Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    10 Dec '16 18:03
    For those of you who are interested in what a 25% poll rating for Labour means in practice, here's the swingometer: http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/2015/united-kingdom?CON=42&LAB=25&UKIP=12&LD=11&GRN=4

    Amongst others, Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East, Wirral West and Berwickshire will all fall to Theresa May.

    My question is this: given that this is the worst poll rating of any opposition party since 1983, and that his personal and party ratings have actually sunk further since he won the second leadership contest, what lessons can Jeremy Corbyn learn from Michael Foot to improve his electoral performance?
  2. 10 Dec '16 18:10
    Corbyn seems determined to lead Labour to a defeat at the polls before resigning.
  3. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    10 Dec '16 18:26 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Corbyn seems determined to lead Labour to a defeat at the polls before resigning.
    I'm honestly not sure he'll resign, particularly if we lose 50 seats. Personally I think we'll lose more, I'd have assumed once that 25% is as low as we could go, but now we have a leader who is both invisible and inaudible, I think we could fall to low double figures.

    One interesting historical note is that Michael Foot polled consistently better than Corbyn, and the '83 result was 27.6% to Labour. We really have to find a better analogy to fully express the complete egregiousness of Corbyn's misrule: you can't compare him to Lansbury, the other frequent comparison, because he never made it to the '35 election. The nearest you can get is to William Adamson, who received 21.5% in 1918. That's where we are now - Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is performing more comparably to the party as it was in 1918 than it was in 1983, but if he ups his performance he could conceivably reach the dizzy heights of the period when Healey and Foot debated bilateralism and unilateralism and John Golding mounted the fightback on the NEC against the same people who have just taken control of Momentum.
  4. 10 Dec '16 18:39
    Originally posted by Amaurote
    I'm honestly not sure he'll resign, particularly if we lose 50 seats. Personally I think we'll lose more, I'd have assumed once that 25% is as low as we could go, but now we have a leader who is both invisible and inaudible, I think we could fall to low double figures.
    I would like to see more countries with invisible leaders. The voting should focus more on policy than personality. Are the ratings mostly about personality or does the party also have unpopular policy?
  5. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    10 Dec '16 18:59 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I would like to see more countries with invisible leaders. The voting should focus more on policy than personality. Are the ratings mostly about personality or does the party also have unpopular policy?
    You know, I'm as sceptical as anyone about the cult of personality, and I really admired Nielsen's The Myth of Leadership a few years' back, but as over-rated as they are, Occupy-models of leadership just don't work in parliamentary politics - which is why the UK Green Party switched to a leadership model and why Momentum are ironically split between a hard left group who seek digital democracy and a far left group that prefer analogue committee meetings with a more authoritarian structure. But in practice Corbyn's leadership is no less traditional than previous leaders, because he uses the same whip structure plus the threat of deselection to impose his will.

    On policy, it varies. Most of his policies are the same as Ed Miliband's were, and those remain quite popular with the public, but on the economy and unilateralism and security issues his ratings are toxic. Another irony is that he's portrayed as a radical, but some of his proposals are further right than his predecessors' and people on the soft left - for example, refusing to offer a cut in the top rate of tax when Kezia Dugdale proposed it in Scotland, and signing the party up to the austerian Fiscal Charter. On the key issue of the day, immigration, he is absolutely toxic.

    As a guild socialist I quite like the model you propose, but you can't do it in one party autonomously in a parliamentary democracy. Reality is the media is looking for a salesman/saleswoman or a persuader-in-chief. I always felt a hard left leader was a stretch, to be honest, but if we were to pull it off we needed an attacking hard left figure to sell that agenda, like a Ken Livingstone, or a charming and eloquent one, like Lisa Nandy or Clive Lewis. What we have is a pleasant, anodyne, dessicated figure who is more interested in talking about foreign policy, and some of whose supporters clearly veer off into antisemitism, as witness the Rothschild slurs from this heckler (heckling a heckler, amusingly) earlier today:

    https://twitter.com/JonIronmonger/status/807550636065755136
  6. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Dec '16 11:09 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Amaurote
    You know, I'm as sceptical as anyone about the cult of personality, and I really admired Nielsen's The Myth of Leadership a few years' back, but as over-rated as they are, Occupy-models of leadership just don't work in parliamentary politics - which is why the UK Green Party switched to a leadership model and why Momentum are ironically split between a hard ...[text shortened]... ckler, amusingly) earlier today:

    https://twitter.com/JonIronmonger/status/807550636065755136
    "he uses the same whip structure plus the threat of deselection to impose his will."

