Forum menu
He should have lead by example he said there was no place for racism in the labour party but didn’t take the steps to kick all these people out.
He did both those things. He repeatedly said there was no place for racism, and anti-semitism in particular in the party, and he bolsterered and accelerated complaints and investigation procedures. It wasn't enough though for his critics on the right, it never would have been, because their aim wasn't the elimination of AS from the party, it was the elimination of Corbyn. This was all about grubby politics, and it still is.
Do I think Corbyn is racist no (i haven’t seen anything that suggests so), do I think his lack of action made the issue worse 100%
Aside from there is repeated evidence of procedures being improved whilst he was in office.
Again many of the "political intervention" examples were his office actually forcing more aggressive action against antisemites.
Could it be better. Definitely but its nowhere close to what was being claimed and I somewhat doubt any party would have fared better in an analysis of their complaints procedures (remember the tories havent even got round to bothering to start their investigation into Islamophobia despite that being the reason why the ECHR declined to investigate them).
Unless JC gets run over by a bus, that’s never going to happen. This will drag on for decades.
Hopefully not, Starmer has the opportunity to purge the idiots (because they won't be able to keep their mouths shut) and try and rebuild something electable in the next three years when there should be an open goal due to the incompetence of the incumbents
Yes, let’s all laugh at the fat black woman. In an entirely objective and non-racist way of course.
Nope, how about instead we laugh at the £80k per year public servant who can't even pronounce anti-Semitism, let along begin to understand what it means, despite attempting to apologise for it? Don't even start me on her grasp of numbers.
Have you even listened to that clip of her posted above? It is embarrassing.
It wasn’t enough though for his critics on the right, it never would have been, because their aim wasn’t the elimination of AS from the party, it was the elimination of Corbyn.
The two are intertwined, the fact that Corbyn would rather damage Labour for decades than say 'Sorry', or just say nothing, demonstrates that he puts his ego before the party and the poor. It's even more obvious now that he's hopelessly unsuited to being in a Party which is supposed to champion the underprivaledged.
So, getting rid of Corbyn is a necessity if Labour is to stand any chance of being elected.
Starmer has the opportunity to purge the idiots (because they won’t be able to keep their mouths shut) and try and rebuild something electable in the next three years when there should be an open goal due to the incompetence of the incumbents
I'd just assumed that was the plan all along. This was just him firing the starting gun on the process. And with serious justification for doing so.
The sixth form echo chamber is predictably soiling its petticoats in yawningly predictable outrage at the treatment of their useless messiah.
Meanwhile, outside in the real world, voters are looking at this and thinking 'oh look... the labour party have got rid of that hopeless old 70's throwback Marxist." and concluding that that's a pretty smart (long overdue) move, and the party might be worth voting for next time.
I see that the faithful have raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for Jeremy's 'fighting fund'. How frightfully Islington of them. Did they rattle tins outside Waitrose? Imagine if they put their efforts into actually doing something useful?
When Corbyn took over, I like many others was impressed with him. He seemed principled and fair minded. Took me a few weeks to realise how wrong I was. There is a fine line between principled and arrogant to the point where you can't see or won't see that maybe you are wrong.
Corbyn and his team made the Labour party unelectable. If he cared about getting a Labour government into power and more importantly getting this lot out then he would apologise and fade into the background. But no, he still stands on the sidelines refusing to see that he may have been in the wrong and making noise that fuels the MSM, damages Starmer and takes the focus off Johnson.
The last election showed that Labour have a mountain to climb. They can do without this petulant, arrogant fool making it harder for them.
It’s even more obvious now that he’s hopelessly unsuited to being in a Party which is supposed to champion the underprivaledged.
Jesus. Do you know what Corbyn did yesterday after being suspended from the party and called a racist all day? He went and did his weekly shift at the local foodbank.
Has the booting out of JC had a positive effect already?
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1322126032028291072
Aside from there is repeated evidence of procedures being improved whilst he was in office.
Indeed - and this was actually cited in the EHRC report! It's interesting that things only improved when Matthews got the boot - only when Corbyn kicked out a minor right-winger did improvements on dealing with antisemitism start happening.
Again many of the “political intervention” examples were his office actually forcing more aggressive action against antisemites.
But of course in this very thread this has been cited repeatedly as "Corbyn interference" with zero context oh how he "interfered" to accelerate dealing with antisemitism. You'll note the wording in the EHRC is similarly woolly, giving the impression that his "interference" was a bad thing.
