My point is that the labour party should be committing its efforts to things it can actually influence
I don't disagree, but I think you massively exaggerate the time and effort people in the labour party devote to Palestine. I can't really ever remember Corbyn talking about it in any detail when he was leader. This is why I say it's been blown out of all proportion by Corbyn's external and internal enemies to destroy him.
Now we have the spectacle of Angela Rayner, the same person who introduced Corbyn in Manchester with glowing praise less than a year ago, now saying anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party. I guess it goes to prove that some people are happy to do and say anything they like to further their careers. I thought Rayner was better than this, and clearly I was massively wrong.
now saying anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party.
where?
I think you massively exaggerate the time and effort people in the labour party devote to Palestine
Remember when flags were banned from the party conference. Well, Union or EU flags anyway...
now saying anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party.
She didn't say anything even remotely resembling that, despite what the usual lefty tinfoil-helmet brigade would have you believe as they soil their petticoats in howling, righteous indignation on Twitter
Funny how many on here are accusing others of being consumed with self interest.
It seems to me the left's obsession with Palestine / Israel is the definition of self interest. The constant bickering provides no solutions for the Palestinians whilst simultaneoisly worsening the issue of anti semitism. All it succeeds in doing is demonstrating how principled one is.
Without skin in the game principles become nothing more than sentimentalism and virtue signalling. I don't believe for a second that those on here advocating for the Palestinian cause care more about their fate than binners. I do however feel that they are more ready to adopt principled positions that allow anti semitism to go unchecked in both the Labour Party and society at large.
^Straight to the jugular.
where?
https://labourlist.org/2020/11/rayner-says-thousands-of-labour-members-may-be-suspended-from-party/
Could you find us the bit where she said, to quote you directly: "anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party"
I've read everything she said and can't find any reference to that at all
There is an OTT obsession with Israel and Palestine on the left and some of it might come from anti semitism, but fundamentally what it comes down to is being on the side of the underdog - the one being pushed around by a hugely wealthy expansionist, religious colonial power.
People who thought that was what the Labour party were supposed to be about are finding it a bit hard to now be told that can get you kicked out of the party. You might not think it's important but to lots of people if we are on the side of the colonial power and we want to keep selling arms to them then what's the point?
Could you find us the bit where she said, to quote you directly: “anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party”
Local party groups are being told motions supporting Jeremy Corbyn or questioning the EHRC reports are not allowed and could be viewed as anti semitic, then she says thousands of members could be kicked out for anti semitism. Not unreasonable to make a connection there is it.
It seems to me the left’s obsession with Palestine / Israel is the definition of self interest.
This is pure doublespeak: mischaracterising "giving a shit" as an obsession. It's possible to hold two or more thoughts simultaneously, just as it's possible to avoid riding the latest bandwagon that facilitates an attack on those who dare to say what they think is right. Now that is the definition of self-interest.
This is pure doublespeak: mischaracterising “giving a shit” as an obsession. It’s possible to hold two or more thoughts simultaneously,
I'm sure everyone posting on the last few pages of this does give a shit about Palestine, and am equally sure no one is being antisemitic. The disagreement is about how labour should handle these issues tactically. That this really has not been helped by he who should not be named would be my view, and also that the leadership seems to be doing their best with an unnecessarily difficult situation. Clearly other views are available.
Could you find us the bit where she said, to quote you directly: “anyone who defends him should be expelled from the party”
Her comments about 'suspending thousands and thousands' (which is a weird phrase in itself, it sounds like she's positively looking forward to it!) are in the context of labour CLPs passing motions for Corbyn to have the whip restored and it making Jewish members uncomfortable. The message to the membership from Rayner and Starmer is loud and clear: Stop defending Corbyn, or be kicked out.
I'm very sorry it makes Jewish members uncomfortable, and I don't doubt for a second they feel that. After Corbyn has been built up into this anti-semitic demon by his political enemies it's hardly surprising. If I were them I'd be asking who benefits from all this. It certainly hasn't done the Jewish community any good, or the labour party, or the wider socialist movement. It seems Rayner is just the latest to work out that it could be good for her career though.