    False: just a lie.

    " signing the party up to the austerian Fiscal Charter."

    Corbyn is anti austerity to the core. You are hanging onto to a soundbite from the past, when he still sought backing from the PLP. You are also ignoring the continuing evolution of economic thinking under McDonnell.

    "As a guild socialist I quite like the model you propose"

    I am not sure what a 'guild socialist' is these days when it's at home. Are you?

    "Heckler heckling a heckler"

    Just a cheap point scoring attack. This is not an argument and the anti semitism slur has been falsified (proven false) so many times it is tiresome. What has been proven also is the extent of Israeli state involvement in the propogation of this slur against its critics and the extent of Isreali financial support to members of our parliament. Remember antisemitism is not unwelcome to the Isreali state as it helps sustain the illusion of an existential threat which feeds their totatilitarian control. Fear is the tool of fascists.

    You are unable to lift your head out of slur and innuendo. Your account of what Corbyn is or does or stands for is patently nonsensical

    I quite agree though that Labour is in dire straits. I attribute this to the persistent and vicious efforts of the Third Way politicians in the PLP to destroy the party rather than tolerate its rejection of their neoliberal positions. A split party will not win prizes. It does not follow that the Left should abandon its own principles and aspirations in preference for the failed and destructive, anti-democratic anti-politics of Third Way Labour.

    Do we really need a charismatic "Leader" for Labour? The choices on offer until now hardly fit that bill and I remain supportive of the one decent leader we have got. The day our media start backing him will be the day I start to worry about him.
  7. 11 Dec '16 11:39
    Originally posted by finnegan
    "he uses the same whip structure plus the threat of deselection to impose his will."

    False: just a lie.

    " signing the party up to the austerian Fiscal Charter."

    Corbyn is anti austerity to the core. You are hanging onto to a soundbite from the past, when he still sought backing from the PLP. You are also ignoring the conitnuing evolution of econo ...[text shortened]... er we have got. The day our media start backing him will be the day I start to worry about him.
    The Green party of Canada have adopted a boycott of Israeli products and companies. The list made for rather telling reading, some of the products made on land illegally seized and its inhabitants expelled. Why this should be controversial I do not know. Was not the boycott of South Africa a valid way to bring pressure to bear on apartheid?
  8. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Dec '16 11:43
    Originally posted by Amaurote
    For those of you who are interested in what a 25% poll rating for Labour means in practice, here's the swingometer: http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/2015/united-kingdom?CON=42&LAB=25&UKIP=12&LD=11&GRN=4

    Amongst others, Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East, Wirral West and Berwickshire will all fall to Theresa M ...[text shortened]... st, what lessons can Jeremy Corbyn learn from Michael Foot to improve his electoral performance?
    More psephological rocket science. Hardly groundbreaking stuff.

    Wirral West has been marginal for decades if not forever but it will not be so in the next election as it will have been gerrymandered into a new, safe Tory seat as part of the boundary changes now underway. This is unlikely to be much influenced by the leadership of the Labour Party.

    I wonder how many of the other consitutencies listed are subject to the same process - certainly there are many around the country as you know. Yes - boundary changes will indeed fix things for the Tories very nicely.
  9. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Dec '16 14:19
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    The Green party of Canada have adopted a boycott of Israeli products and companies. The list made for rather telling reading, some of the products made on land illegally seized and its inhabitants expelled. Why this should be controversial I do not know. Was not the boycott of South Africa a valid way to bring pressure to bear on apartheid?
    http://breakingdownthnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/open-letter-to-tom-watson-from-labour.html

    Dear Tom Watson,
    We write as both Jewish and non-Jewish members/ supporters of the Labour Party.
    We read with interest your speech to guests at the Labour Friends of Israel luncheon recently and watched the video of you singing ‘Am Yisrael Chai’. Perhaps you are not aware that this is the favourite chant of West Bank settlers and the fascist/neo-Nazi Jewish Defence League when attacking Palestinians and those they disagree with?
    You began your speech by saying that you supported Israel because ‘our consciences dictate it’. If you had a conscience you would not have spoken of your ‘special pleasure’ at the presence of Mark Regev, Israel’s Ambassador who, as-Chief Spokesman for Benjamin Netanyahu, defended Operation Protective Edge in Gaza in 2014 when 2,251 Palestinians were killed, including 551 children.

