Forum menu
Corbyn seems determined to undermine his own party and keep the Tories in power for the next decade.
So you think if he conceded to the likes of Margaret Hodge and admitted to being a racist, and by proxy the hundreds of thousands of members who support him are racists, that would be an end to the matter? And people accuse the left of being naive?
The reality is that there are two sides. The left demonstrated they were willing to move on by supporting Starmer in the leadership election and his intention to unify the party. The PLP rightwingers and their corporate backers decided they wanted to continue to use the AS issue to run the left out of the party and take full control. You have this the wrong way round.
admitted to being a racist
There was no need for him to do this. Rayner responded well to the EHRC report without having to accept being labelled as a “racist”, and Corbyn could have, and should have, as well. She acted in the best interests of the party, which I happen to believe is also in the best interest of all us here in the UK. I only wish Corbyn had as well.
What’s wrong with saying ‘we are proud of our anti racism but we also need to do better’ instead of this self flagellation about how awful Labour is?
If only Corbyn had had the nous and humility to say that in response to the report....
and admitted to being a racist
at the very least, all he had to say (as Grum pointed out last page) “we’re proud of our record, we will always strive to do better” but what he actually said was “we have nothing to learn especially not from people I don’t like, and are being mean to me, and it’s all a massive plot against me”
dazh - Had he shown any leadership qualities or humility at the point of the original report being published, he would have said something along the lines of sorry this happened on my watch and good luck to my successor in solving the problem. The entire current problem is down to his pathetic comms at the time. It wasn't about him being racist - it was about him being the leader of an organisation which failed to tackle it properly. You know, leadership.
Leadership election is irrelevant. After two heavy election losses, you take your ideology and your personnel and you go away. Your successor shouldn't have to use anything to marginalise you because the voters already did that.
Kelvin do you honestly think Corbyn would have been allowed the same level of acceptance and forgiveness that Rayner has? The only reason Rayner got away with that is because she’s largely irrelevant, and is not the target. Hodge and her fellow right wing travellers have made clear that nothing short of Corbyn being expelled will do, and that is in direct opposition to a majority in the membership. A few MPs on one side, hundreds of thousands of members on the other, it’s a fairly simple equation.
The only reason Rayner got away with that is because she’s largely irrelevant, and is not the target.
She got away with it because, on the day the report was published, she stuck to accepting the (legal) findings of the EHRC report and supporting the implementation of its findings. That was all that any Labour politician should have been doing on that day. Her only slip up was being drawn on Corbyn, and saying that she thought he had a blind spot as regards the problems highlighted in the report... she may well be right, but she should have tried to avoid saying that at the time, it didn't help with the factionalism being fermented by those that will defend Corbyn against anything and everything that they see as an attack on him.
Kelvin do you honestly think Corbyn would have been allowed the same level of acceptance and forgiveness that Rayner has?
He could have at least tried. He never bothered. Instead he made a peevish non-apology and then played the victim. His favourite stance. Given that there were plenty of actual victims here, a stance that was even more distasteful than usual.
He's not stopped digging since. Somebody really needs to take the shovel off him. Unfortunately, instead, he's got his cheerleaders telling him that he's the best shovel-operator EVER and the hole is absolutely bloody brilliant but it needs to be deeper because its such an honest and decent hole
those that will defend Corbyn against anything and everything that they see as an attack on him.
Or those who would defend him against being called a 'f***** racist anti-semite'? Don't get me wrong, there's a lot Corbyn could have done to diffuse the situation, and I agree he could have said something different after the EHRC report came out, but we're talking about trying to compromise against that sort of attack by one of his own MPs. Compromise only works if it's two-sided. I've not seen any evidence that Corbyn's attackers are willing to do that in the interests of unity, quiite the opposite in fact, and that's why the party is now in this mess.
You can’t make people unify. Starmer couldn’t control how Corbyn responded to the EHRC report. Corbyn has left Starmer with two options, BOTH of which would divide the party, and make it less electable. I think Starmer chose the wrong one, but EITHER response, withhold the whip or not, would damage the party. Thank you Mr Corbyn.
Corbyn is now trying to do damage out of spite and grudge holding. Man of principles, eh?
