Jeremy Corbyn

The point is you can only judge people in context.

Indeed, and the context "same party, same country, same time" is so narrow as to be meaningless.

This is why Corbyn is seen as Left Wing now, whereas in the Labour Party of the 1970's very little of what he is suggesting would be seen as radical.

Corbyn is a socialist. He thinks the means of production should be state owned. Between 1945 and 1990 in the UK that wasn't an extreme idea. Viewed over the last 20 years or the last 200 years it is. (Choose your context!) Of course you don't have to be left wing to be a Socialist (Nazi Party), but in the UK we think of Socialism as left wing which is probably one reason why we regard him as left wing. But then in the UK we tend to regard being pro-EU as 'Left Wing' but that's completely inconsistent with socialism as Corbyn or Benn would tell you. Just another example of why these terms mean very little really. It's very hard to list a set of policies that are objectively left/right wing.

ernie_lynch - Member

And also to the Bullingdon Boys, even though they like to claim that we're all together in Greggs or something.

I don't really give a chuff if he wins or not but you clearly didn't see this on Twitter 😯

[img] [/img]

(yes I know it's photoshopped)

Of course you don't have to be left wing to be a Socialist (Nazi Party)

Whatever they called themselves the Nazis weren't socialists, they didn't nationalise the means of production, distribution, and exchange, they did the opposite and privatised stuff.

In another revelation the shower fittings in the gas chambers Auschwitz weren't actually connected to any water supply, whatever the Nazis said their prisoners weren't about to get a shower.

You'll also find that Corbyn isn't a really socialist, he's much more a social democrat.

(yes I know it's photoshopped)

Well it was all too obvious - everyone knows that Abraham Lincoln couldn't have been a Bullingdon Club member, he never went to Oxford University.

😆

If Corbyn has Blair and his cronies take the stand and be sent to prison for lying to the public. He will get my vote. Blair is the only danger to this country since Hitler. Weapons of mass destruction my arse.

Whatever they called themselves the Nazis weren't socialists, they didn't nationalise the means of production, distribution, and exchange, they did the opposite and privatised stuff.

Good point, I think I have to concede that.

You'll also find that Corbyn isn't a really socialist, he's much more a social democrat.

That's probably a fair point too, I assume he isn't proposing to nationalize a large percentage of our economy, but then everyone in mainstream UK politics at the moment is a Social Democrat depending on which of the two common definitions you choose.

If Corbyn has Blair and his cronies take the stand and be sent to prison for lying to the public. He will get my vote.

I was broadly understanding (supportive?) of Blair's domestic policy but I would love to see him on trial in some appropriate court (Hague?).

The fact that we have to dress thatcher and the myth of Thatcherism up as radical just shows how centrist/moderate UK politics really is.

konabunny - Member

have you considered looking at google, or perhaps Corbyn's website? I doubt he's keeping it a secret if he has a policy on it

Any process of electoral reform must retain the MP-constituency link.

What's "the Thatcher issue" which I apparently raised ?

outofbreath - Member

Posted 7 minutes ago # Report-Post

I have the same problem and can't get the words out when I'm out of breath.

EDIT : 😉

and despite the majority of voters not voting for her she remained Prime Minister for 11 years

Well it's no more an issue for me than all the other Prime Ministers who were in office despite the majority of voters not voting for them, why single out Thatcher? She had as much legitimacy than any other PM.

For the record I strongly support proportional representation. I also strongly agree with Jeremy Corbyn when he says [i]"any process of electoral reform must retain the MP-constituency link"[/i].

I believe that politicians should have a close relationship with the people they represent and be accessible, not be aloof, remote, or disconnected from voters.

Presumably unlike you who bizarrely claims that it [i]"sounds like the same old establishment to me"[/i] without apparently any need to explain why.

This is as much about how the media work as about Corbyn in particular, but still pretty sobering:

Clicky for biggy
[url= https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNz_t8bWUAAIAJ3.jp g" target="_blank">https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNz_t8bWUAAIAJ3.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

This is as much about how the media work as about Corbyn in particular, but still pretty sobering:

Agree the press are criminal in misquoting and deliberately misinterpreting. (Everyone should listen to "more or less" on R4.)

However the direct quotes from him highlight one of the problems I have with Corbyn: It's not clear to me specifically what policies he's going to push for as leader. I get the sense he's very good at pointing out the flaws in other people's policies, but not so great at coming up with his own. You can do that in opposition, but as PM he's going to be making endless decisions where each available option is completely unpalatable to him and the electorate.

