the 80's had split into three distinct groupings, Militant, Socialist Worker and the Workers Revolutionary Party and they were all following the teachings of one man! The WRP even split again after that something about not everyone getting a fair crack at shagging Vanessa Redgrave or something...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember back around that early 80’s period falling in with a bunch of hunt sabbies (very briefly, it was boring and terrifying in a ratio I didn’t take to) but from them, I got in with some people that were so many shades of groups within groups that I wasn’t sure what was going on. They were ‘labour’ but as a drinking session would go on and the group get smaller, they’d fess up to the inner circle to being militant. But then as the hours went by, they were ‘not militant’ but a group within militant just using them for funds and numbers. Happy times.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

It's fairly clear the anti-Semitism thing isn't going to be allowed to be put to bed. I don't think there's much censorship or purging going on.

A Labour government would be problematic though. Influential members of the party hate the leader more than their opponent. The leader himself isn't a very good politician (ironically this is arguably a selling point for him).

He wouldn't get the chance to be Prime Minister though so it's all moot. All the current stuff is about making sure.

...and they're not helping themselves, e.g by failing to adopt IHRA's definition of antisemitism. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the Centrists are the only people actually opposing Brexit which is far more potentially damaging to Labour's apparent demographic than anything at the moment.

Instead, they're playing this stupid game where they say they don't oppose it, but they do oppose leaving the Single Market yet there's silence from the Leadership when their MPs prop up the government on key votes.

Centrism isn't perfect but it's better than the shambles that currently sits in opposition.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Isn't it the centrists like Umunna and Leslie that are doing the actual opposing at the moment, while Corbyn et al wave through Conservative party legislation that will banjax the country?

It's difficult to know what Corbyn is actually saying? Someone drops the fader when he's talking sense, then as soon as there's a tidbit that can used against him? It's all you can hear.

I find Corbyn's stance on Europe infuriating and I have no intention in voting for the man or party.

That said many people will either vote red or blue, seeing the other choices as a wasted vote.

Given that scenario? We're fooked either way, but a vote for the Tories will see the most vulnerable pick up the tab for the suited t**ts' psychopathic greed and stupidity.

A vote for Corbyn sucks the bloated, tax avoiding pieces of shit into the mire as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is true, Corbyn is unpopular with many long established pro austerity and neoliberialist Labour MPs and supporters. 

They, and the media and the Tories are desperate for Corbyn to fail. Ironically, he isn't, and he won't. Many of his policies are incredibly popular with the public, that includes Conservative voters. 

Corbyn is trying to change the direction of a large and established political party and he's doing a decent job, the overton window is shifting. 

Of course, with this there is going to be some kickback. He used to wear cardigans and he didn't sing god save the queen, he's been promoting peace and a more equal society his entire career. So many see it in a binary way, the fact that Corbyn will engage with unsavoury people really upsets them. That's their perogative. 

It does make me laugh though, for many years it was "They're all the same, they all lie, they don't represent us, there is no point in voting". 

Then when Hodge comes out and compares how she felt to the Jews in the 1930s, it's evidence of Labour being divided? It's a crazy statement. Nope that's evidence that Hodge is self serving MP, the type we need rid of, she's piggybacking on the back of the anti-semitism row to discredit Corbyn and improve her own popularity. 

As for 'centerists' opposing Brexit. It's very easy to do that when you are the opposition of the opposition. Labour policy on Brexit is against my belief, I'm frustrated by it, but accept that had Labour opposed it in the commons it may have been detrimental to their support at the time, a clanger that may have triggered another leadership election and damaged their credibility. Brexit has divided almost every political party, what a flipping awful idea it was in the first place. 

I think Labour are playing a dangerous game. Allow the Tories to own Brexit, (well, it is their mess afterall), let it happen and then mop up the mess in the next election. I don't like it. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

...and they're not helping themselves, e.g by failing to adopt IHRA's definition of antisemitism. 

I disagree, the IHRA definition's are not helping the situation. I think I've fallen foul of them a million times. Accusing the State of Israel of being racist is defined as anti-semitic. No that's something the Labour Party are right about, the IHRA definition is idiotic and is a tool for the suppression of criticism of Israel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like said "conference" had some rather unsavory characters present who were still alive too. I'm worried that Corbyn and his staff did not vet the attendance list of such an event before participating. It's naive and stupid. If the aim is peace then he should be attending events such as Women Wage Peace or other bilateral events like the Palestinian-Israeli Memorial Day which actually commemorates everyone who's been killed in this horrible conflict. Instead he went to a PLO/Fringe group event where several convicted terrorists attended. It doesn't take a mastermind to understand that it's a fairly black stain on an already stained history.

