United Kingdom 2

996 posts / 0 new
Last post
josh

Did the poll specify who would be Corbyn's replacement?  Very easy to go up when it's merely a generic Labour leader.  Meanwhile, Opinium poll:

Remain in the EU: 40%

Brexit with clear break from the EU: 38%

Brexit with close alignment to the EU: 14%

 

nicky

No Josh, the poll did not specify who might rplace Corbyn. 

 There will be more elctoral tealeaves to read after the Brecon and Radnore by-election this Thusday.

Labour got 17.7% in the last general election. Let's see if they can hold that.

nicky

Mike Gautrey

@MikeGautrey

·

4h

ComRes poll today: 'a majority (55%) think [Boris]’ll make a “terrible” Prime Minister... two thirds (64%) think Boris will make a better Prime Minister than Jeremy Corbyn.'

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The PLP won't accept anyone on the ballot to replace him other than "moderates".  And it wouldn't be worth even trying to elect a Labour government under any leader who isn't socialist and antiwar.

nicky

Opinium has a relatively good poll for Labour, trailing Conservatives by only 28 to 30.

 

 But Corbyn is running far behind Labour.

Strongly approve : 7% 

Somewhat approve : 12 %

Somewhat disapprove : 22%

Strongly disapprove: 38%

https://www.opinium.co.uk/political-polling-24th-july-2019/

 

robbie_dee

Corbyn isn't going anywhere. If Corbyn's caucus critics decide to trigger another leadership ballot he will stand again and probably win. Moreover, doing so now will only strengthen the odds that Johnson will capitalize on Labour's divisions by precipitating an autumn election and winning it. Giving Corbyn's critics what (I hope) they want least - hard Brexit by 10/31 and another four years in Opposition while the country burns.

robbie_dee

Johnson pushes EU to give way amid no-deal Brexit warnings (Globe and Mail, 29 July 2019)

Quote:

Prime Minister Boris Johnson pushed Britain closer to a no-deal exit from the European Union on Monday, insisting he will not hold Brexit talks with EU leaders unless the bloc lifts its refusal to reopen the existing divorce deal.

Johnson is trying to pressure the EU to give ground by intensifying preparations for the U.K. to leave the bloc in three months without a withdrawal agreement.

But the pound fell to a two-year low as business groups warned that neither Britain nor the EU is ready for a no-deal Brexit, and that no amount of preparation can eliminate the economic damage if Britain crashes out of the 28-nation trading bloc without agreement on the terms.

Johnson became prime minister last week after winning a Conservative Party leadership contest by promising the strongly pro-Brexit party membership that the U.K. will leave the EU on the scheduled date of Oct. 31, with or without a divorce deal.

NDPP

Galloway: MOATS, July 28, 2019 (Ep6, and vid)

https://youtu.be/pGWuxMRb5Sg

Boris, Brexit and BDS...

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The message is clear:  If the Tories are to be beaten, the PLP war against Corbyn and the war to drive Corbyn's supporters out of the party MUST END.  

Debater

If Corbyn insists on stubbornly staying on he risks becoming the Michael Ignatieff or Kathleen Wynne of the Labour Party.

nicky

Ken:

The message is clear:  If the Tories are to be beaten, Jeremy Corbyn, their most important electoral asset must do the right thing and step down from the leadership in order to give Labour a chance of winning.

and contrary to your endless mindless refrain, it is possible to replace him:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leader-jeremy-corbyn-new-replace-election-a9025726.html

 

josh

He would verly likely survive any challenge:

He will also reassured by a recent YouGov survey that found more than half of Labour members (56 per cent) said he should lead the party into the next election.

Since that's YouGov, it's probably on the low side.  And these are the same stories we read prior to the 2017 election.  Maybe if the Peter Mandelsons of the world spent less time plotting an overthrow, and more time attacking the opposition, we'd all be in a better place.

robbie_dee
robbie_dee

Debater wrote:

If Corbyn insists on stubbornly staying on he risks becoming the Michael Ignatieff or Kathleen Wynne of the Labour Party.

Debater, I am disappointed in you. While analogies between political events in different countries are necessarily imprecise, I thought it was pretty clear that Nick Clegg was the UK's "Michael Ignatieff". Both led small-l liberal parties circa 2008-15, both of them rejected coalitions with their natural allies on the left in favor of propping up right wing governments and both were severely punished as a result the next time they faced their respective voters.