    You said that you were ‘ashamed’ at the ‘anti-Semitism in our midst’. Let us reassure you that although you have much to be ashamed of, anti-Semitism is not one of Labour’s sins. Anti-Semitism does not exist as a political force in the Labour Party. It never has and never will. Those who have been suspended for ‘anti-Semitism’, in particular, Ken Livingstone, Jackie Walker, and Tony Greenstein, have been suspended for supporting the Palestinians, not because of anti-Semitism. It is no coincidence that both the latter two are Jewish anti-Zionists.

    You mentioned your recent, expenses paid trip to Israel recently, where you met the Chairman of the Israeli Labour Party Isaac Herzog. You spoke of his ‘determination to continue to push the path of peace’. Is this the same Herzog who, Ha’aretz reports, pushed for ‘Separation From Palestinians as (the) Party Platform’? In other words an apartheid solution with a Palestinian Bantustan?

    I find it difficult to understand, in view of your purported opposition to anti-Jewish racism, why you turn a blind eye to Herzog’s virulent anti-Arab racism? Herzog recently spoke of his fear of waking up to a Palestinian Prime Minister in Israel. He said:
    ‘I want to separate from the Palestinians. I want to keep a Jewish state with a Jewish majority. I don’t want 61 Palestinian MKs in Israel’s Knesset. I don’t want a Palestinian prime minister in Israel.’

    The Jerusalem Post reported how Herzog had spoken about dispelling the false impression that the ILP were ‘Arab Lovers’

    If a member of our Labour Party had spoken about their nightmare of a Jewish Prime Minister or had talked about ‘Jew lovers’ then you would certainly have had cause to complain of anti-Semitism.

    You quoted Yehuda Bauer: “thou shalt not be a bystander.” Unfortunately, you then went on to demonstrate just how lightly the lessons of the Holocaust weigh upon your conscience. You stated that Israel was ‘A vibrant democracy… a state which strives for equality between … Jew and Arab.’

    Perhaps you would care to explain how this is compatible with the pending demolition of Umm al-Hiran, a Bedouin village in the Negev, in order to make way for a Jewish town? Or why half the Arab villages in Israel are ‘unrecognised’ and therefore liable to demolition at a moment’s notice?

    According to Defence for Children International between 500 and 700 Palestinian children a year, as young as 12, are arrested, interrogated and beaten without any right to see a parent or lawyer. Held indefinitely, they are deprived of sleep, shackled and charged in a language they don’t understand.

    Because there are two separate legal systems on the West Bank, this cannot happen to Jewish children. Perhaps you could explain how this is compatible with a ‘vibrant democracy’ and why this is not an apartheid society?

    Israel is a Jewish state, i.e. a state in which Jews have privileges over and above non-Jews. This manifests itself on Jerusalem Day in mobs chanting ‘Death to the Arabs’ as they march through the Arab quarter. Fascist groups like Lehava, which campaign against sexual relations between Arabs and Jews are state-funded. Today in Jerusalem, without interference from the police, gangs of Jewish fascists go around attacking Arabs under the pretext of ‘protecting’ Jewish women.

    Because Israel is a Jewish state opposition to African asylum seekers has taken the form of pogroms and lynchings. According to Netanyahu, illegal African immigrants threaten the identity of the Jewish state. In the words of Culture Minister Miri Regev, "the Sudanese are cancer in our body." Later she apologised to cancer victims for having compared them to asylum seekers! Your good friend Herzog has been part of this racist consensus, attacking Eritrean refugees as bogus asylum seekers.

    Apologists for Zionism always refer to Israel’s Arabs having the vote. This is, of course, true but Israel is a state of its Jewish citizens and democracy doesn’t simply mean having a vote every few years but civic and political equality regardless of ethnicity or religion. When you are treated as an alien in your own country that is not democracy but ethnocracy. A state where torture is legal, censorship is routine and detention without trial for one ethnic group is routine (Arabs) is not a democracy.

    It is, therefore, no surprise that in Israel’s ‘vibrant democracy’ a plurality of Jewish Israelis (48%-46% ) [Pew Research Centre Survey, Israel’s Religiously Divided Society], favour the physical expulsion of Israel’s Arabs and no less than 79% believe that Jews are entitled to preferential treatment.