OFC if Corbyn had not interfered, he would have been criticised for "not acting fast enough". Unfortunately a number of people are stuck in the hate circle-jerk and are only willing to engage in disingenuous point-scoring.
Has the booting out of JC had a positive effect already?
FFS look at the dates on when the poll was taken.
Did everyone bask in the glow from his halo?
No it just confirmed the view that the labour party is no longer an organisation which is interested in the under-priveleged.
Jesus. Do you know what Corbyn did yesterday after being suspended from the party and called a racist all day? He went and did his weekly shift at the local foodbank.
And in what way does that qualify him to be leader of a political party?
He's deeply flawed, on the one hand he (sort of) means well (eg foodbank etc), on the other he'll happily drag Labour through anti-semitic mud for decades rather than say 'sorry'.
The latter hurts the poor far more than his shift at a food bank will ever help them.
No it just confirmed the view that the labour party is no longer an organisation which is interested in the under-priveleged.
He's about to spaff a few hundred thousand quid on legal fees because he can't bring himself to say sorry, due to his planet-sized ego and his constant need for adulation. He could not bother and donate all that to a food bank instead.
He could not bother and donate all that to a food bank instead.
But that would put the poor before his ego - never going to happen.
Hopefully not, Starmer has the opportunity to purge the idiots (because they won’t be able to keep their mouths shut) and try and rebuild something electable in the next three years when there should be an open goal due to the incompetence of the incumbents
I hope he won't. That sort of thing was the MO of the whole Momentum / Far-Left group within Labour when Corbyn first became leader. Thankfully he was removed, before they pushed ahead with their whole deselection plan which would have helped them secure the 3rd GE loss under his leadership.
I do think you can unite a Party by just removing everyone who doesn't agree with you. If Labour want a road-map to success they have to at least look at the last time they Won anything, which means bringing up 'New Labour', no doubt to many cries of "war criminal" from the left of the Party.
Despite voting against his own party continually the never tried to Deselect Corbyn, they didn't try to deselect that other hard-left blowhard Dennis Skinner, they actually invited him to join the Cabinet time and time again to give the left a voice, nor did they ever make a move against Tony Benn who seemed to hate New Labour more than the Tories, that old purity of ideology problem again I guess.
Personally, I wouldn't let the like of Diane Abbot or Jeremy Corbyn near the shadow cabinet, as you say, they just can't help themselves. They still believe that the UK will have a suddenly realisation that they were right all along and we'll carry them into power, but we won't. But there should be room for the left of the party and people who can keep their principles whilst not actively trying to bring down their own party in the process.
Has the booting out of JC had a positive effect already?
FFS look at the dates on when the poll was taken
Good point, did not look at that.
If Labour want a road-map to success they have to at least look at the last time they Won anything, which means bringing up ‘New Labour’,
The problem is the left has never forgiven Tony Blair for winning an election.
And in what way does that qualify him to be leader of a political party?
Your words were 'he’s hopelessly unsuited to being in a Party which is supposed to champion the underprivaledged.'. If you want to question his leadership credentials then fine, but you were questioning whether he should be in the party at all.
Actually maybe he shouldn't. If there's one thing I've learned from this whole thing it's that the labour party is a defunct and self-serving organisation which is more interested in grubby political games and mudslinging than helping the poor or fighting for the interests of working people. It's simply not fit for purpose, and needs to be put out of its misery.
Aside from there is repeated evidence of procedures being improved whilst he was in office.
Again many of the “political intervention” examples were his office actually forcing more aggressive action against antisemites.
but it wasn't enough its that simple. Fact is he was in charge when all this happened so its his fault.
The problem is the left has never forgiven Tony Blair for winning an election.
FFS man stop with the trolling.
As far as the public at large are concerned, where there's smoke there's fire. Starmer is just stampimg down on the embers. He knows that he has to divest the Labour party entirely of it's Marxist and anti semitic elements if it's ever going to stand a chance of getting back into Government.
Agree that the Labour Party could do with an Alistair Campbell type figure to control the messaging but not sure if he's needed just yet. There's a purge going on at the moment so simple headlines like RLB gone, Corbyn suspended etc read well in the press. The actions speak for themselves so don't need over explaining.
It's all a bit groundhog day though isn't it. Its Militant Tendency all over again. The harping of the Corybynistas is probably helping Starmer to be honest, doing his comms for him. The more they decry Starmer and separate themselves from the mainstream of the Labour Party the better it is for Starmer, it leaves no skeletons in the cupboard when it comes time to fight the next election.
