Corbyn’s Labour and the path to power

956 posts / 0 new
Last post
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

josh wrote:

all along it's been talked about that the referendum didn't mean an anything goes leave.

Yes, almost entirely by people who voted to remain.

..that's not true. the more may negotiated the more people became concerned. including labour leavers.

NDPP

Corbyn just did a Tsipras. 

josh

No, it's not that bad.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

If Corbyn were to whip his MPs there wd clearly b3 enough support for a second referendum given the position of the minor parties and the number of likely Conservative defectors.

The big problem is thatCorbyn is a not so secret Brexitier and will do what he can to frustrate the strong majority opinion in the Labour Party in favour of a new vote.

He proved he wasn't a Brexiter by campaigning heavily for Remain.  There is nothing he could have said in the referendum that could have produced a Remain victory-in fact, there was nothing ANYONE could have said in that referendum to produce a Remain victory.  Corbyn HAD to campaign honestly-and campaigning honestly meant admitting that people had legitimate grievances with the EU.  He'd have had to abandon his commitment to socialism to campaign for the EU passionately, to pretend the EU wasn't driven, at this point, mainly by a fixation with forcing all EU members to impose perpetual austerity.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

A referendum proposal could only be introduced by the government, though-and we both know there is no circumstance in which May WOULD introduce such a proposal.  A referendum can't be called by opposition parties against the will of the government.  The parliamentary system doesn't work that way.

NDPP

Jeremy Corbyn on BREXIT: 'The EU is a Military Frankenstein.'

https://youtu.be/f-ukx8HrnpE

"Jeremy Corbyn at an anti-Lisbon Treaty rally in 2009. He brands the EU a 'military Frankenstein' and says a 'NO' vote in Ireland would be 'such a boost to people all over Europe who do not want to live in a European empire."

This guy will clean up as a result of Labour's cave-in to the Blairites and is smiling from ear to ear...(and vid)

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1100094710515974144

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

So now are you going to get off the guy's case, nicky?  

(on edit), btw, this isn't a change...Corbyn always agreed to back Labour policy on this issue, and the policy was to work in this sequence 1)Attempt to amend or defeate Brexit in the House 2)Push for a referendum.  Nothing would have been different or better if the referendum push had come earlier.

And it still goes without saying that the Tories will not allow any vote at all which could produce a referendum.

JKR

josh wrote:

The options on the table are testament to those who do not want to accept the result of the vote.

The majority of voters in the referendum supported either a soft-Brexit or Remain.

nicky

Corbyn did not campaign “heavily” against Brexit, Ken.

he did so tepidly and ineffectively. His half-heated effort was an important factor in “leave” prevailing in the referendum.

it was the most important reason why 80% of Labour MPs voted non-confidence in his.

his u-turn today is welcome. Let’s see if he is as wishy-washy on the issue as he was during the first referendum

josh

JKR wrote:

josh wrote:

The options on the table are testament to those who do not want to accept the result of the vote.

The majority of voters in the referendum supported either a soft-Brexit or Remain.

They had two choices:  leave or remain.  Not, sort of leave or remain.  Europe has been a front burner issue in the UK since the 1970s.  The voters who voted leave knew they were voting to get out of the EU. This disrespect for the decision makes a mockery of democratic principles.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Corbyn did not campaign “heavily” against Brexit, Ken.

he did so tepidly and ineffectively. His half-heated effort was an important factor in “leave” prevailing in the referendum.

it was the most important reason why 80% of Labour MPs voted non-confidence in his.

his u-turn today is welcome. Let’s see if he is as wishy-washy on the issue as he was during the first referendum

He campaigned more on the Remain side than any other Labour figure.  He'd have had to lie to campaign passionately for Remain, because unless you support neoliberalism and perpetual austerity, it wasn't possible to passionately campaign for the status quo on that issue.

