Corbyn is highly principled and that is why he is inappropriate for leadership. He has no capacity for the pragmatism. He draws on utopianism as a guiding light and only a few people will fall for it.
Damn you but you may well be right
Jury still out though as still the honeymoon period....actually writing that made me realise you are right...it wont get any better will it 😥
honeymoon period
that would be the quickie behind the NUT bikesheds on the wedding night wouldnt it? 😉
the bike sheds
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Draw me like one of your French girls....
I'm thinking Mr Darcy believes Hilary is pitching for leader after Corbyn has been routed at the ides of March.
I thought it was generally accepted that Corbyn can't resign until he loses in 2020. His mandate makes him hostage to the membership.
So if Benn was making the case for bombing to further his career he's going to have a long wait. But why would being pro-bombing be good career wise? Most of his party are anti-bombing.
I can't see any reason why Benn would be anything but straight on this issue.
I'd like to understand the contrary case.
EDIT: Straight, but wrong, of course.
I think this is more a NUM quickie where they are having it in a large hole they have just dug for themselves 😉
If I hear one more politician say "Moderate forces" I'm going to go crazy with a machette. That is all.
He has no capacity for the pragmatism.
But THM just criticised him for being pragmatic?!
I'm so confused!
Outofbreath - member
...principled...
[img]
[/img]
So if Benn was making the case for bombing to further his career he's going to have a long wait. But why would being pro-bombing be good career wise? Most of his party are anti-bombing.
Benn will be struggling to hide his erection at how important he's made himself look tonight. Sending others to kill people doesn't really matter. I'm sure he realises time is getting on and he needs to position himself sooner rather than later.
I'm going to go crazy with a machette.
If you do, should the police shoot to kill?
Benn will be struggling to hide his erection at how important he's made himself look tonight.
Right, so just to be clear you're saying that Benn did something unpopular with his party for nefarious reasons in order to make him look important.
And that's what you meant by opportunistic.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Nah, they should probably do a poll of crims in the hood they can count on in a rumble. It's the modern way.
If you do, should the police shoot to kill?
I'm going to go crazy with a machette.
If you do, should the police shoot to kill?
To use a recent quote, "I wouldn't be happy about that".
But THM just criticised him for being pragmatic?!
No I didn't. I merely observed...you can make the value judgment
I'm so confused!
No need
No, there's no confusion for you, it's black and white.. 😉
I wonder though - if/when the campaign turns into a shitstorm, it might end up making Corbyn look good.
OTOH if we eliminate ISIS and secure a peaceful Middle East, it will make him look bad. Hmm....
I wonder though - if/when the campaign turns into a shitstorm, it might end up making Corbyn look good.
If it's a shitstorm he can say "told you so".
OTOH if we eliminate ISIS and secure a peaceful Middle East, it will make him look bad.
If the mythical moderates turn up and it ends well he claim that his free vote made it inevitable *and* point out that Cameron waited until he declared a free vote to hold the vote. Chances of this going well are rather low, though. 🙁
Personally I think Corbyn stuck to his principals. He's always ignored the whip so to have tried to impose his will on his own party would have been inconsistent. Plus of course it would have made no difference to the result and as such he's better served hanging on an hoping for better days.
The Labour peer Jeffrey Rooker hits the nail on the head with this statement today about Corbyn, Daesh and the Labour Party
[i]My party leader cannot be accused, like the prime minister, of misleading anyone. He has never, to my knowledge, agreed to protect the realm, the British way of life, or western liberal democracies - and he won’t. We need to get rid of him before we face the electorate and have a leader fit and proper to offer themselves as our prime minister... The case is clear, Daesh is coming for us. They try to use our innate tolerance to undermine us – exactly the same way as the anti-British Trots in the Labour party are using our tolerance to try and get control. The history of Munich tells me not to give in to the easy route. If you don’t fight when under attack, you lose – and we are under attack.[/i]
Plus of course it would have made no difference to the result
I'd question if there would have been a vote if Cameron had to guess how many Labour rebels there would be in a whipped vote. As soon as it was a free vote it was obvious he could win and he called the vote - that suggests Corbyn's decision made a difference.
teamhurtmore - MemberCmon Ernie, you don't really believe this BS do you?
Well I believe what I claim to believe.
In contrast I obviously don't believe all the bullshit which you repeated spout on here concerning you not being a committed Tory voter.
Or your absurd claim of being, quote, "politically neutral" 😆
Hilary Benn, you opportunistic little shite, you.
This. Never have I seen such a blatantly deliberate attempt to further one's own ambitions. You could tell he'd been practising that speech for days. And obviously now the guardian is already promoting him as the next leader. Something tells me though that however much he thinks he's done well, who of the labour party membership are going to vote for someone who was cheered to the rafters by the tories? Corbyn should have whipped the vote and sacked him. In fact he should still sack him now.
Personally I think Corbyn stuck to his principals.
Jesus you've only just realised this? Welcome to the reason that most people voted for him. I do wonder about you sometimes.
You could tell he'd been practising that speech for days
According to the Spectator, he was seen to have been writing it in the chamber whilst listening to the debate...
as always, its often better to listen to the full speech rather than just the potted highlights:
https://soundcloud.com/spectator1828/hilary-benns-rousing-speech-in-favour-of-syrian-airstrikes
Well, the last time I remember Tories applauding someone from the Labour Party, it was Blair wasn't it?
Oh...