Kathleen Wynne is a different story. I think she had a good strategy to lose gracefully to the Patrick Brown led PCs while boxing out the NDP on the left and positioning her party well to come back after a stint in opposition. Brown's unexpected downfall and replacement by Ford changed everything. Both liberal and left Ontarians panicked and looked for whoever they could to avert what they (correctly, imv) anticipated to be a disasterous premiership. For a moment we thought it could be the Liberals but when they failed to catch on the anti-Ford vote quickly switched in droves to Horwath's NDP. As it turned out Wynne's left-wing platform ended up legitimizing the ONDP as an option rather than boxing them out, because both parties sounded similar the ONDP just wasn't saddled with the Liberals' baggage.

I suppose its possible for Johnson's leadership of the Conservatives to have a similar impact on Labour in the next UK election as Ford's leadership of the PCs had on the Ontario Liberals. But I think its unlikely. I think Labour has a much higher floor in the UK because of its long-term ideological project and class-based appeal. Even in 1983 when they polled less than 28% of the vote barely 2% ahead of the Liberals, Labour won over 200 seats compared to the Liberals' 23. And I don't think this will be 1983 all over again anyways. Corbyn is a stronger leader than Foote and the left is in a much stronger position now than the depths of the early 80s.

While I don't think Labour will be wiped out, though, I think it is much more likely that - like for Harper in 2011 and Ford in 2018, a divided left will deliver a right wing government that most voters don't really want.  Corbyn's critics think that by calling for him to resign they can prevent that outcome. But they're wrong. What they need to do is put aside their nostalgia for the Blair years and do what needs to be done to stop Brexit now, which is to swallow their pride and (tactically and while maintaining their criticisms of him if they must) support Corbyn's Labour.  After all that's what they asked from the left of Labour for so  many years under Blair, and by and large the left, including Corbyn himself, at least begrudgingly obliged.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Good point.  Corbyn and his allies within the party NEVER treated Blair with even a tenth of the irrational, vindictive rage the Blairites have subjected Corbyn-and worse, his supporters, a group which has been treated just as despicably as Bernie Sanders' supporters were treated by the establishment wing of the Dems during the '16 primaries, when Bernie's supporters were accused, with no justification whatsoever, of not caring about the need to fight racism, sexism, anti-LGBTQ bigotry, and the need to defend reproductive choice.   It is likely that Hillary's defeat in the fall of '16 was the result of that abuse, given that it's not reasonable for any candidate to win the votes of people that candidate's supporters have spent months slandering and insulting.

NDPP

Why BoJo Better Plan For No-Deal Brexit - Galloway

https://youtu.be/v7irEYOhFdk

"As UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson made his way into Wales on Tuesday, he was greeted with boos and jeers from the public and opposition from local leaders. Is he ready for a no-deal Brexit scenario?"

NorthReport

Brexit will be ‘catastrophic’ and the sooner the Irish reunite and get away from these British crazies the better And the same for Scotland and Wales too if the Welsh can.

The very fact all the right-wingers want Brexit tells me all I need to know - the working people will get screwed only this time they will get  royally screwed

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/jul/30/boris-johnson-prime-minister-brexit-news-warned-no-deal-brexit-could-lead-to-farmers-blocking-roads-in-protest-live-news?page=with:block-5d405f508f0845f89e317327#block-5d405f508f0845f89e317327

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

NorthReport wrote:

Brexit will be ‘catastrophic’ and the sooner the Irish reunite and get away from these British crazies the better And the same for Scotland and Wales too if the Welsh can.

The very fact all the right-wingers want Brexit tells me all I need to know - the working people will get screwed only this time they will get  royally screwed

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/jul/30/boris-johnson-prime-minister-brexit-news-warned-no-deal-brexit-could-lead-to-farmers-blocking-roads-in-protest-live-news?page=with:block-5d405f508f0845f89e317327#block-5d405f508f0845f89e317327

You know very, very little about Northern Ireland, North.  The conflict between pro-Irish and pro-British people goes back centuries, and has been fueled by the generations and generations of British governments who first created the division by importing a Protestant, pro-British community from Scotland(most of whom were essentially forced to relocate by the government of the day on pain of death) and then spent centuries convincing that cpmmunity that the Catholic majority on the island would slaughter them if(prior to 1922)British rule over the whole of the island wasn't maintained by any means necessary and (since 1922)if the pro-British community did anything at all to make life non-miserable for the pro-Irish minority in the Six Counties.   