I’ve not seen any evidence that Corbyn’s attackers are willing to do that in the interests of unity, quite the opposite in fact, and that’s why the party is now in this mess
Starmer offered him the chance to just say sorry for his 'exaggeration' claims and he'd be back in the party and taking the whip
That sounds pretty reasonable to me. In fact, given the damage he's caused, probably considerably more than he deserved.
For his troubles, Corbyn threw that back in his face and doubled down instead
Theres only one person to blame here, whether you want to accept that or not.
Starmer offered him the chance to just say sorry for his ‘exaggeration’ claims and he’d be back in the party and taking the whip
I presume you missed the story about what really happened? That Starmer had agreed to let him back in, then Hodge et al kicked off and threatened to resign, and Starmer got cold feet and sided with them. This all happened after Corbyn's clarification and Starmer was fine with it, until Hodge lobbed in a grenade. There are two sides to every battle, so please lets stop with the fiction that this is all on Corbyn.
Poor Jeremy
He's the real victim here.
I can't see why Margaret Hodge is getting so uppity. It's not like she's been on the receiving end of deluges of vile racist abuse or anything, is it?
Oh...wait...hang on a minute....
Party unity.
Corbyn.
Erm...
For his troubles, Corbyn threw that back in his face and doubled down instead
That's simply not true. Corbyn apologised, Keir accepted, then Keir changed tack and withdrew the whip. Keir could have just left it at that, but he didn't.
OFC you'll say that it wasn't a "real apology". But if Corbyn had made a "real apology", you'd have said it wasn't enough, he needed to apologise in person to all the PLP or some shit. Nothing he could have done would have been good enough - the constant misrepresentation (both from the press and the PLP lot) over the last few years is proof of that.
That’s simply not true. Corbyn apologised, Keir accepted, then Keir changed tack and withdrew the whip. Keir could have just left it at that, but he didn’t.
OFC you’ll say that it wasn’t a “real apology”. But if Corbyn had made a “real apology”, you’d have said it wasn’t enough, he needed to apologise in person to all the PLP or some shit. Nothing he could have done would have been good enough – the constant misrepresentation (both from the press and the PLP lot) over the last few years is proof of that.
All he has to say is that he accepts the findings in full
He hasn't said it
Anywhere
At all
Corbyn apologised
If you think that what Corbyn has said at any point would qualify as an actual apology, then you have an odd definition of the word
At no point has he apologised
He has, however, made it all about him and continues to portray himself as the victim. Which given the actual victims here and what they've been on the receiving end of is pretty insensitive, to say the least.
All he has to say is that he accepts the findings in full
So if he did, do you everyone currently criticising would say "OK, no worries. Let's all move on"?
That's naive at best. The next day's news would be full of "Corbyn admits to being antisemite", "Corbyn must resign", "Starmer retains racists in party". There is no way to appease the binners-esque haters, no apology will ever be good enough.
what he actually said was “we have nothing to learn especially not from people I don’t like, and are being mean to me, and it’s all a massive plot against me”
This is the very strawiest of men. He just said he didn't accept all of the report.
Exactly SamB. Meanwhile Margaret Hodge gets to stay in the party and exert influence despite being a tax-dodging darling of the BNP. Never mind that Keir Starmer took £50k from a pro Israeli lobby group with ties to the arms industry, and kept it secret. These are facts, and they don't look good.
It’s not like she’s been on the receiving end of deluges of vile racist abuse or anything, is it?
And it's not like Jeremy Corbyn personally commanded and composed every threatening tweet and email like some would have us believe. Like I said, two sides.
So a conservative voter who wants to vote labour if only they had conservative policies and politicians. Why not just vote conservative instead of feeling guilty about it?
You're having a larf aren't you? Vote for the current a*rseholes! And to make matters worse the actual Conservative candidate I'd be voting for is Gove.
It’s not like she’s been on the receiving end of deluges of vile racist abuse or anything, is it?
I'm sure JC has been on the receiving end of plenty of abuse too, what's your point?
And it’s not like Jeremy Corbyn personally commanded and composed every threatening tweet and email like some would have us believe.
It all happened on his watch. An independent EHRC report was heavily critical of his lack of leadership which allowed it to happen.