    You refer to your and LFI’s support for 2 States. After 50 years of occupation and settlement, a Palestinian state is not possible. 2 states is a smokescreen for the continued military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and a pretext for Israeli Apartheid. At no time have either you or LFI ever called for an end to the military occupation of Palestinian territories.

    You condemn Boycott Divestment and Sanctions but the Boycott of repressive and racist regimes has a long pedigree. From the Boycott of slave-grown sugar in the West Indies to the Boycott of Nazi Germany (which the Zionist movement broke) to the Boycott of South African Apartheid, BDS has always been the most moral of movements. Just as Thatcher and Reagan opposed the Boycott of Apartheid South Africa yesterday, so you and LFI oppose the Boycott of Zionist Apartheid today.

    Perhaps you have forgotten that it was Israeli Labour governments who supplied weapons to South Africa in breach of the UN Arms Embargo? That it was an Israeli Labour government which invited John Vorster, the South Africa Premier, who had been interned during the war for Nazi sympathies, on a state visit to Israel? [Brothers in arms - Israel's secret pact with Pretoria]

    If you were at all sincere in your support for a Palestinian state, then you would support pressure upon Israel via a Boycott. The fact that you, the Israeli Ambassador and Labour Friends of Israel, an uncritical Israeli support group, oppose Boycott demonstrates your insincerity and hypocrisy.

    You said ‘Let’s have no more parallels drawn between today’s tragic conflict in Israel-Palestine and the blood lands of central and Eastern Europe.’ You appear to forget that it is the advocates of Zionism who make such comparisons. From Menachem Begin equating Yassir Arafat in the siege of Beirut to Hitler in his bunker to Netanyahu’s comparison of Iran with Nazi Germany orDeputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai promising the Palestinians of Gaza a ‘bigger Shoah’

    Zionism has always equated the Palestinians with the Nazis. When the Israeli Right marches to the drumbeat of ‘Death to the Arabs’ it is difficult not to recall similar marches in Europe when the chant was ‘Death to the Jews’.

    Despite your attempts to equate anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, it is clear from what is happening in the United States that anti-Semites are the most fervent supporters of Israel. Donald Trump, whom Herzog has welcomed to power, has appointed open anti-Semites like Steve Bannon of the alt-Right as his advisors. This does not appear to trouble you or Labour Friends of Israel for some reason.

    When you say that ‘The BDS movement is morally wrong’ you betray your real concern is to support the US’s watchdog in the region. BDS is an entirely moral response to Israel’s immoral Occupation.
  10. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    11 Dec '16 18:57
    Originally posted by finnegan
    "he uses the same whip structure plus the threat of deselection to impose his will."

    False: just a lie.

    " signing the party up to the austerian Fiscal Charter."

    Corbyn is anti austerity to the core. You are hanging onto to a soundbite from the past, when he still sought backing from the PLP. You are also ignoring the continuing evolution of econo ...[text shortened]... er we have got. The day our media start backing him will be the day I start to worry about him.
    Bit confused about your first objection: it isn't controversial to state that Corbyn is a traditional Labour leader of the orthodox hard left, and as such he uses the same threats of the whip and deselection to get his way. I think he's quite right to do this - I don't think he whips particularly effectively (yesterday he gave a speech on womens' right and failed to announce a whip for the corresponding division this week, which is pretty typical of his snafus), but he's done it scores of times since he became leader, most notably on the vote on Syrian air strikes. He's even brought back Nick Brown, Blair's Chief Whip, to help him. That's right - Blair's Chief Whip. Ditto the threats to deselect Hillary Benn by his shock troops, which McDonnell and Corbyn could end immediately if they wanted, but have repeatedly refused to: nothing wrong with that. Ditto his use of boundary changes to impose unity. Source: http://uk.businessinsider.com/corbyn-supporters-are-poised-to-deselect-hilary-benn-2016-11

    "Corbyn is anti-austerity to the core". And so on. The Fiscal Charter is not "a soundbite", it's a critical choice made by Corbyn and McDonnell to restrict themselves to balancing the books. It's a profoundly pro-austerity policy. And far from being a sop to "the Blairites", most of the right of the Labour Party were horrified that he'd been so regressive. There was no need to do it at all - he chose to do it. And the "Blairite" (actually centre-left, Milibandite) Kezia Dugdale opted to increase higher-rated taxes in Scotland a few months ago. McDonnell and Corbyn and Sturgeon, those heroes of "anti-austerity", refused. That's your "continuing evolution of economic thinking" under McDonnell. To further illustrate the incoherence, naivete and imaginary leftiousness of Corbynista thinking, here's a record of phonecall Ed Balls' former advisor took from a pro-Corbyn canvasser last year:

    Caller: Hi I am calling from Jeremy Corbyn's leadership campaign have you got a moment to speak.
    Me: Oh yes.
    Caller: Great. Have you made up your mind how you are going to vote in the Labour leadership election.
    Me: No, not yet.
    Caller: Oh. And why is that?
    Me: Well... I like some of what Jeremy is saying. And I voted for him last time [a little white lie...] But I am very worried about the polls.
    Caller: Yes I think Jeremy hasn't really had a chance to lead though.
    Me: Sure, but what is his plan to turn things around in the polls.
    Caller: Well there is a populist mood out there at the moment as we saw with Brexit and with Trump and the SNP and Jeremy is able to tap in to that.
    Me: Really?!
    Caller: Yes
    Me: Trump?
    Caller: Well in the sense that there's an anti-establishment mood and he is anti-establishment.
    Me: Oh. But what kinds of things is he going to say to appeal to this mood? What's his approach to these people going to be?
    Caller: Well he is anti-austerity.
    Me: So he's not going to say stuff like Trump then?
    Caller: Oh no goodness I didn't mean that he was actually like Trump!
    Me: Sure sure. But what is he for then?
    Caller: He is anti-austerity and...
    Me: Yes that is true. But what is he for?
    Caller: Well austerity is causing a lot of anger and is hitting people's wages and incomes and housing and he will stand up for them.
    Me: Is being anti-austerity a new thing.
    Caller: No he has always been anti austerity.
    Me: Oh. It doesn't seem to be working. But also hasn't the Labour Party always been anti-austerity?
    Caller: No Jeremy has changed that
    Me: But didn't Gordon Brown in 2009 bring all the G20 leaders together and commit them all to a growth plan to get us out of the financial crisis rather than to all cut back. I thought Labour had been anti-austerity since 2009?
    Caller: Well I don't remember that, but Ed Balls.
    Me: What about Ed Balls?
    Caller: Well he was arguing for cuts
    Me: Isn't that what john Mcdonnell is arguing for?
    Caller: No
    Me: But hasn't john mcdonnell said he wants to have the same fiscal rule as Ed Balls?
    Caller: I'm not sure but...
    Me: I think they have both said that they want to eliminate the current budget deficit but leave space for borrowing for capital?
    Caller: Yes but there is a much bigger emphasis on investment, john mcdonnell wants to invest
    Me: What in?
    Caller: Well in growing the economy
    Me: Ok.. so by?
    Caller: Well housing for a start - social housing not just so called 'affordable' housing.
    Me: Ok. Has he got a target for how many?
    Caller: Oh I don't know good question just let me have a look.
    Me: Say 200,000 or so?
    Caller: I... um...
    Me: I only ask because it was in the 2015 manifesto you see so i'm trying to work out whether this is anything different...
    Caller: Oh right. Well I think there's obviously more areas. Is there anything else you're worried about?
    Me: Oh that's not a problem. Yes there was one other thing. I am Jewish you see, and I am very worried about all of this anti-semitism.
    Caller: Yes. Jeremy obviously is against any form of discrimination.
    Me: Well yes, I would expect that. But what is his plan to deal with the issue as a whole?
    Caller: Well obviously Jeremy condemns anything like that.
    Me: Ok.
    Caller: Is there anything else?
    Me: (arriving at the pub) No thanks that was very helpful.
    Caller: Do you know when your nomination meeting is?
    Me: Yes, thanks, bye


    Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/supporter-jeremy-corbyn-ed-balls_uk_5798d809e4b0796a0b6139c5
  11. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    11 Dec '16 19:05 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by finnegan
    More psephological rocket science. Hardly groundbreaking stuff.