The British went to any number of lengths to keep those communities divided-including the policy of feeding pro-British Protestants during the Black 47(a.k.a "the potato famine")while leaving the pro-Irish Catholic majority on the island to either starve or go into self-imposed exile.

The paranoia and hatred the British created among the pro-British community in the Six Counties towards the pro-Irish minority is not going to simply disappear as a result of concerns over the effects of Brexit.

robbie_dee

Yanis Varoufakis, 'Jeremy Corey's Finest Hour?' Project Syndicate, 30 July, 2019

Quote:

Despite opinion polls suggesting a Liberal Democrat revival, courtesy of their unambiguous pro-Remain stance, the only impediment to Boris Johnson’s bid for dominance is Corbyn’s Labour Party. Ardent Remainers have lambasted Corbyn for refusing to turn Labour into the electoral wing of the campaign to reverse Brexit. They cite his criticism of the EU’s inbuilt pro-austerity, oligarchic bias as evidence that he was never serious when, in June 2016, he campaigned to remain in the EU while committing to reform the bloc.

But Corbyn was right to be nuanced in his support of Remain. It was not Vladimir Putin, Facebook, or the Leave campaign’s blatant lies that put Brexit over the top. And it was not the critical stance on the hustings of those of us (including DiEM25) who, like Corbyn, campaigned along the lines of: “In the EU. Against this EU!”

No, the best ally of the Leave campaign were establishment figures, from Tony Blair to Christine Lagarde. They oscillated between Project Fear (warning of post-Brexit Armageddon) and a rosy depiction of the EU that whitewashed its anti-democratic decision-making, its misanthropic handling of the euro crisis, and its readiness to sign trade agreements with the United States that usurped parliaments and threatened some of the EU’s greatest achievements.

Since the 2016 referendum, a civil war-like atmosphere has made it increasingly impossible for Leavers and Remainers to hold a civilized conversation. Corbyn valiantly tried to keep Labour’s Leavers and Remainers together by seeking an honorable compromise: The UK would formally leave the EU, to respect the referendum’s outcome, while remaining in as many of the bloc’s structures as possible – including a customs union. Instead of applauding Corbyn for this tricky balancing act, his opponents within the Labour Party, together with a liberal establishment unprincipled enough to deliver all Leavers to Nigel Farage and Johnson, attacked him with extraordinary viciousness.

But that was then and this is now. With Johnson as prime minister, and his strategy crystal clear, Corbyn’s task is to expose the truth about Johnson’s no-deal Brexit – namely, that it means a Trump-deal Brexit – and put forward Labour’s plan to end the interminable Brexit ordeal immediately.

NorthReport

This is just sickening playing with people's incomes, pensions, etc. like this.

The British Pound Is Starting to Resemble Emerging-Market Currencies​https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-31/emerging-market-class-of-2019-has-a-distinctly-british-flavor

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

robbie_dee wrote:

Yanis Varoufakis, 'Jeremy Corey's Finest Hour?' Project Syndicate, 30 July, 2019

Quote:

Despite opinion polls suggesting a Liberal Democrat revival, courtesy of their unambiguous pro-Remain stance, the only impediment to Boris Johnson’s bid for dominance is Corbyn’s Labour Party. Ardent Remainers have lambasted Corbyn for refusing to turn Labour into the electoral wing of the campaign to reverse Brexit. They cite his criticism of the EU’s inbuilt pro-austerity, oligarchic bias as evidence that he was never serious when, in June 2016, he campaigned to remain in the EU while committing to reform the bloc.

But Corbyn was right to be nuanced in his support of Remain. It was not Vladimir Putin, Facebook, or the Leave campaign’s blatant lies that put Brexit over the top. And it was not the critical stance on the hustings of those of us (including DiEM25) who, like Corbyn, campaigned along the lines of: “In the EU. Against this EU!”

No, the best ally of the Leave campaign were establishment figures, from Tony Blair to Christine Lagarde. They oscillated between Project Fear (warning of post-Brexit Armageddon) and a rosy depiction of the EU that whitewashed its anti-democratic decision-making, its misanthropic handling of the euro crisis, and its readiness to sign trade agreements with the United States that usurped parliaments and threatened some of the EU’s greatest achievements.