To refuse to accept those findings then to make yourself out to be the one deserving of sympathy is pretty offensive all-round really
Still... he's an honest and decent man, apparently. And that's what matters. And Margaret Hodge and the like are just going to have to accept that
So, despite not having been leader for however long, Corbyn still dominates discussion aboh the Labour Party, even in a thread that's titled like this one is.
It depresses me - I've moved left over the last, I dunno-15-20 years, and this just depresses me, because it feels like the bloody tories will be a shoe-in again because a credible opposition can't pull itself together.
Still… he’s an honest and decent man
I've never met him but based on all the evidence that was available before (and after) the AS issue was politicised, I do firmly believe that, as do hundreds of thousands of others in the party. That is after all why he managed to trounce every establishment PLP challenger, and it's why he gave millions hope that for the first time in decades, the political system might just act in the interests of the people rather than a tiny few at the top.
And then that hope was crushed due in most part to people within his own party who decided to politicise and personalise an issue which should never be used in that way, because it not only diminishes the cause itself, but also makes it worse by creating divisions which previously didn't exist. AS existed long before Corbyn became leader, and was much more widespread than just the labour party. You wouldn't really think that now though, because his enemies have managed to turn it into something focused on him and the labour party, and that's pretty tragic.
It’s not like she’s been on the receiving end of deluges of vile racist abuse or anything, is it?
I’m sure JC has been on the receiving end of plenty of abuse too, what’s your point?
that in JC's case none of it was antisemitic, and what we're talking about is antisemitism.
As for give and take, you don't compromise with or choose the bits you like from a report which has a legal status. I'm sure JC's not personally antisemitic and it would not be surprising if he felt bruised by the whole thing. But really, so what?
It depresses me – I’ve moved left over the last, I dunno-15-20 years, and this just depresses me, because it feels like the bloody tories will be a shoe-in again because a credible opposition can’t pull itself together.
Similar thinking here. Too many unwavering opinions and vendettas
It depresses me – I’ve moved left over the last, I dunno-15-20 years, and this just depresses me, because it feels like the bloody tories will be a shoe-in again
So much this. To all the active Labour members on this thread, please, please stop this dragging on and distracting your party and the electorate from the key issue. The ECHR report needs to be the end of it.
It's not about Corbyn. It's not about Starmer. It's not about the Labour party. It's about the future of this country and all who live in it. Get over yourselves and do the right thing.
To all the active Labour members on this thread, please, please stop this dragging on and distracting your party and the electorate from the key issue.
Why do you think its labour members and activists dragging this on? They want it to go away more than anyone.
Lots of valid points above, but one salient fact remains.
The best thing Corbyn can do for the Party he has devoted his life to is to shut up, tip his hat surreptitiously to those who played him and keep quiet. His consolation can be that by doing so he is not carrying on playing the game Labour's enemies want him to.
De Pfeffel has managed to need to self isolate by being a bellend. The government is being exposed as granting hundreds of millions to their mates in unscrutinised PPE contracts. We are about to make a No Deal Brexit in just over a month a certainty.
The whole news agenda should be focussing on what this bunch of crooks and idiots are trying to get away with, but high up the agenda is Corbyn bickering.
The best thing Corbyn can do for the Party he has devoted his life to is to shut up, tip his hat surreptitiously to those who played him and keep quiet.
I'd agree if that guaranteed the end of it, but I don't think for a second it would. Nothing will ever be enough for these people.
I think grandad finally shuffling off to the allotment with a pledge to STFU would be more than enough for everyone
The Tory’s could give him a knighthood for services rendered, to puff up his enormous ego and momentum members could take it in turns to sit and fawn at him by the garden shed and listen to his stories about how he single-handedly ended apartheid.
Daz - you could take up one of your obscenely overpriced IPA’s and he could have a camomile tea and you can plot the green revolution while he tends to his runner beans 😃
The Tory’s could give him a knighthood for services rendered
You seem confused. Johnson have happily rewarded several of the rabid "centrists" who carried out their job for them.
Maybe thats why Hodge is doubling down in order to get into the Lords?
I’d agree if that guaranteed the end of it, but I don’t think for a second it would. Nothing will ever be enough for these people.