There's nothing he could have said that would have singlehandedly swung over 2% of the electorate from Leave to Remain.  There was nothing you could say, for example, in a working-class town anywhere in the UK to make a case for Remain, since the EU austerity policies had brought nothing but misery to working-class towns all over Europe.  What would you have had him say, given that it isn't possible to have genuinely egalitarian and democratic values and be a passionate supporter of the EU?  Why shouldn't he have acknowledged that there are real problems in what the EU has done to the non-wealthy, that it does next to nothing to protect workers' rights and the poor in the UK, especially since New Labour gave up any effort to apply the Social Chapter to the UK just as it was abandoning everything else that was non-Tory in Labour's program.

What, exactly, would you have had Corbyn do?  Pretend that the EU had turned the UK into paradise?  Pretend that it wasn't anti-worker, that it wasn't imposing perpetual austerity?  How could he have done that and even remained himself, for God's sakes?

It would be different if Remain and Reform had been a possibility...but no one has presented any means here by which it is ever going to be possible to get the EU to stop demanding perpetual austerity of all its member countries.  Austerity is just as much a human rights violation, just as much a form of oppression, just as much an injustice as racism, sexism, anti-LGBTQ prejudice and xenophobia.  Perpetual austerity is not something that's no big deal, nicky, and the austerity requirements essentially cancel out everythind that's good in the EU.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

And it still goes without saying that the Tories will not allow any vote at all which could produce a referendum.

..your absolutely right. but come the final brexit vote in parliament may will have no where to go once her deal is voted down. i don't think the tories will be able to just slide into a no deal brexit. may just doesn't have the support. something else will be needed and this could include a vote or election. to let things just slide into a no deal brexit would be fatal for the tories. with the labour split this could be as good as it gets for them. today's labour move was excellent as it completly divorces them from a no deal brexit. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
The majority of voters in the referendum supported either a soft-Brexit or Remain.

Did they remember to write "soft Brexit ONLY" on their ballots?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

And no, the EU issue was NOT the main reason those MPs passed their meaningless, non-binding motion against Corbyn-a motion even you would have to concede that Corbyn made moot by fighting and winning a campaign for re-election to the leadership.  The main reason those MPs passed their motion was that they didn't accept that a non-Blairite(all the other leadership candidates had been on the extreme right of the party and none proposed any policies that deviated from the Third Way in any meaningful way)had the right to have won the leadership, they didn't accept that the people who'd joined as members or supporters had any right to be in the party, they hated the idea that Labour was no longer their private "club", and they hated the fact that there was debate and passion and life in a party they'd been doing their level best to slowly kill since 2010.  Most of these MPs had never accepted Ed Miliband as leader, either, even though he agreed with them on every meaningful issue-just as he agreed with his rival in the leadership campaign, his brother David, on every major issue-for some reason, these MPs thought that David had some special personal magic to offer-if you've ever seen David on television, you know he has no charisma whatsoever and no core values.  And these were the MPs-MPs who've been given the undemocratic special privilege of automatic re-selection as Labour candidate for as long as they hold the seat, whether or not their constituency party-the people who are actually supposed to DECIDE who the Labour candidate is-want them reselected or not-who were happy to join Labour's interim leader, Harriet Harman, in abstaining on the savage 2015 cuts the Tories were making to the pitiful remnants of the social welfare state AND on her government's barbaric "benefit sanctions regime"-a form of means-testing-on-bath salts, in which people who were too sick to leave their beds were forced to go to a benefits office and justify, to a bureaucrat who was there to force as many people as possible OFF benefits, that they hadn't made a hidden miracle recovery from what their doctors had certified as chronic conditions and were now, somehow "fit for work".  The MPs you think should have the sole say on who leads Labour are arrogant, unaccountable dinosaurs, MPs who represent nothing but the vindictive anti-Left politics of a quarter-century ago. They have no principles, no core values, they care nothing about the working and kept-from-working poor, and they would rather see Labour ground into the dirt than returned to office on the principles they crushed into dirt in a past century.  They have nothing to offer and the represent no one but Tony Blair's ego.  Why should those fossils be allowed to drag Labour back into the tar pits of the past?  They were the ones who caused the Labour wipeout in Scotland, for God's sakes-a wipeout in a country where Labour support should never have crashed under any circumstances.  And they were the ones who, by 2010, had all but wiped out Labour strength at the local government level. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Labour to table amendment to make its credible alternative plan the UK’s Brexit negotiating position

quote:

Jeremy Corbyn will tell a meeting of Labour’s Parliamentary Labour Party this evening that the party will back the Cooper-Letwin amendment to take ‘No Deal’ off the table and announce that Labour will also put forward or support an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit.

Speaking at tonight’s meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Leader of the Labour Party, will say:

“The Prime Minister is recklessly running down the clock, in an attempt to force MPs to choose between her botched deal and a disastrous No Deal. We cannot and will not accept.

“Last week, after our visit to talk to EU officials and leaders in Brussels and Madrid, no one can be in any doubt Labour’s alternative Brexit plan is serious and credible. We are convinced our alternative, which puts jobs and living standards first, could command support in the House of Commons, bring people who voted Leave and Remain together, and be negotiated with the EU.

“That’s why we will be putting down an amendment in parliament this week setting out Labour’s plan: for a comprehensive customs union with a UK say; close alignment with the single market; guarantees on rights and standards; protection for Britain’s role in EU agencies; and a security agreement which guarantees access to the European arrest warrant and vital shared databases. And we will be calling for legislation to underpin this mandate.

“We will also be backing the Cooper-Letwin amendment to rule out a No Deal outcome. One way or another, we will do everything in our power to prevent No Deal and oppose a damaging Tory Brexit based on Theresa May’s overwhelmingly rejected deal.

“That’s why, in line with our conference policy, we are committed to also putting forward or supporting an amendment in favour of a public vote to prevent a damaging Tory Brexit being forced on the country.”

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
We are convinced our alternative, which puts jobs and living standards first, could command support in the House of Commons, bring people who voted Leave and Remain together, and be negotiated with the EU.

Hasn't the EU repeatedly said they're done negotiating, and have no intention of re-opening the terms of Brexit?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
We are convinced our alternative, which puts jobs and living standards first, could command support in the House of Commons, bring people who voted Leave and Remain together, and be negotiated with the EU.

Hasn't the EU repeatedly said they're done negotiating, and have no intention of re-opening the terms of Brexit?

..if that's the case then why are they meeting with corbyn? what i know for sure is the eu doesn't want the uk to leave. and they will negotiate though they might prefer with the tories.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
..if that's the case then why are they meeting with corbyn?

Beats me.  But after saying they won't renegotiate a deal it would look sort of strange if they met with him to renegotiate a deal.

Quote:
and they will negotiate though they might prefer with the tories.

One would hope, since the Tories form government right now. 

NDPP

Attempts to Overturn Brexit Are Misguided

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/class-dimension-brexit-debacle

"...It's as if 17.5 million people are just a minor inconvenience, to be swept under the political rug like dirt. Leave voters in the de-industrialized, under invested parts of Britain grabbed their opportunity to try something radical and different.

The EU didn't save their secure, decent paying jobs. It didn't stop their areas falling into decline. To be told now that things will just get worse if they don't wake up and smell the coffee is hardly inspiring. Leave voters will not be grateful to people living in more affluent Remain-voting areas, telling them they need to pick up the cards and put them in the drawer because they're making a mess.

If Remainers somehow manage to overturn Brexit, they will have destroyed many Leave voters faith in democracy forever. It won't cut it to patronisingly tell them you are thinking of their best interests when you have no idea what it's like to live their lives..."

 

"Let's cut to the chase: holding a second referendum with Remain on the ballot-paper is a betrayal of the 1st referendum and the 17.4 million who voted Leave. And a breach of faith with the manifesto. Campaigning FOR Remain in that referendum is a double betrayal."

https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1100131661604442112

JKR

josh wrote:

JKR wrote:

josh wrote:

The options on the table are testament to those who do not want to accept the result of the vote.