One thing's for sure - I'm glad I'm not his PR-manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/08/2018 at 15:53, PompeyVillan said:

Corbyn is unpopular with many long established pro austerity and neoliberialist Labour MPs and supporters

Who are these people? these "pro austerity" labour MPs. 'cuts I'm damned if I know of any.

From the days of Blair and Brown to the present, Labour universally has been opposed to "austerity" (in itself that's a bollex term. Massive ideological cuts is more accurate).

I genuinely don't get this notion that thinking Corbyn is a poor leader and has serious flaws is somehow to be "neoliberal" or a secret tory or some sort of centrist loon and traitor. Sure there are some berks in all parts of the Labour party, as there are in all of them, but the kind of split that's happened where they're all turning on each other is getting worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/08/2018 at 15:40, Dr_Pangloss said:

...and they're not helping themselves, e.g by failing to adopt IHRA's definition of antisemitism. 

That's not true. The issue is about a couple of appended examples which would have the effect of stifling criticism of Israeli actions.

There's a discussion of that here.

Quote

...In the IHRA document, this form of words, described as  a “non-legally binding working definition”, is set off from the rest of the text by appearing in bold and being placed in a box – thus leaving no doubt that this – these two sentences – constitutes the “working definition”. Likewise, in the NEC Code the (identical) definition is set apart by appearing in bold, though indented rather than boxed. No cooking of the books here. The NEC takes the IHRA “working definition”, in its entirety and without altering it one iota, using it as the foundation on which the Code is built: that is “what the hell is going on”...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/08/2018 at 15:14, ml1dch said:

Isn't it the centrists like Umunna and Leslie that are doing the actual opposing at the moment, while Corbyn et al wave through Conservative party legislation that will banjax the country?

I would dispute that comment even if 'politics' only consisted of 'Brexit' and nothing else, but of course it doesn't. 

8 hours ago, blandy said:

Who are these people? these "pro austerity" labour MPs. 'cuts I'm damned if I know of any.

From the days of Blair and Brown to the present, Labour universally has been opposed to "austerity" (in itself that's a bollex term. Massive ideological cuts is more accurate).

I genuinely don't get this notion that thinking Corbyn is a poor leader and has serious flaws is somehow to be "neoliberal" or a secret tory or some sort of centrist loon and traitor. Sure there are some berks in all parts of the Labour party, as there are in all of them, but the kind of split that's happened where they're all turning on each other is getting worse.

Labour's 2015 manifesto began:

'Our manifesto begins with the Budget Responsibility Lock we offer the British people. It is the basis for all our plans in this manifesto because it is by securing our national finances that we are able to secure the family finances of the working people of Britain.

The Budget Responsibility Lock guarantees that:

Every policy in this manifesto is paid for. Not one commitment requires additional borrowing. We are the first party to make that pledge and with this manifesto it is delivered. We will legislate to require all major parties to have their manifesto commitments independently audited by the Office for Budget Responsibility.

A Labour government will cut the deficit every year. The first line of Labour’s first Budget will be: “This Budget cuts the deficit every year”. This manifesto sets out that we will only lay a Budget before the House of Commons that cuts the deficit every year, which the OBR will independently verify.

We will get national debt falling and a surplus on the current budget as soon as possible in the next parliament. This manifesto sets out that we will not compromise on this commitment.'

Inside it continues:

'We will balance the books by cutting the deficit every year, with a surplus on the current budget and with national debt falling as soon as possible in the next Parliament. This will need common sense spending reductions, outside of the protected areas of health, education and international development. We will ask those with incomes over £150,000 a year to contribute a little more through a 50p rate of tax. And we will build the high-skill, high-wage economy we need to raise tax revenues and control social security spending.'

(https://action.labour.org.uk/page/-/A4 BIG _PRINT_ENG_LABOUR MANIFESTO_TEXT LAYOUT.pdf)

After they lost the election, Liz Kendall attacked the manifesto from the right. She announced that she agreed with George Osborne's 'fiscal mandate', which would require a government to achieve budget surplus in normal times. Chuka Umunna made similar statements in his own abortive leadership campaign. 

It's true that no Labour MP has or had exactly the same opinions about the deficit as George Osborne, but plenty were fine with embracing some of his agenda for either ideological or tactical reasons. This matters because austerity has been a disaster for this country. It's legitimate for those who didn't support any of this terrible policy to point out the mistakes of those who did. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I would dispute that comment even if 'politics' only consisted of 'Brexit' and nothing else, but of course it doesn't. 

Right now, it pretty much does.

There is nothing happening in UK politics at the moment that shouldn't be viewed through that prism.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â