Since the 2016 referendum, a civil war-like atmosphere has made it increasingly impossible for Leavers and Remainers to hold a civilized conversation. Corbyn valiantly tried to keep Labour’s Leavers and Remainers together by seeking an honorable compromise: The UK would formally leave the EU, to respect the referendum’s outcome, while remaining in as many of the bloc’s structures as possible – including a customs union. Instead of applauding Corbyn for this tricky balancing act, his opponents within the Labour Party, together with a liberal establishment unprincipled enough to deliver all Leavers to Nigel Farage and Johnson, attacked him with extraordinary viciousness.

But that was then and this is now. With Johnson as prime minister, and his strategy crystal clear, Corbyn’s task is to expose the truth about Johnson’s no-deal Brexit – namely, that it means a Trump-deal Brexit – and put forward Labour’s plan to end the interminable Brexit ordeal immediately.


 

Why is "Soft Brexit" anathema to the People's Vote crowd?  It would keep the tiny number of good things that come of being in the EU, while freeing the UK from the right wing stuff that is carved in stone in the EU rules for the rest of eternity.  Labour values can't exist within a mandatory balanced budget, massive restrictions on nationalization, AND a ban on raising taxes on the rich.  There's no such thing as socialism on a tight budget.

NDPP

'Labour values' can't exist within the EU. 

The Left Must Put Rupture on the Table

https://t.co/GniLiWa89i

Costas Lapavitsas: "The EU is a neoliberal citadel, fundamentally unstable and impervious to reform..."

NorthReport

Obviously Johnson is crazy like a fox, but will probably get his way with such a compliant press apart from the Independent and the Guardian!

Labour attacks 'appalling waste' as Johnson adds £2.1bn to no-deal fund

Spending for Brexit preparations increased to stockpile medicines and recruit border officials

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/31/labour-attacks-appalling-waste-as-johnson-adds-2bn-no-deal-brexit-fund

NorthReport
nicky

The LibDems have just taken Breton Radner from theCons in the by-election,

Labour has dropped from 17.8 to 5.3%, losing 70% of its vote.

Nothing to do with Corbyn, right Ken? No more than the local elections, the EU elections or the catastrophic polls,  because it is all a Blairite plot.

Surely it is time for Corbyn to start thinking about what is best for the Labour Party.

Debater

Another victory for the Liberal Democrats.

When will Corbyn agree to step down before he takes Labour down with him?

Debater

josh

nicky wrote:

The LibDems have just taken Breton Radner from theCons in the by-election,

Labour has dropped from 17.8 to 5.3%, losing 70% of its vote.

Nothing to do with Corbyn, right Ken? No more than the local elections, the EU elections or the catastrophic polls,  because it is all a Blairite plot.

Surely it is time for Corbyn to start thinking about what is best for the Labour Party.

A lot of strategic voting to defeat the Conservative.  Which worked.

NDPP

"The whole direction of travel of the Watson-Starmer-Thornberry axis in the Labour fifth column has been towards an alliance with the Liberal-Democrats to betray Brexit and millions of Labour voters. That's why by hook or by crook they have to destroy Corbyn."

https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1157307783848562688

 

Will Boris Bottle Brexit?

https://t.co/EXHeFWmHTh

"Johnson is loud in declaring himself ready for a no-deal EU exit, but is that just an electoral ploy?"

nicky

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/02/despite-the-dire-polling-jeremy-corbyn-is-not-going-

Barring accident or illness the Labour leader is certain to lead the party into the next election and is very likely to stay whatever the result may be

If Labour was deadly serious about defeating the Tories at the next general election, Jeremy Corbyn would no longer be the party’s leader. The polling since Boris Johnson took over as Prime Minister and installed the most right-wing government the UK has ever seen tells exactly the same story that it told when Theresa May was in charge: Corbyn is deeply unpopular in every conceivable demographic except one – the Labour Party’s membership. Actually, you can make that two. The Tory faithful love him too.

Don’t think this fact is lost on those who surround the Labour leader. They may be many things, but stupid is not one of them. The likes of John McDonnell, Len McCluskey, Andrew Murray, Dianne Abbott, Jon Lansman and Karie Murphy can read the opinion polls, they get the data. They realise that Corbyn is utterly toxic throughout the UK and across every age group. They understand that he costs Labour support.

In fact, we are probably now at the stage where only the spectacularly obtuse Richard Burgon among Labour MPs and officials genuinely believes Corbyn is well-liked and leading the party to victory. But that does not mean Corbyn is on his way out. There is no chance of that.