The reason for the spontaneous ejaculation from the government benches and the warmongering members of the LP, was that all night, they'd been yearning for legitimacy. And Benn presented it in all its tumescent beauty as, while anointing himself a statesman with the blood of innocent civilians, he gave the Yes vote the illusion of it being the [i]honourable[/i] thing to do. The opportunistic, crass little charlatan shite that he is.
According to the Spectator, he was seen to have been writing it in the chamber whilst listening to the debate...
He probably wasn't sure how he was going to vote.
Clearly he doesn't understand what just happened.The history of Munich tells me not to give in to the easy route.
He has never, to my knowledge, agreed to protect the realm, the British way of life, or western liberal democracies
System justification, the disease that condemns us to war without end.
I watched the whole thing live. The theatrics were ridiculous. Clearly designed to make himself the focus of the debate, rather than the arguments. Not that he had much to say other than 'but we'll look a bit stupid if we don't join in'.
This. Never have I seen such a blatantly deliberate attempt to further one's own ambitions
Well I think he was speaking from the point of principle because the likelihood of deposing Corbyn is tiny. A major change has happened. The Left has control at pretty much every level, assuming Corbyn manages to keep his supporters happy and his health holds up, then it is difficult to see how anyone can unseat him. Over the next five years, the Left's control (or the membership's to be fairer) will become stronger, by the next election there will be sufficient MPs to ensure a left candidate can always get onto the ballot, I really don't see a future for the right of the party.
I really don't see a future for the right of the party.
Can't say I agree. The clamour over the coming months for Corbyn to go will become almost irresistable. And you can see the argument after a clearly unambiguous challenge to his authority that Benn delivered tonight. The fact is Benn could have disagreed quietly on a point of principle, made his arguments and then left it at that. That wasn't what we got though was it?
The Left has control at pretty much every level
Well that's very clearly not true. If Corbyn was knocked off his bike and killed tomorrow the right would immediately regain control. And they certainly wouldn't allow a left-wing candidate to appear on the leadership ballot paper again. The left would be completely powerless. However overwhelming support for a left candidate might be.
Look at the Labour rules, if he doesn't stand down, there is no way to unseat him.
EDIT: EL - I did qualify for health which I think covers for being knocked off his bike.
EDIT 2:
But your analysis is right, you need him to stay on unto the election when with boundary changes etc you should have enough Mps to get a left winger on the ballot.
@dazh supposedly Corbyn's treatment of Benn in the last few days lead Benn to decide to deliberate that type of speech. I was commenting on Corbyns principals as others here seemed to believe he'd ignored them. Corbyn would have lost a whipped vote, had to sack/seen resign shadow cabinet ministers and been left with a genuine chance of being listed as leader. So it was never an option.
@ernie, that's why I was so keen for Corbyn to have a crack at being leader as I thought it would consign hard left politics to the dustbin for decades.
I did qualify for health which I think covers for being knocked off his bike
So you fully accept that if Corbyn were to die that the Labour Party would immediately revert back into the hands of the right-wing, but you still claim that [i]"The Left has control at pretty much every level"[/i]?
How bizarre.
Well I kind of think it is a relatively remote contingency and not sufficient to take into account but worth noting as an assumption. Why are you protesting so much?
(EDIT: You may have missed my second edit, always difficult when the page turns)
I thought it would consign hard left politics to the dustbin for decades.
It's funny how not bombing people is "hard left politics" when it's from the Labour Party but not when it's from the SNP.
I guess there's other ways to scare people from the SNP.
Opps ... it looks like Labour might have a new leader in Hilary Benn ... 😯
Why are you protesting so much?
What am I protesting about?
I wasn't aware that I was.
I wasn't aware that I was.
We may be suffering from cross posts - I can't see how my analysis is that different from yours - do you think there is any reason Corbyn won't survive until the next election?
It's funny how not bombing people is "hard left politics" when it's from the Labour Party but not when it's from the SNP.
Well, we already know their attitude to fascists and terrorists:
I don't think the left control anything within the Labour Party beyond the leadership. The fact that if something were to happen to Corbyn, however remote that might be, the party would immediately and irreversibly revert back into the hands of the right-wing proves this imo.
I don't agree with your claim that "The Left has control at pretty much every level". It has control of the leadership position and that's pretty much it.
Left's position on NEC looks pretty strong to me - but I guess you may differ on definition of Left for these purposes> I do agree you don't have control of the PLP but providing he can withstand that, he will be on the ballot as long as he wants to be.
he will be on the ballot as long as he wants to be.
I have no idea what that means.
Well I kind of think it is a relatively remote contingency and not sufficient to take into account but worth noting as an assumption.
It's not that remote. John Smith died suddenly in (party) office and Tony Blair was elected (party) leader.
Nah, they should probably do a poll of crims in the hood they can count on in a rumble. It's the modern way.
"we believe there at least fifty people irate about the phrase 'moderate forces' who are not waving machetes, and so we propose to provide them with portable missile launchers and light weapons so they can eliminate the machete waver"
t would consign hard left politics to the dustbin for decades.
He is not Blair
that's why I was so keen for Corbyn to have a crack at being leader as I thought it would consign hard left politics to the dustbin for decades.
Since when is Corbyn hard left?
It's funny how not bombing people is "hard left politics" when it's from the Labour Party but not when it's from the SNP.
Isn't it? But as for supporting dictators and terrorists, thats an odd comment what with other party leaders doing deals in deserts, fawning over Pinochet and backing the 'less bad' side in former wars that lead us to where we are today. Al-Megrahi may or may not have committed the crime but it's fair to say that Pinochet, Hussein, and Gadaffi killed many times more people under their watches but still got a free break to do as they pleased so long as their money came our way.