Well to be fair there's a lot at stake AlexSimon. There's always the possibility that Corbyn's crazy moderate views might capture the imagination of British voters, a terrifying prospect for all warmongering neoliberals.

You can't blame them for wanting to insulate the public from his real views, in the same way that you can't blame them for regretting to be stupid enough to allow him onto the leadership ballot paper.

He was never suppose to come anywhere near to winning the leadership election, so if Labour Party members and supporters insist on voting incorrectly, despite being clearly told not to, then desperate measures are required.

It's not clear to me specifically what policies he's going to push for as leader.

I think you probably haven't fully grasped the concept of democratically arrived decisions and policies, hardly surprising after years of one man deciding all party policies - it's so different.

You are however wrong in claiming that it isn't clear 'what policies he's going to push for', he makes his personal preferences clear. He just believes that it's not just down to him (or any leader) to dictate policies which party members have to fight for.

if Labour Party members and supporters insist on voting incorrectly, despite being clearly told not to, then desperate measures are required.

You are however wrong in claiming that it isn't clear 'what policies he's going to push for'

Entirely possible that I'm wrong - I haven't followed his words closely. Can you help by citing two policies he's going to push for as leader?

What I don't understand (or at least would hope to be different) is how our current interconnected generation are still so influenced by a few media heads

Well the alternative is to do nothing and allow Corbyn to freely express his views without misrepresenting and twisting them, which bearing in mind how popular he appears to have become overnight sounds rather risky.

Surely it's worth a punt to try and stop his apparent growing popularity?

I understand their motivation, I don't understand how in the modern age it's still so effective.

I understand their motivation, I don't understand how in the modern age it's still so effective.

I think you might have the cart before the horse. I think people who buy papers *want* to buy lies that reinforce their prejudices. The readers bias comes first, the choice of newspaper comes second. The paper prints the lies the readership wants to hear, the paper doesn't create the prejudice. (Although clearly it must reinforce the prejudice to a degree.)

oh - and policies:
Renationalisation of railways and energy companies
Replace tuition fees with student grants
Increase the top rate of income tax
Withdraw from Syria
Stop cuts to public services

(there are more)

I get the sense he's very good at pointing out the flaws in other people's policies, but not so great at coming up with his own.

Party leaders don't (or shouldn't) come up with policies. The party does it, the leader should simply manage the process to arrive at the best decision. This is another reason why I think he'd be good at the job.

Renationalisation of railways and energy companies
Replace tuition fees with student grants
Increase the top rate of income tax
Withdraw from Syria
Stop cuts to public services

Yeah, that's pretty specific and (with the exception of removing our mighty number of zero assets from Syria) pretty expensive.

Even increasing the top rate of tax *might* carry a cost or fail to generate much cash: http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-50p-top-rate-tax-bring/17601

Party leaders don't (or shouldn't) come up with policies.

I'll leave you and AlexSimon to argue about whether he has come up with some policies he would push for and whether doing so was a mistake...

Even increasing the top rate of tax *might* carry a cost or fail to generate much cash: http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-50p-top-rate-tax-bring/17601

So you couldn't bothered to do a search to establish what Corbyn's opinions were but you managed to find the motivation to do one to counter his opinion ?

And this is from someone who claims [i]"he's very good at pointing out the flaws in other people's policies".[/i]

I think [i]sheep[/i] who buy papers *want* [i]bleats[/i] that reinforce their prejudices. The [i]herd[/i] comes first,
🙂

It's not clear to me specifically what policies he's going to push for as leader.

Yeah if only he would come out with a clear, strong manifesto which he then has to abandon when circumstances change eh?

Yeah if only he would come out with a clear, strong manifesto which he then has to abandon when circumstances change eh?

I really really hope he wins, at least the leadership. I've complained bitterly in the past about this problem with politics - the electorate (or the media) demand a concrete set of promises, but given that's not really possible in all situations they are doomed to be broken and consequently everyone tears everyone else apart for it constantly. So the whole political debate is reduced to angry mudslinging instead of anything constructive.

If Corbyn can change that.. I'll be a very happy voter even if he doens't become PM.

So you couldn't bothered to do a search to establish what Corbyn's opinions were but you managed to find the motivation to do one to counter his opinion ? And this is from someone who claims "he's very good at pointing out the flaws in other people's policies".