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

If Corbyn truly needed to stand down, the best way to make that happen, while producing a leadership election process that was truly democratic and which produced a leader the Labour rank-and-file would embrace and accept-Corbyn, btw, has always said he would stand down if he truly believed he was dragging the party down-here's the way that people who were actually concerned about "the good of the party" could come together to make that happen at the Labour confrence in September

1) Adopt Open Selection for ALL sitting Labour MPs, so that the PLP, most of whom are only in their seats now because they were imposed as candidates decades ago by the vindictively anti-Left Neil Kinnock and the arrogant, anti-democratic, and essentially Tory Mr. Blair, will have to make an actual case for their renomination as Labour candidates, rather than simply being able to count on reselection for life as a kind of political sinecure;

2) Abolish the MP nomination requirements for getting on the leadership ballot, replacing them by a signature process to do so, since there is no valid reason for the MPs to control who is and who is NOT on the leadership ballot.  The MPs , are simply one PART of the party, they should not be treated as Labour's ruling elite and don't deserve any more say in who gets to be leader than anybody else.  Remember, it was the MPs who doomed Labour to defeat in 2010 by blocking all candidates OTHER than the dreary and unelectable Gordon Brown from the ballot to succed Blair in 2008;  They are the ones-and it wasn't anyone else but them in the party-who wanted Corbyn replaced by Owen Smith, the man who couldn't get ANY CROWDS at any of his leadership rallies and ended up begging to be allowed to speak at CORBYN's leadership rallies.

It would have been much more likely that Corbyn might have stood down if the PLP had agreed, after 2017, to stop treating the party as their private fiefdom, as a place where they should decide what the party stands for and, by controlling the leadership ballot, who leads it.   The PLP, the tiny group who are essentially the only remaining supporters of Blairism and the Iraq War, needs to just get the hell out of the way and let the people of the Labour Party run it.  And they need to stop insisting that the only way Labour members and supporters can prove they aren't antisemites is to agree to permanently exempt the Israeli government from ANY dissent about what it does to Palestinians, which is what adopting the IHRA "examples" would have done. 

Agreed?

 

Debater

In some ways, Corbyn reminds me of Michael Ignatieff & Stephane Dion -- too stubborn and disconnected to realize how unpopular he is.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Debater wrote:

In some ways, Corbyn reminds me of Michael Ignatieff & Stephane Dion -- too stubborn and disconnected to realize how unpopular he is.

He's only unpopular because those in his party who don't want Labour to work for a real alternative to Toryism-let's face it, there's no difference anymore between being a Tory and being  a "Labour moderate"-as the decision by the last "moderate" Labour leader, Harriet Harman, to have the party abstain-which was no different than voting for-the even deeper Tory benefit cuts in 2015, a policy which, if not stopped, would have erased the last major difference between Labour and the Tories on any major issue-have spent four years relentlessly sabotaging the man.

If Corbyn stands down, it means the smears and the lies win. It means that, within the party, the privileged few will have defeated the many.  It means that those who don't want Labour to be different than the Tories will have prevailed.  No leader who came in because Corbyn was smeared, who came in with the backing and approval of the anti-Corbyn, anti-youth, anti-change cabal, could ever be credible as a leader, could ever be popular, could ever propose anything significantly different than warmed-over Blairism, could ever win the support of the young, a group Labour HAS to win by massive, overwhelming margins to have any chance of forming a government at all, since most of the older people will always vote Tory no matter what.                                  

Whichever leader came to replace Corbyn and was APPROVED of by the PLP and the media, would inevitably be just as unpopular on the merits as Corbyn has been made to be unpopular through lies and smears, because that leader would automatically be discredited.  It simply goes without saying that no Labour leader accepted by those forces would have any Labour values whatsoever.  

JKR

It seems to me that the civil war within Labour has become so toxic and overconsuming that Labour’s  existence as a viable political force may be in jeopardy, especially with Brexit possibly being a watershed moment in the history of the UK. 

nicky

Here is an intriguing possibility which may lead to Labour extricating itself from its current leadership nightmare:

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/08/03/is-corbyn-at-risk-from-the-mother-of-all-political-decapitations/

the Lib Dems did carry Corbyn’s seat narriwly in the Euros

 

nicky

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17810758.labour-less-popular-brexit-party-scotland/

Corbyn leading Labour to FIFTH place in Scotland with 11%.

ken, even assuming that Corbyn is not to blame for his toxic unpopularity, sure you have to concede he should step down for the good of his party.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17810758.labour-less-popular-brexit-party-scotland/

Corbyn leading Labour to FIFTH place in Scotland with 11%.

ken, even assuming that Corbyn is not to blame for his toxic unpopularity, sure you have to concede he should step down for the good of his party.