Some of the left's obsession with Palestine and Israel may have anti semitic roots but it also works the other way round in that the obsession can lead unwittingly to furthering anti semitism through ignorance. This is what concerns me most.
I see how the Palestine issue gains traction within the music community and how AS creeps in. There's quite a large hip hop scene in Europe that is full of disgusting AS slurs and I worry that unchecked that sentiment could grow amongst the youth of the UK.
I was equally alarmed to see attemts to graft the Palestinian cause onto the BLM protests. I have a Kenyan in-law who spent some of their school years in both Israel and Lebanon and as a black person she educated me a little when I advocated the typical white European left wing perspective on Israel.
When I say educated me, I mean she gave me a look of withering contempt that I can still remember 15 years later.
Her comments about ‘suspending thousands and thousands’ (which is a weird phrase in itself, it sounds like she’s positively looking forward to it!) are in the context of labour CLPs passing motions for Corbyn to have the whip restored and it making Jewish members uncomfortable.
In the piece you linked what she says is:
“If they think making people feel unsafe or unwelcome in our meetings is a response to the EHRC report, then they need to be out of our party immediately.
Really this is not the same.
The message to the membership from Rayner and Starmer is loud and clear: Stop defending Corbyn, or be kicked out.
They're saying nothing of the sort. I'm sorry Sorry mate, but to interpret it like that is just the sort of tinfoil-helmeted nonsense that seems to fit in so well with the persecution complexes of the left and their need to see everything as part of 'their struggle'.
Well put, MCTD – encapsulates why I’m so depressed about all this infighting…
More worryingly, I'm not a Labour member, nor am I usually a Labour voter.
The more I see and hear this kind of infighting being reported and discussed more than proper policy development, the more likely I am to piss my vote up against the LibDems wall.
You really don't want to look back in 4 years time and regret missing the open goals Boris is giving you, because you are too busy deciding whose turn it is to cross the ball. And I'm directing that at both sides of the debate on here. Corbyn couldn't leave it alone, and neither can his critics.
If they think making people feel unsafe or unwelcome in our meetings is a response to the EHRC report, then they need to be out of our party immediately.
At the same time as threatening to kick out thousands of members, they are literally also saying don't pass motions of support for Corbyn or criticise the EHRC report because it makes Jewish people feel unwelcome - but apparently linking these two directly and obviously related things makes you a conspiracy theorist. You really do talk some utter mince binners.
At the same time as threatening to kick out thousands of members, they are literally also saying don’t pass motions of support for Corbyn or criticise the EHRC report because it makes Jewish people feel unwelcome – but apparently linking these two directly and obviously related things makes you a conspiracy theorist
Is it possible to put forward a motion of support for Corbyn or to criticise the EHRC report, without making Jewish people feel unwelcome?
Is it possible to put forward a motion of support for Corbyn or to criticise the EHRC report, without making Jewish people feel unwelcome?
I don't think anyone has put forward a motion criticising the EHRC report, it's the motions demanding Corbyn be given back the whip which are causing trouble. But in answer to the question, no its probably not possible for Jewish people to feel comfortable with the pro-Corbyn motions because his enemies inside and outside the party have built him up into an anti-semitic hate figure. The genie is out the bottle, and its not going back in.
The EHRC which must not be criticised in any way or you're an anti-semite....
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/30/ehrc-board-member-under-scrutiny-over-social-media-use
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/30/politicising-ehrc-five-controversial-appointments
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/12/equalities-watchdog-drops-plan-for-tory-islamophobia-inquiry
Is it possible to put forward a motion of support for Corbyn or to criticise the EHRC report, without making Jewish people feel unwelcome?
I don't know I wouldn't like to speak for Jewish people or assume they are a homogenous mass.