I think it's really worth a try.
You seem confused. Johnson have happily rewarded several of the rabid “centrists” who carried out their job for them.
The rabid ‘centrists’ who’ve cut Jeremys parting gift of a 26 point poll down to a 5 point deficit? Those ‘rabid centrists’? The bastards, eh? Making a Labour government infinitely more likely?
Thats why all those Tory’s joined the three quid trots to vote for Jezza after Ed’s monumental **** up in changing the rules
Corbyn came straight from Daily Mail central casting, ticking every Marginal-seat-voter-Terrifying box in the book.
And even when he’s meant to be gone, he’s still he’s the gift that keeps on giving. Doing his upmost to ensure permanent Tory government. Good old Magic Grandad!
I heard they were thinking of renaming Tory central office, Jeremy Corbyn House as a gesture of their appreciation for all his hard work on their behalf
you can plot the green revolution
No chance. Corbyn is light years away from where I am on environmental issues. Any conversation between us would be more like when I used to argue with socialist workers on how they didn't represent the working class and how the power of the state was the problem, not the solution. I could probably get on with McDonnell though, he seems open to new ideas.
The rabid ‘centrists’ who’ve cut Jeremys parting gift of a 26 point poll down to a 5 point deficit?
Wasnt that supposed to be 20 points ahead even before Johnson failed with covid? Amazing how quick the expectations got downgraded eh.
I was thinking of Stuart, Hoey, Mann, Austin and Woodcock. All who got richly rewarded for the dedicated work. Shame couldnt do the same for those devoted people like yourself who served the tories well but never mind.
Jezza goes legal.
**** me rotten.
Is he actually a BNP sleeper agent?
There's no 'I' in team, Jeremy, but there is a 'you' in c***.
The left demonstrated they were willing to move on by supporting Starmer in the leadership election and his intention to unify the party.
Out of all the nonsense posted on this thread this bit stands out. Are you really suggesting that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn fans you claim are still kicking about decided against voting for the Corbyn backed candidate who was going to continue in the same vein as Corbyn and had been his right hand woman all along due to a lust to unite the party? LOL.
No chance. Corbyn is light years away from where I am on environmental issues
jezza would re-open all the coal mines just so he could carry a big banner down a high street in Sunderland once a year
I was thinking of Stuart, Hoey, Mann, Austin and Woodcock
Hoey? Centrist? Hoey the rabid Brexiteer headbanger who spent the referendums campaign sharing a stage with Farage.
The irony of that being that if he hadn’t been accidentally elected labour leader, we all know full well who’d have happily been on that stage with them, railing nonsense about EU armies and federal superstates, don’t we?
Are you really suggesting that the hundreds of thousands of Corbyn fans you claim are still kicking about decided against voting for the Corbyn backed candidate who was going to continue in the same vein as Corbyn and had been his right hand woman all along due to a lust to unite the party? LOL.
RLB gained 135k votes compared with Corbyn's 313k votes in 2016.
She still got less than half the votes Starmer got though.
I guess that means she ‘won the argument’ 😂
I could probably get on with McDonnell though, he seems open to new ideas.
At last! Dazh posts something I can agree with.
= ;87)
She still got less than half the votes Starmer got though.
I guess that means she ‘won the argument’
The point was that some of JC's supporters did go to Starmer, which they quite obviously did.
Jezza goes legal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55001462 /blockquote>
Let's hope for SKS' sake they stuck to the rules then.
Hoey
A good socialist. Of the 'National' kind, that is.
She still got less than half the votes Starmer got though.
Err, that was my point.
So what you’re saying is that Grandads disciples rejected his anointed successor in order to vote for a ‘centrist’
Yes, that sounds like an absolutely credible theory
Or alternatively; there are far fewer Corbynite nutters than the disproportionate amount of noise they make would suggest?
Lots of people who voted for Corbyn as leader voted for Starmer, not Long-Bailey, yes.
Much as you'd like it to be true binners, not everyone who supported Corbyn was a 1970s marxist lunatic. Try to see things in a less cartoonish/childish way, it would really make these threads a lot more bearable.