I'm guessing that most of the Corbyn supporters on here will still vote Labour at the next election. Labour knows there are more votes to be gained in the middle ground than there are to be lost to the far left.
Don't think of politics as a horizontal line, with the Far Left on the left hand side the line and the Far Right on the far right hand side of the line, think of it as a circle, like a clock face with the far left at 11 o'clock and the far right at 1 o'clock. The last two elections have seen the hands of the clock tick past midnight, with traditional, dyed in the wool Labour voters going right wing.
Labour needs to reset the clock to 6 o'clock and fight the battle there.
The problem is the left has never forgiven Tony Blair for winning an election.
Are there other topics where you are arrogant enough to unequivocally claim knowledge of what an entire group of people is thinking?
Are there other topics where you are arrogant enough to unequivocally claim knowledge of what an entire group of people is thinking?
Yes, loads...
It’s simply not fit for purpose, and needs to be put out of its misery.
They call it a 'broad church' but in reality it's a directionless rabble of people who all have their 'vision' of what the party should be. It only takes a small push from the tories in any one of several topics to kick off the in-fighting.
They call it a ‘broad church’ but in reality it’s a directionless rabble of people who all have their ‘vision’ of what the party should be. It only takes a small push from the tories in any one of several topics to kick off the in-fighting.
One thing the Tories have got sussed is that come election time they will compromise on their differences to get elected and then go back to arguing once they're back in power.
A lesson Labour don't seem to be interested in.
It’s all a bit groundhog day though isn’t it. Its Militant Tendency all over again. The harping of the Corybynistas is probably helping Starmer to be honest, doing his comms for him. The more they decry Starmer and separate themselves from the mainstream of the Labour Party the better it is for Starmer, it leaves no skeletons in the cupboard when it comes time to fight the next election.
Didn't work out that well for Neil Kinnock, he purged the fruit loops but still lost. However, Starmer does come across much better.....
I’m guessing that most of the Corbyn supporters on here will still vote Labour at the next election.
Yep, I will. I like Corbyn for his principles, typically being on the right side of things etc,.
He was however shite at being a leader and he was disliked by a lot of the voters whose vote he needed yet I still voted Labour when he was leader as even with him as leader a Labour government would have been a much better thing to have had than what we have now.
I am actually more of a Green party person but that vote is even more a waste of a vote than Labour in my super tory constituency.
I’m guessing that most of the Corbyn supporters on here will still vote Labour at the next election
Or they could get disillusioned and give up voting? But hey who gives a **** about them.
Lets return to the good old days where we had a centrist party chasing the tories ever further to the right. Just think looking by the good start we could end up with US style politics in 20 years or so.
I’m guessing that most of the Corbyn supporters on here will still vote Labour at the next election.
Probably not. It'll be green or not at all. There's no point voting for an organisation which won't change anything.
Or they could get disillusioned and give up voting? But hey who gives a **** about them.
Corbyn certainly doesn't, happy to drag Labour through the mud till his dying breath.
One thing the Tories have got sussed is that come election time they will compromise on their differences to get elected and then go back to arguing once they’re back in power.
A lesson Labour don’t seem to be interested in.
It's much more difficult for them due to the bottom-up structure of the party. Everyone at conference thinks it's their chance to shape the party.
I don't really know the solution. The tories simply don't have that problem.
Why, after 12 years Labour still haven't managed to shake the feeling in the general public that the 2008 crash was their fault, I really can't tell you. Keir doesn't seem to be managing any better than his predecessors in that regard.
Well he may or may not be antisemitic but when I saw this picture of him I just wanted to give him a slap and tell him to wear his effing mask properly
Probably not. It’ll be green or not at all. There’s no point voting for an organisation which won’t change anything.
Sometimes changing nothing (clearly they wouldn't change nothing) is better than a tory party actively changing things for the worse but you carry on helping the tory party.
Why, after 12 years Labour still haven’t managed to shake the feeling in the general public that the 2008 crash was their fault, I really can’t tell you.
It's because labour failed to propose anything different. If we're going to have a neo-liberal small-state deregulated economy, the tories are the natural choice to manage it because they believe in it. Labour want to have their cake and eat it. They criticise the obvious ill effects of neo-liberalism, but then don't propose to change it in any material way. This gives the tories all the ammunition they need to paint labour as unfit to manage the economy. Even under Corbyn and McDonnell they did't really tackle the issue, instead they fell back on outdated Keynesianism rather than pursue more modern and relevant solutions.
For every dazh vote that Labour loses they'll pick up a few more from the centrists that voted Conservative, Lib Dems or those that didn't vote at all last two times.