I don't assume that. Let's say some jewish people present at those meetings. I think it should be possible, especially if they're the ones putting forward those motions. I'd just question whether it's the best use of energy right now.
soil their petticoats
What does this phrase mean? Is it just some cheap sexist remark?
from:
despite what the usual lefty tinfoil-helmet brigade would have you believe as they soil their petticoats in howling, righteous indignation on Twitter
there’s rampant government corruption and incompetence and the small matter of the huge looming recession and mass unemployment on the horizon, with a disastrous Brexit adding to the chaos
And yet Keith doesn't offer up anything like a purposeful position on any of it. You know - he could do this.
Labour consistently fail to change the narrative on neoliberal economics - despite having all of the tools in front of them to strip away the lies of Sunak and Co about the source of Government money.
Remind me - is he still playing a forensic long game?
Starmer whipping his M.P's to abstain on the new tiers, what a waste of space he is, he's not offering any alternative.
Remind me – is he still playing a forensic long game?
Busy pulling splinters out of his arse cheeks, I think.
he’s not offering any alternative.
The reality of centrist 'credible' opposition. Don't rock the boat, don't threaten the interests of vested power and wealth, don't try anything new. We have 4 more years of this before the voters inevitably tell him to do one. What then?
Starmer whipping his M.P’s to abstain on the new tiers, what a waste of space he is, he’s not offering any alternative.
And what alternative are you suggesting then? He has pointed out the 'grave misgivings' he has about the tier system which is why the labour party won't be voting with the government.
From what I can see he only has three options:
1. Support the government
2. Abstain - while giving his reasons for doing so
3. Vote with the ultra-libertarian right of the Tory party to defeat the government on the tier system coming in to place, which then means that legally there are now no restrictions in place at all and everyone can do what they want. And what happens then? This isn't a ****ing game. We're in the middle of a pandemic
Come on then. Lets have your alternative suggestions please...
I'm all ears
I am with Binners here, what options does he realistically have? The last election gave the Tories an 80 seat majority, if the cabinet can't get its policy through with that then there is something very wrong.
Wonder what will happen if there is a vote on a Brexit deal? Will it be the same carp situation? The problem is we have an inept right wing bunch of fools in charge with a massive majority. Times really are rubbish.
3. Vote with the ultra-libertarian right of the Tory party
A shit policy is a shit policy. If that's the labour view then they should vote against it irregardless of whoever else does that. As the opposition it's their job to oppose, if they just agree on everything there's no point in having an opposition.
The other option is to set out what they would do, but as we've seen Keir isn't too keen on declaring where he stands on any issue, let alone covid restrictions.
He has pointed out what he would do.
1. Continue lockdown with tiers in place
2. Provide business with the support they need
3. Fix test and trace
Wonder what will happen if there is a vote on a Brexit deal? Will it be the same carp situation?
I think there will be some horrible arrangement that avoids the complete chaos of crashing out on WTO terms, which the government appear to have done zero real planning for, (expect Kentish truck parks and telling businesses they need to prepare) and then yes Labour will have not real choice but to abstain. Can vote for a shit deal, but the alternative is worse.
As the opposition it’s their job to oppose, if they just agree on everything there’s no point in having an opposition.
They're abstaining, which isn't supporting the government.
So let me get this straight...
You lot who spend your lives railing against neoliberal capitalism and advocating the wonders of socialism now want Keir Starmer to vote against the government so that a hardcore of ultra-neoliberal, right wing free-marketeers can throw open the economy and open everything up with no restrictions so that their mates can get back to making money?
Thats it, right? Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant!
Well, that'll bloody show Boris who's boss and a grateful nation will thank the labour party for that when their boss phones up and tells them to get back in the bloody office NOW or they're sacked?
Clearly you've really thought this through, haven't you? Socialism, eh? Bloody fantastic!
And Starmer has made a statement this morning saying exactly what Labour would do differently (see post above)
And what alternative are you suggesting then? He has pointed out the ‘grave misgivings’ he has about the tier system which is why the labour party won’t be voting with the government.
Yes, his misgivings are so grave that he's going to do nothing to stop it happening. I think we all know how this dithering would be viewed if it were the previous leader.
And Starmer has made a statement this morning saying exactly what Labour would do differently (see post above)
I'll ask again...
You want him to whip his MPs to vote against the government?