I can't speak for Ken, but I think it would be better for Labour to be relegated to third place in parliament than for it to return to the control of Blairites who are very little better than Cons, and not at all better than LibDems. At least then, it would be possible to begin rebuilding it as a true vehicle for socialist policies.

nicky

Thanks Michael. Good to know where you stand.

you think it is better to have the farthest right government in generations imposing untold misery on all but the very rich than a reformist moderately left - wing Labour government that helps the lives of the great majority.

all for the sake of ideological purity

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

Thanks Michael. Good to know where you stand.

you think it is better to have the farthest right government in generations imposing untold misery on all but the very rich than a reformist moderately left - wing Labour government that helps the lives of the great majority.

all for the sake of ideological purity

Nope. But that would be the way a corporate shill such as you would see it.

nicky

Corporate shill? Me ?? What corporation? Maybe they owe me some money!

by the way, since we’re throwing around ulterior motives, did you know that Corbyn is a CIA plant?

he is the most effective tool they have ever found to destroy the Labour Party.

you will have to admit that makes a lot of sense.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17810758.labour-less-popular-brexit-party-scotland/

Corbyn leading Labour to FIFTH place in Scotland with 11%.

ken, even assuming that Corbyn is not to blame for his toxic unpopularity, sure you have to concede he should step down for the good of his party.

I can turn that around-surely you have to concede that the PLP should have stopped scheming to force Corbyn out as leader after the 2017 election for the good of the party.  

Surely you'd have to concede that Labour would be in a much stronger position in the polls right now if the PLP HAD stopped scheming to force Corbyn out, and had focused, instead, for the good of the party, on doing what they are SUPPOSED to do: focusing solely on attacking the Tories and working for the defeat of the Tory government.

Surely you'd have to concede that the PLP should not have demanded that Corbyn, a lifelong opponent of antisemitism, accept the IHRA "examples" of antisemitism, examples that equated virtually ALL public criticism of the Israeli government with hatred of Jews, when they knew that criticism of the Israeli government is virtually never antisemitism and therefore there was no justification with ever linking antisemitism with comments about Zionism at all.

Surely, you'd have to concede that Corbyn and his supporters never deserved to be subjected to the most despicable smear campaign in the history of British politics, never deserved to be indifferent to or participants in expressions of hatred against Jews, when throughout the history of the Left the Left has always been the least antisemitic part of the political spectrum.

Surely you'd have to concede that Corbyn's opponents in the party-a tiny, dwindling clique of reactionaries-should never have done any of that, that none of that was ever "for the good of the party".

And surely, you'd have to concede that, with a general election imminent, Corbyn's opponents in the party should just stop doing all of that and should all stand down at the next election so that there is some chance of unifying the party for victory, given that nobody the opponents could put in place would ever be accepted as a legitimate leader by the vast majority of the party who wants Labour to embrace the ideals the Corbyn movement stands for, since doing that would be the best thing the anti-Corbyn MPs could do if they actually cared about "the good of the party".

If the PLP cared about "the good of the party", why could they not see that they should have accepted that the 2017 election settled the leadership issue and finally, FINALLY accepted Corbyn as leader and got wholeheartedly behind him in order to do what Labour MPs are supposed to do-work to defeat the Tories and undo everything the Tory government has done?

None of the attack points raised against the man ever had any validity:

Other than the PLO, nobody had an issue with the suit Corbyn wore at the Cenotaph-and wearing that simply, perfectly acceptable suit, Corbyn actually showed MORE respect to the veterans by being the only party leader who actually stayed after the ceremony to chat with them and ask about their lives and by his work every day sense to get the UK out of the unwinnable and imperialist wars it's been in in the Arab/Muslim world, while the Tory and Labour RIGHT figures in their arrogant, imperialist morning coats were just there to commemorate and celebrate the wars that killed the men honored by the Cenotaph.

He has put the lies about his positions on Northern Ireland and the Israel/Palestine issue to rest-the voters know he was just working for justice for the minority community in Northern Ireland and that working for that HAD to meen working to get Sinn Fein into negotiations, and they know that he was just trying to do the same by approaching Hezbollah and Hamas.  

He's proved he cares about antisemitism and that his supporters are no more antisemitic-and generally less antisemitic-than the UK population as a whole, and the statistics prove that the rise in antisemitic incidents in the UK is almost entirely the responsibility of the Far Right-including the Tory far right.