So what you’re saying is that Grandads disciples rejected his anointed successor in order to vote for a ‘centrist’
Yes branes, that's what I'm saying. It's not exactly difficult to see why people chose Corbyn over Owen Smith.
Or alternatively; there are far fewer Corbynite nutters than the disproportionate amount of noise they make would suggest?
FFS man I've always said the idea that anyone who supported Corbyn was a marxist headbanger was a fantasy that only you have. You've constructed an alternate reality where everyone who voted for Corbyn is a cap wearing, communist manifesto quoting socialist worker. It's all bollocks.
As I've told you before, the vast majority of Corbyn supporters were older working class socialists combined with the younger generation of environmental and human rights acitivists/supporters (like myself) who saw an opportunity to bring their anti-establishment fringe politics into the mainstream. The thing that united them wasn't Corbyn the personality, it was the chance to finally defeat the jaded and cynical politics of the Blair era which resulted in the Iraq war.
As I’ve told you before, the vast majority of Corbyn supporters were older working class socialists combined with the younger generation of environmental and human rights acitivists/supporters (like myself) who saw an opportunity to bring their anti-establishment fringe politics into the mainstream.
That pretty much describes the Labour Party membership, not a section of it. There are a huge number of the membership that do not stick there flag in any camp and who will vote for whichever leader they fancy at the time. The 'left' didn't lend their vote to Starmer, like you say. You over estimate the amount of people that think like you.
Kier on Desert Island Discs this morning , comes across like a pretty nice guy.
They never invited Jeremy to do Desert Island Discs!
#BIASEDMSM
(Just imagine his choices...!)
You over estimate the amount of people that think like you.
I don't think I do, because even when I talk to friends in the party who are more centrist I agree with them on almost everything, even binners! The differences aren't in the membership, it's between the membership and the PLP. It's a simple mathematical fact that huge numbers of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer, as otherwise he wouldn't have won. They didn't 'lend' (stupid phrase BTW!) their votes to him, they supported him on the basis of his promises, which he is now breaking, running the risk of a leadership which doesn't have the ongoing support of the membership. That's not a great place to be if you want to win an election.
I see no promises broken. Unless you refer to "unity"... on which, again... he doesn't control what Corbyn says and does, he just has to pick what he thinks is the least worst of the shitty options Corbyn has left him with... I think he picked the wrong one... but there is no good one... and neither option breaks any promise. Unless you think that "unity" means putting up with whatever Corbyn does, because he's Corbyn.
Unless you think that “unity” means putting up with whatever Corbyn does, because he’s Corbyn.
No I think it means respecting, listening to, and involving 'the left' in the decisions he makes and the direction he takes the party in. I see very little evidence he's doing that, and lots that shows he isn't. At pretty much every juncture, he's taken the side of the PLP right wing and ignored the views of members and activists. If unity means 'do everything we say and shut up' then he's doing a very good job, but ultimately it'll come back to bite him when he needs the membership to do some work for him and he goes into an election with internal divisions and factional infighting.
they supported him on the basis of his promises, which he is now breaking
can you list the policies he's changed? Because I can't think of one.
What he's done is taken party discipline seriously. Jezza picked and chose when he enforced party discipline. If he bothered at all. The drift was allowed the whole AS to fester as the man at the top failed to take the decisive action that was required
What Starmer is doing is providing actual leadership, something Corbyn was either incapable of or unwilling to do. Or in reality, both.
They never invited Jeremy to do Desert Island Discs!
#BIASEDMSM
(Just imagine his choices…!)
what? binners didn't post...
At pretty much every juncture, he’s taken the side of the PLP right wing and ignored the views of members and activists.
throw up some examples then, cos like Binners I can’t think of any off the top of my head
Kier on Desert Island Discs this morning , comes across like a pretty nice guy.
Ah yes the "honest this wasnt focus grouped" but just happened to try and appeal to all the target audiences at once.
Ah yes the “honest this wasnt focus grouped” but just happened to try and appeal to all the target audiences at once.
Whatever. If you accept that the whole thing was a cynical exercise in manipulation (which I don't, only some of it was), it is a still a million times more professional than a bumbling old fool in a tatty sweater.
What would Jezza's choices have been, I wonder.
1.The Internationale, obvs.