You realise what that would result in, right? You've actually thought that far ahead?
You know who the Tory rebels are, right? What they represent? Who's interests?
You're aware that it would bring a victory for a hardcore of ultra-neoliberal, right wing free-marketeers to throw open the economy and open everything up with virtually no restrictions so that their mates can get back to making money?
Well, that'd be a real 'victory' for the people labour are meant to represent, wouldn't it?
Christ on a bendybus! You wonder why I constantly accuse you lot of 6th formal levels of reasoning? I know primary school kids who could display more effective rationale than that
We'll all vote against the government, because.... erm... errrr just BECAUSE!
Oh.... actually .... thats not really worked out that well, has it?
Yes, his misgivings are so grave that he’s going to do nothing to stop it happening. I think we all know how this dithering would be viewed if it were the previous leader.
What choice does he have given the Tories 80 seat majority? When JC was leader there was not a Tory majority so Labour would have been in position to have done something. See Brexit mess as an example of JC's fence sittign and dithering.
Yeah, you're quite right. It's only a matter of extreme national importance, so why would you support or oppose it. He's only the leader of the opposition, after all.
The real travesty here is that he had a real opportunity to negotiate with the government: the size of the tory rebellion is such that the Government may actually need Labour.
Of course, Boris knows full well that Starmer hasn't the courage to say anything beyond "please don't hurt me". This is exactly the kind of crap you'd be all over it it was Corbyn.
now want Keir Starmer to vote against the government so that a hardcore of ultra-neoliberal, right wing free-marketeers can throw open the economy and open everything up with no restrictions so that their mates can get back to making money?
Don't be stupid. What I want is for him to get off the fence and propose a real, viable alternative that will both protect people from the virus and the economic fallout. The only way to do that is a massive programme of direct support from the government for people and businesses in the form of UBI and govt grants to businesses to cover their overheads. It requires nothiing less than the govt under-writing the economy for however long is necessary to beat the virus and get back to normal. But that's not what Keir is proposing is it? He's not proposing anything different to Boris, and is instead only interested in the optics of being 'responsible' and 'credible' so that he doesn't lose the support of his corporate sponsors.
What choice does he have given the Tories 80 seat majority?
So you're saying it makes no difference? Then why would opposing it matter?
What happens if govt is defeated, stick in lockdown or free-for-all? If the latter Starmer has undoubtedly done the right thing because, if they voted against the tiers, the subsequent rise would be blamed on labour.
What I want is for him to get off the fence and propose a real, viable alternative that will both protect people from the virus and the economic fallout
Quite. He could start by tabling an amendment and voting for that: at least we'd have some idea of what he wanted for the country. But that seems to be beyond Captain Ditherer. I actually had him as my second preference for leader and have to say that I've been bitterly disappointed so far.
So you’re saying it makes no difference? Then why would opposing it matter?
Opposing it shows support for the 2nd crappy option, and sides you with the ultra right lunatics of the Tory party.
Voting with screws over business as they haven't got the support they require.
Abstaining says both options are crap and shows the split in the Tory party because if they can't get a policy through with an 80 seat majority there is something wrong.
If the option was a poop sandwich on brown or white bread would you expect someone to choose?
Quite. He could start by tabling an amendment and voting for that: at least we’d have some idea of what he wanted for the country
Why? To achieve what, exactly?
A total waste of time. Labour has no chance of getting any amendments on the bill and Starmer knows it. It'd be self-defeating, pointless tokenism, but then the left is rather fond of that type of thing.
There are only two outcomes here:
1. Boris gets his bill through
2. Boris is defeated and the far-right ERG uber-libertarian headbanger wing of the Tory party get their victory and its open up the economy, herd immunity and overflowing ICU departments
Hmmmmmmmm .... it's a real dilemma as to which option the Labour party should enable, isn't it?
A total waste of time. Labour has no chance of getting any amendments on the bill and Starmer knows it.
So on the one hand, the Tories may need Labour's support or abstention to pass the bill. On the other, Labour has no influence over its contents.
I'd stick to the crayons.