His positions on the issues of the day are popular with the electorate-by contrast, there is no support for Blairism anymore.

And he has done enough to put the EU issue to rest by pledging Labour to hold a second referendum on any deal.  That's as far as he can go towards Remain without losing the North and Northeast of England to the Brexit Party for the rest of eternity.

Why are you so obsessed with bringing down the leader of a political party in another country?  

And why have you been so relentlessly nasty and dismissive of what anyone else had to say in your discourse on this issue?  You act as though we should all simply defer to you because of...well, what really?  All we have to go on is some vague claim that you did something vaguely left at some point in the past.    

And why is it so important to you to convince people on this board-none of whom have any say in the inner workings of the British Labour Party-that Corbyn has an obligation to stand down?  

Finally why are you so bound and determined to drag Labour back to the non-position of "social democracy", when there is no longer any meaningful  difference between "actually existing social democracy" in European and UK politics and Thatcherism, when "social democracy" means accepting permanent austerity and a foreign policy built on perpetual war, when nothing progressive or egalitarian can be done within an increasingly privatized, increasingly market-driven, increasingly tight-budgeted market economic model of the sort the EU imposes on all its members?

Finally, it's not Corbyn's fault that the party is weak in Scotland.  Labour can't ever be popular there again until it comes out for, at the minimum "devo max", if not an outright acceptance of Scottish independence.  Nobody Labour could choose as leader would ever do that. Labour's popularity was destroyed in Scotland during the IndyRef, which occurred before Corbyn was leader, when Scottish Labour made the fatal mistake-imposed by the still-Blairite Westminster Labour leadership of Ed Miliband-of running a joint "nae" campaign with the Scottish Tories and Scottish Liberal Democrats, when it should have run a specifically Labour Nae campaign which would have pledged a Westminster Labour government to "devo max"-in essence, to full Home Rule for Scotland with taxing powers for the Scottish Parliament of Holyrood.  Labour wouldn't do that, and in the subsuquent general election it refused to allow Scottish Labour candidates to stand on a distinctly Scottish platform, a platform which would have reflected the fact that Scottish voters never supported Thatcherism and that Labour never needed to reduce its program to Blairism in Scotland to win votes there.  Scottish Labour can never recover on a "moderate" platform, and it can never recover on the Blairite "get over it" position.

That is the fault of pre-Corbyn Labour stupidity.  The least-effective way of correcting that would be to put in a leader who'd take the old Blairite stance of saying "we won't make any concessions, we'll just wait for you to get over that 'independence' nonsense and come to your bloody senses".

Just once, nicky, just ONCE, why don't you put some of the responsibility for Labour's current situation where it belongs-on the shoulders of the PLP, a totally out-of-touch cabal who don't care about defeating the Tories, but care only about reclaiming control of Labour for themelves-and who don't care that their insistence on doing so may guarantee that there is never another Labour government.

What you don't seem to realize is that the savagery the PLP has used against Corbyn, and against his supporters, throughout his leadership has guaranteed that nobody who replaced him with the PLP's support could ever be accepted as a credible leader by the vast majority of the party, could ever have any right to ask Corbyn's supporters for their support, or ever offer a program distinctly different than the Tories.  Any leader who came in to replace Corbyn, if the smears succeeded in driving him out, would start out on the job totally discredited.

Does that not matter to you at all?

cco

nicky wrote:

you think it is better to have the farthest right government in generations imposing untold misery on all but the very rich than a reformist moderately left - wing Labour government that helps the lives of the great majority.

all for the sake of ideological purity

We've had a generation – in Canada, the US, the UK, and countless other places – to see what happens when an ostensibly left-wing party tries to win by adopting a right-wing platform. The right-wing party doesn't say "At last! Consensus! We might as well merge!". It moves farther right. Among the many reasons Boris Johnson is now prime minister, one of the biggest is Tony Blair turning Labour into the Red Tories – just like Chrétien and Martin legitimized Harper.

nicky

For all his faults Blair won three elections which is three more than Corbyn will ever win

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

For all his faults Blair won three elections which is three more than Corbyn will ever win

Blair won elections Labour would have won on any manifesto and with any leader.  After eighteen years, the voters were sick of everything associated with Thatcherism. They weren't demanding that Labour renounce socialism, taxes on the rich, and any deviation at all from militarism.

The Great Recantation never had to happen-and a dream of a better world is not a heresy.