    Wirral West has been marginal for decades if not forever but it will not be so in the next election as it will have been gerrymandered into a new, safe Tory seat as part of the boundary changes now underway. This is unlikely to be much influenced by the leadership of the Labour Party.
    ...[text shortened]... e country as you know. Yes - boundary changes will indeed fix things for the Tories very nicely.
    Nope, boundary changes account for only 18 losses to Labour. Tory gerrymandering aside, which they're pastmasters at, it's pretty academic with poll ratings and electoral results like this: Corbyn has no strategy, is invisible, is inaudible, cannot persuade, does not want to persuade, and refuses to engage with debate as they present, let alone anticipate them. You don't need to be "charismatic" to do that, you just need to lead. Wilson did it. John Smith did it. Neil Kinnock did it. The evil demon-king Tony Blair did it. Even Ed Miliband did it on energy regulation and windfall taxes, which is why his poll rating rose to 40% mid-terms last parliament. 40%, 15 percentiles above our current position - Corbynistas would get nosebleeds if we polled that high.

    On the plus side, Diane Abbott has just promised that we'll be neck-and-neck with the Tories by next December. Remember that, everyone. That's a Corbyn promise: https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/81620/diane-abbott-labour-will-be-neck-and-neck-tories
  12. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    11 Dec '16 19:24 / 1 edit
    As for guild socialism, yes, I am sure, thanks. More of an SG Hobson man than a GDH Cole man, but I think "National Guilds" and "Self-Government in Industry" are equally great disquisitions/analyses of the subject. Hobson was more literary and a more impressive activist, but more accurate on the nature of wage slavery, while Cole, more cold-blooded and cerebral, was better on the nature of functional democracy and the thermostatic state. I'm less keen on modern parecon ideas, but even where they probably don't work, like job complexes, I think there's much we can learn from the movement. Albert is a terrible writer, though.

    Not sure why you're invoking Tom Watson as a Little Satan to sit aside your Great Satan, "the Third Way". Very few Blairites in the party, and Watson is the classic example of a Brownite. His ideas on the economy are a bit to the right for me, but his record on FOI requests, transparency, the expenses scandal and uncovering the child abuse scandal in parliament are fantastic. Presumably the hard left are still a bit miffed that he went to Israel at the government's invitation as a diplomatic gesture after the outbreak of anti-semitism in our party, along with (amongst others) Ruth Smeeth, who received 25,000 antisemitic insults and threats. He went because Jeremy Corbyn "wasn't available" (he never is). I'm pretty sure you can't be accusing him of guilt by association for merely singing a song with members of the Israeli government: after all, if you did you'd presumably have to by inference accuse Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell of being terrorists for sharing a platform with the IRA. And Watson sang a song. A song. He didn't proclaim his solidarity with Haganah or Irgun. He didn't even proclaim his sorrow for terrorists killed in the commission of an act of terror, like Corbyn after Loughall. He didn't advocate the "honouring" of IRA bombers, like John McDonnell. A song. And for that they get a pass, and you're ready to rhetorically lynch him. Just as that anti-Semitic Corbyn supporter on the clip you've just ignored is ready to lynch Peter Tatchell for mentioning a civil aid group that Jo Cox supported before her murder by a far-right lunatic.
  13. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    11 Dec '16 19:29 / 1 edit
    Incidentally, when I clicked on that breakingdownthenews site it linked to stories about David Icke. Strange bedfellow for someone on the left, normally, but nowadays, reptoid/antisemitic tropes, irrelevant references to Zionism - probably par for the course, so by all means carry on.
  14. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    12 Dec '16 09:14
    Originally posted by Amaurote
    Bit confused about your first objection: it isn't controversial to state that Corbyn is a traditional Labour leader of the orthodox hard left, and as such he uses the same threats of the whip and deselection to get his way. I think he's quite right to do this - I don't think he whips particularly effectively (yesterday he gave a speech on womens' right and ...[text shortened]... tp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/supporter-jeremy-corbyn-ed-balls_uk_5798d809e4b0796a0b6139c5
    On deselection and anti austerity you are just insisting on continuing shismatic abuse of Corbyn without in reality supporting your claims. Verbosity does not equate to reasoning. You are just throwing out more and more misinformation which, of course, would be tedious to deconstruct.

    Sadly you are a great help and support to the Tories.
  15. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    12 Dec '16 09:16
    Originally posted by Amaurote
    Incidentally, when I clicked on that breakingdownthenews site it linked to stories about David Icke. Strange bedfellow for someone on the left, normally, but nowadays, reptoid/antisemitic tropes, irrelevant references to Zionism - probably par for the course, so by all means carry on.
    Yes I should check sources. That is a fair point here. Whether your assessment of this source is accurate or not is a moot point which I will not pursue. Too time consuming.

    I was of course seeking a convenient response to your allegation of anti semitism. The open letter cited is perfectly reasonable and says what needed saying.