The majority of voters in the referendum supported either a soft-Brexit or Remain.

They had two choices:  leave or remain.  Not, sort of leave or remain.  Europe has been a front burner issue in the UK since the 1970s.  The voters who voted leave knew they were voting to get out of the EU. This disrespect for the decision makes a mockery of democratic principles.

Leave voters were told that there would be a soft-Brexit if there was a vote for Leave.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

How soft?

Isn't the deal currently on the table a "soft" Brexit?  There's certainly no need -- by definition -- to spend months negotiating a hard one.

JKR

For some the offer on the table is too soft while for others it is not soft enough. Unfortunately the vote to leave was not very instructive. That’s one of the reasons many people now want another vote.

nicky

https://labourlist.org/2019/02/ruth-smeeth-labour-leadership-out-of-its-depth-but-ill-stay-and-fight/

on another note, what is so un Democratic about another referendum?

much has changed in the past three years. There now seems to be a significant  majority in favour of remain.

There have been numerous revelations about the flaws in the vote : illegal spending, Russian interference, blatant lying by the Brexiters which have now been more fully exposed.

and most importantly a yawning awareness of the consequences of “leave”.

Public opinion is fluid. That is why we have periodic general elections.

asking the people for their present views on Brexit is absolutely democratic.

josh

So if remain wins a new referendum, you wouldn’t object to another referendum on the issue in two to three years?

josh
nicky

No Josh i wd not oppose a third referendum in a few years if conditions mirrord those of today:

1. Massive illegal spending in referendum

2. Foreign meddling in the campaign

3. Numeros now exposed lies by winning side as propagated by the likes of Farage and Johnson

4. Close result

5. Buyers remorse with substantial majority now favouring the losing side

any other position would be un-democratic

NDPP

Topple/Galloway (and vid)

https://twitter.com/Cybrarian64/status/1100374084385427458

"...Corbyn is effectively no more. He's like El Cid strapped to his horse but politically no more."

Blairites win. Labour is now the NDP UK.

josh

Lies?  What election doesn't have lies.

Your first two points are totally exaggerted as the final result did not differ materially from the polling before the campaign began.

What constitutes a close result?

How do you quantify "buyer's remorse"?

josh

NDPP wrote:

Topple/Galloway (and vid)

https://twitter.com/Cybrarian64/status/1100374084385427458

"...Corbyn is effectively no more. He's like El Cid strapped to his horse but politically no more."

Blairites win. Labour is now the NDP UK.

Oh, FFS.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

nicky wrote:

No Josh i wd not oppose a third referendum in a few years if conditions mirrord those of today:

1. Massive illegal spending in referendum

2. Foreign meddling in the campaign

3. Numeros now exposed lies by winning side as propagated by the likes of Farage and Johnson

4. Close result

5. Buyers remorse with substantial majority now favouring the losing side

any other position would be un-democratic

..i agree with this. except 2 which i'm not sure what it refers to.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..so no slipping into no deal brexit

Brexit: MPs will get vote in March on extending article 50 if no deal agreed, PM says

MPs to vote on 14 March on extending article 50 if Commons has not passed a deal by then, and if MPs vote on 13 March to reject no deal

JKR

josh wrote:

So if remain wins a new referendum, you wouldn’t object to another referendum on the issue in two to three years?

I think for a very long time the UK will want to avoid a repeat of this tire fire.

josh

Which would just show that the powers that be don't care about a fair vote, they just want a remain vote. 

JKR

It seems to me that many of the powers that be are trying to avoid a people’s vote as much as possible.

josh

A people's vote?  Who voted last time, space aliens?

JKR

Why shouldn’t the people be allowed to vote when they have a much clearer idea of what Brexit entails?

nicky

To answer Epaulo13's query about "foreign interference" jus t Google "Russian Interference Brexit" and you will get many links.