And you're forgetting that Labour lost badly on Blairite programs in 2010 and 2015, which means had no chance of winning on a Blairite program at any election for years and years after that, if any.

You're also forgetting that the Labour rank-and-file are utterly sick of the entire Blair Alumni Association(the anti-Corbyn wing of the PLP) and that Labour can't win ANY election with candidates and a leader the rank and file despise.

 

nicky

None of shat you say Ken changes the grim reality that Corbyn will never win an election and may leave Labour so crippled that

it will not be electorally viable for years and years

josh

No, that’s how Blair and Brown left the party.  Corbyn took it from 30% to 40%

NDPP

Mark Carney Accused of Reviving Project Fear With No Deal Brexit

https://t.co/VxH0tsjg6z

"Mark Carney has been accused of undermining Brexit negotiations and failing to move on from Project Fear after issuing a stark warning about a no-deal Brexit.." Nice to know this neoliberal bankster and Goldman Sachs alumnus is on the 'progressive' Remain side. Naturally, he's Canadian too.

 

On Contact: British Government PsyOps [MUST WATCH]

https://youtu.be/Z_K-j6a9ETI

Chris Hedges interviews Mohamed Elmazzi on the 'network of networks', The Institute for Statecraft and the Integrity Initiative. Be warned, these propaganda 'clusters' have also been identified in Canada, where their work will obviously be a piece of cake given the slavish and exclusive adherence to msm master narratives only.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

None of shat you say Ken changes the grim reality that Corbyn will never win an election and may leave Labour so crippled that

it will not be electorally viable for years and years

It can't be MADE electable by moving sharply to the right again.   The Labour Right made itself permanently unelectable by abstaining on Tory benefit cuts.  If the "center-left" isn't EVEN-after abandoning all other significant differences with the Tories-going to be an absolute opponent of any and all assaults on the social wage-the social welfare state, the only thing Labour can still use to make life better for the working and kept-from-working poor if it stays with the right-wing's insistence that renationalization and increasing taxes on the rich are off limits-if the Labour Right isn't even going to guarantee that there will never again be any lost ground for the poor, and it can't make such a guarantee without opposing all further proposals for cutting the social wage-than in what way is the Labour Right different than the Tories at all?

If the Labour Right is just as indifferent to the poor as the Tories are-and effectively supporting the Tory assault on the social wage proves  that they are just as indifferent-why don't they all just cross over to the Tory bench and be done with it?

Labour has no reason to exist, nicky, if it's program is just going to be "it's enough that we'll be nicer about it".   

And what Corbyn's opponents still don't get is that, in abstaining on the cuts, they admitted that that IS what they want the Labour agenda reduced to.

Nothing outside of at least preserving all existing social benefits can be of any benefit, if nationalization and the preservation of the NHS as free at the point of service are abandoned.  There can't be a Labour austerity, especially if it is caused by an agreement to keep taxes on the rich artificially low.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

I do thank you, nicky, for admitting what everyone else has been saying the whole time-that your agenda has never been anything other than putting the Blairites back in control of Labour, no matter what damage that will do.

cco

Ken Burch wrote:

Nothing outside of at least preserving all existing social benefits can be of any benefit, if nationalization and the preservation of the NHS as free at the point of service are abandoned.  There can't be a Labour austerity, especially if it is caused by an agreement to keep taxes on the rich artificially low.

This is the ultimate and inevitable conclusion of neoliberal "centrist" capitalist party politics: the idea that what's really important is the brand of conservatism, not the ideology. Blair is to be praised for winning three back-to-back conservative majorities under the Labour brand, because Labour are compassionate conservatives, while the Tories are only espousing the same ideas because they're evil. Bush started wars because he's a warmonger, while Hillary started wars because she's a thoughtful stateswoman living realistically in a difficult world. Harper liked pipelines because he was controlled by Albertan oil barons, while Trudeau builds pipelines because it's important to balance economic growth with environmental concern.

And hey: lots of people buy the argument. Many of them write op-eds in which they pat themselves on the back for being the sensible ones who can see the real truth of the divine mandate of conservatism with left-wing branding. Then they castigate left-wingers for staying home instead of voting Red Tory.

The establishment panic over Corbyn's leadership of Labour has been informative. They have the Kissinger-esque perspective that "We can't let a party go left-wing just because of the irresponsibility of its members." The mere possibility of real change being on the ballot is so terrifying that they need to threaten a military coup. Every time the latest smear fails to stick, what returns is concern trolling for the health of the brand.

Pages