It did work for Kinnock up until the point he blew it by celebrating victory at the US style celebratory rally just before the votes were cast. He did however manage to purge the party of extremist elements which gave the party a stable platform on which to build.
For every dazh vote that Labour loses they’ll pick up a few more from the centrists that voted Conservative, Lib Dems or those that didn’t vote at all last two times.
The evidence for this is?
If we look at the new labour results they did nicely initially as they kept the traditional voters and added some new ones but then over the next couple of elections they lost massively amongst the core voters.
"Centrists" are a minority. if they werent the Libdems would be a more significant power.
Its fascinating the love of purges the centrists display. After years of announcing it should be a broad church the determination to purge anyone who disagrees with them is a tad hypocritical
but you carry on helping the tory party
Ha! The tory party does require any help from me when the so-called opposition do their job for them.
For every dazh vote that Labour loses they’ll pick up a few more from the centrists that voted Conservative, Lib Dems or those that didn’t vote at all last two times.
Probably true, and nothing will change as a result. I can confidently predict in 10 years time we'll all be on here arguing about exactly the same things, except we'll all be poorer, the rich will be richer, and the people at the bottom will be even more f***** than they are now.
Even under Corbyn and McDonnell they did’t really tackle the issue, instead they fell back on outdated Keynesianism rather than pursue more modern and relevant solutions.
I remember reading some pretty good ideas early on that were encouraging, but they never got any attention in the press. Credit Unions, worker-owned co-operatives, a group of advising economists, etc. Renationalising did get some traction and seemed to be popular, but was too easily dismissed with all the magic money-tree talk.
It’s because labour failed to propose anything different.
There are two things you have to get right to be elected, policies and credibility.
You can all the right polcies, but come across an incompetent and no one will vote for you.
With Starmer they at least have a credible leader.
The sooner JC shuts up and vanishes the quicker Labour can start to put its house in order and sort out a platform for the next GE.
I remember reading some pretty good ideas early on that were encouraging, but they never got any attention in the press. Credit Unions, worker-owned co-operatives, a group of advising economists, etc. Renationalising did get some traction and seemed to be popular, but was too easily dismissed with all the magic money-tree talk.
Yep, right polices, wrong person pushing them.
That's just how it is, if you come across an incompetent, no one cares what you say, they just won't trust you.
He went and did his weekly shift at the local foodbank.
One could see that as part of his path to secularsainthood
Or seeing that he is essentially in charge of his own time whilst getting £80k+ p.a. plus expenses plus funding for an office etc etc it's relatively easy to fit that in your diary especially as it's it's easy voter canvasing
I remember reading some pretty good ideas early on that were encouraging
Some were, but they were still frilling round the edges. 20th century tax-and-spend Keynesianism was still the preferred solution when instead they should have been looking at root and branch reform involving PR, MMT and UBI all being used to deliver a central policy goal of the green new deal. They got the green new deal bit right, but missed the opportunity on the rest. Starmer is going to get it even more wrong. He's allowed the party to turn inwards again and is offering nothing on any of these subjects. It's political cowardice, plain and simple.
Some intersting points here from Richard Murphy on the state of labour - https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2020/10/30/labour-is-life-expired-its-sole-remaining-core-purpose-should-be-to-build-the-new-political-settlement-that-the-country-it-seeks-to-represent-needs/
dissonance,
The evidence for this is 3 consecutive election victories.
YMMV.
The evidence for this is 3 consecutive election victories.
And remind me what happen to the vote share in each? As I pointed out. Its a trick which worked for a time but will work it work again? I doubt it.
The difference between Blair and the "moderates" now is Blair had the political skill to realise it was a deadend. Thats why he walked away and left the mess to everyone else.
So good luck doing it again especially when the rabid "moderates" have made it absolutely clear they want to purge the nonbelievers.
For every dazh vote that Labour loses they’ll pick up a few more from the centrists that voted Conservative, Lib Dems or those that didn’t vote at all last two times.
The evidence for this is?
Well, New Labour - for all it's faults - suggests there might be something in it.
I think all this just shows that we never really did want someone with principles that they stick to in charge. He has admitted some failings but also thinks a lot of the criticism is unfair, so that's what he said. If was a 'better politician' he would have just apologised and shut up like many are demanding.
The fact is we live in a right wing country (England anyway) and Starmer's unimpressive poll numbers in the face of probably the most incompetent government of all time shows all the claims that JC was the problem were well wide of the mark.