Yes, being good at pointing out flaws is a very common trait.

Yeah if only he would come out with a clear, strong manifesto which he then has to abandon when circumstances change eh?

Rightly or wrongly some specific policy always helps me make up my mind. I assume many of Corbyn's supporters/opposers have come to their conclusion based on the policies stated by AlexSimons.

You are however wrong in claiming that it isn't clear 'what policies he's going to push for', he makes his personal preferences clear. He just believes that it's not just down to him (or any leader) to dictate policies which party members have to fight for.

So considering we know most of the Labour MP's are further to 'right' than Corbyn I assume he'll just accept the majorities policies? I don't buy for one minute.

I assume many of Corbyn's supporters/opposers have come to their conclusion based on the policies stated by AlexSimon

He does the exact opposite of what you were suggesting earlier in fact - he doesn't just pick opposite points to Tory policy, he sees where we're heading, has decided there's a better alternative and has committed to research and debate to get us there.

I think that's what's motivated people to support/vote personally. Not the headline policies, but the commitment, belief, honesty and transparency.

So considering we know most of the Labour MP's are further to 'right' than Corbyn I assume he'll just accept the majorities policies?

No? Maybe he's not an egomaniac, and is prepared to work with a variety of opinions..?

dragon - Member

So considering we know most of the Labour MP's are further to 'right' than Corbyn I assume he'll just accept the majorities policies? I don't buy for one minute.

You are not paying a blind bit of notice to what Corbyn is saying. He has clearly stated that Labour MPs should not be forcing their views on the party.

He has clearly stated that Labour MPs should not be forcing their views on the party.

Right so that'll work then 🙄 Its a disaster waiting to happen if you let the party in fight with no clear strategy or direction. He doesn't seem much of a leader if he's just going to allow a massive bun fight on everything from rail ownership, NATO commitment, abortion legislation, science strategy etc. etc.

Its a disaster waiting to happen if you let the party in fight

You can manage different opinions without infighting, if you're good at your job. Managers all over the country do this every day. Of course, other managers also fail to do this at the same time.

The party leader job should be just that - manager, not dictator, and not messiah.

I've complained bitterly in the past about this problem with politics - the electorate (or the media) demand a concrete set of promises, but given that's not really possible in all situations they are doomed to be broken and consequently everyone tears everyone else apart for it constantly.

Which was exactly the point I was trying to make on p46 which you were questioning. Obviously I didn't get the point across properly.

No he is the party leader, that is not the position for a manager.

See:

The leader’s job is to inspire and motivate.

The manager’s job is to plan, organize and coordinate.

Apologies dazh, quite possible.

Dragon - it's a bit of both. Good managers get the best out of their staff, that includes inspiring where necessary. Management is about people and strategy as much as it is logistics and planning.

Disagree, while there is overlap between a manager and a leader, there are clear differences (see below definitions). A party leader is clearly mostly doing the top definition, he then has his colleagues and whips to execute the management functions. TBH I don't think Corbyn has much experience of either and that will be a major problem for the Labour party if he wins.

"Leadership is about aligning people to the vision, that means buy-in and communication, motivation and inspiration."

"Management is a set of processes that keep an organisation functioning. They make it work today – they make it hit this quarter's numbers. The processes are about planning, budgeting, staffing, clarifying jobs, measuring performance, and problem-solving when results did not go to plan."

Yes but the leader shouldn't just pursue whatever aims he or she personally values the most. It's not a one-man show, at least it shouldn't be. IMO anyway.

Leadership is about aligning people to the vision

Yes and the vision is something that should be arrived at by a consensus of more than one person, even Blair did that.

dragon - Member

He has clearly stated that Labour MPs should not be forcing their views on the party.

Right so that'll work then 🙄 Its a disaster waiting to happen if you let the party in fight with no clear strategy or direction. He doesn't seem much of a leader if he's just going to allow a massive bun fight on everything from rail ownership, NATO commitment, abortion legislation, science strategy etc. etc.

You clearly haven't got a clue how democracy and democratically arrived decisions work. It is perfectly possible to have 'a clear strategy and direction' AND still have a debate and discussion. How, ffs, you think Parliament works?

But I'll tell you what dragon, since it's obvious after 48 pages that you're unimpressed by Corbyn why don't just carry on voting Tory and not worry too much about the Labour Party? 💡

I can't imagine arguing with Tory supporters over who would make the best leader for their party.