Wikipedia summs it up as follows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_Brexit_re...

NDPP

It's worse than that Nicky!!!

Was Britain's Labour Leader A Communist Spy?

https://www.voanews.com/a/was-britains-labour-leader-communist-spy/42607...

Thank heavens this Bolshevik and his Kremlin agenda has now been overturned! So glad we have a neocon NDP socialism here that supports NATO, hates Russia, loves Nazi Ukraine and defends Apartheid Israel! 

josh

Same smear was used against Harold Wilson.

josh

JKR wrote:

Why shouldn’t the people be allowed to vote when they have a much clearer idea of what Brexit entails?

Translation:  Didn’t like the outcome of the vote, so let’s vote again.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

josh wrote:

JKR wrote:

Why shouldn’t the people be allowed to vote when they have a much clearer idea of what Brexit entails?

Translation:  Didn’t like the outcome of the vote, so let’s vote again.

When is Quebec having its next referendum? You can have more than one if you don't like the first result.

JKR

josh wrote:

JKR wrote:

Why shouldn’t the people be allowed to vote when they have a much clearer idea of what Brexit entails?

Translation:  Didn’t like the outcome of the vote, so let’s vote again.

Translation: Thinks the majority are against Brexit so let’s not have a vote.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Labour demands “clear evidence” for Hezbollah ban

Labour has called on the government to provide “clear evidence” that the political wing of Hezbollah should be proscribed.

Commenting on Home Secretary Sajid Javid’s decision to classify Hezbollah as a terrorist group, the party raised concerns that such a move could “make it difficult to maintain normal diplomatic relations with Lebanon”.

Labour also suggested that Javid’s position on the ban may have been determined by his “leadership ambitions”, and not arrived at “in an objective and impartial way”.

A Labour Party spokesperson said: “The Home Office has previously ruled that there was not sufficient evidence that the political wing of Hezbollah fell foul of proscription criteria, a position confirmed by ministers in the House of Commons last year. Ministers have not yet provided any clear evidence to suggest this has changed.....

cco

And of course, the DUP will vote in favour of the ban, being fervently opposed to (non-Protestant) terrorist groups being part of a country's governing coalition.

bekayne

kropotkin1951 wrote:

josh wrote:

JKR wrote:

Why shouldn’t the people be allowed to vote when they have a much clearer idea of what Brexit entails?

Translation:  Didn’t like the outcome of the vote, so let’s vote again.

When is Quebec having its next referendum? You can have more than one if you don't like the first result.

They've already done that.

bekayne

One major difference is that in Quebec the government that held the referendum actually wanted to implement the results of that referendum.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

josh wrote:

NDPP wrote:

Topple/Galloway (and vid)

https://twitter.com/Cybrarian64/status/1100374084385427458

"...Corbyn is effectively no more. He's like El Cid strapped to his horse but politically no more."

Blairites win. Labour is now the NDP UK.

Oh, FFS.

NDPP was bound to post that at some point, as a poster whose views always seem to pretty much toe the WSWS line...the line that holds that every socialist leader who achieves any popularity is a sellout and any left movement that is in any way effective is a betrayal.  In the world of the WSWS, any win is a tragedy.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

josh wrote:

Same smear was used against Harold Wilson.

And inspired a plot to overthrow Wilson, one of the most painfully moderate leaders Labour ever had, by major figures in the British ruling class https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/mar/15/comment.labour1  

Interesting fact in that coup plot:  The plotters asked Lord Mountbatten to be the leader of what would, in effect, have been a military dictatorship, but Mountbatten refused to have anything to do with the idea.   

Pogo Pogo's picture

The Brexit/Russia claims are tied closely to the Trump/Russia claims and have similiar levels of evidence.

NDPP

Yes. None.

No Evidence of Russian Interference in Brexit, Theresa May

https://on.rt.com/8sbl

"Not a sausage of evidence."

Pages