2.New World Symphony, but brass pit band only.
3.Every Breath You Take.
4.Something by Wagner.
I reckon that's largely covered it.
it is a still a million times more professional than a bumbling old fool in a tatty sweater.
Yes nothing says professional more than lying through your teeth about what actually interests you and pretending it wasnt carefully chosen. Still I guess dishonesty works for Johnson so might as well follow his lead.
Ah yes the “honest this wasnt focus grouped” but just happened to try and appeal to all the target audiences at once.
They all do it, it's 30 mins of free publicity in a well loved concept which makes you look good no matter what you select.
Nobody is going to sit there and be 100% honest about themselves
Three Lions was an utterly cringeworthy choice! The interview as a whole was interesting though.
Three Lions? Oh dear.
I'll have a listen to that.
Does this go in with the other examples, like David Cameron saying that Eton Rifles was his favourite song to which Paul Weller commented: "which bit didn't he ****ing get?", or Gordon Brown saying he was presently listening to the Arctic Monkeys?
I'm picturing a Thick Of It type meeting where they wargame various song options with Malcolm Tucker 😀
Three Lions? Oh dear.
Just the type of authenticity we need. And they wonder why the public despise politicians.
Actually, now I've had a listen to it and I know the context I'm going to let him off with it.
He's a massive footy fan and player, and it reminds him of being at Wembley for England v Germany
I thought he came across really well overall and it didn't sound focus-grouped at all
Diva by Dana International would have ticked soooooo many boxes.
Missed opportunity there.
He should have picked the Red Flag, what a sell out.
It’s a simple mathematical fact that huge numbers of Corbyn supporters voted for Starmer, as otherwise he wouldn’t have won. They didn’t ‘lend’ (stupid phrase BTW!) their votes to him, they supported him on the basis of his promises, which he is now breaking, running the risk of a leadership which doesn’t have the ongoing support of the membership.
No it's not. I voted for Corbyn but was never a particular fan of his. I also voted for Starmer and he has not really done anything unexpected so far. By your logic everyone who voted for Starmer is now a Starmer supporter, even those who voted for Corbyn. There are far more shades of grey than you seem to realise.
Yes nothing says professional more than lying through your teeth about what actually interests you and pretending it wasnt carefully chosen. Still I guess dishonesty works for Johnson so might as well follow his lead.
Yes nothing says "not wanting to give someone you don't like on ideological grounds credit for anything" like saying they are 'lying through their teeth' whilst having absolutely no idea whether it is true or not.
You stick with Grandpa. Like two completely dissimilar things in a pod.
At the risk of derailing this thread into another circular repeation nightmare.
The left demonstrated they were willing to move on by supporting Starmer in the leadership election and his intention to unify the party.
Labour membership over time:
Undeniably membership jumped hugely under Corbyn. To around 580,000 from around 200,000.
In the leadership voting:
401,564 members voted.
Starmer won in the first round with 225,135 votes, so even if we assume that literally every pre Corbyn member voted for Starmer (and they didn't leave in that period which seems unlikely) then that's potentially an extra 25,000 "Corbyn members" who put Starmer as their first vote. (Affiliates makes this hard to prove)
This is the minimum that could of done that, in reality it's likely way higher than that, and the number of pre Corbyn members that left in the Corbyn years is likely much higher than 0.
It's not hard to believe that a decent chunk of "Corbyn members" switched to Starmer at least as one choice on their votes.
You stick with Grandpa. Like two completely dissimilar things in a pod.
Could we give the ageism a rest?
Could we give the ageism a rest?
Ok, I'll rephrase it.
Keep your ideological 'purity' and thus condemn Labour to be a political irrelevance for another few years.
Undeniably membership jumped hugely under Corbyn. To around 580,000 from around 200,000.
Membership isn't votes in a GE.
Keep your ideological ‘purity’ and thus condemn Labour to be a political irrelevance for another few years.
I see this criticism a lot here but don't know what it means.
You've got more chance of getting elected if you have fewer principles. It is an unfortunate truth that the Tories capitalise on.
I see this criticism a lot here but don’t know what it means.
If you really honestly don't understand the meaning of that phrase, you have no business commenting on a political thread TBH.