United Kingdom 2

851 posts / 0 new
Last post
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Ken , perhaps you should look up the definition of “perceived” before you throw out words like “lies”

Why would you even REPEAT those "perceptions" when you know there's nothing to them?  And why would you credit the Panorama broadcast when you know it was largely driven by a smear campaign the Labour Right has been perpetuating ever since Corbyn became leader?

Corbyn has flaws-though no more than anybody else who has ever led his party-but why on earth would you trust the claims of people who are obsessed with getting the British public to believe that a man who has campaigned against all forms of bigotry, throughout his life, is a secret bigot?  Whatever you might feel about Corbyn, even if you think he's a bad leader, could he possibly be so intolerable that the use of slander is justified in the name of forcing him out?

And, looking at it on the level of practical politics...since Labour can't win the next election without a massive level of voter turnout, and there can't be a massive turnout if young voters stay away from the polls in disgust, how do you figure any successor to Corbyn can avoid a massive decline in youth voter turnout if there is the "perception", as you like to say, that that successor is only in the job because Corbyn was forced to stand down as the result of a successful campaign of vilification and slander?  We all know that would be the widespread perception if anybody the PLP would approve of ended in the leadership.

nicky

I know nothing of the sort Ken, so stop accusing me of bad faith

you should reassess your simplistic black and white lingo.

there is ample evidence of anti-semitism in some parts of the Labour Party. Corbyn to his shame and to his cost has latgely looked the other way.

as for your repeated monsense that any othrr leader would drive away Labour supporters, particularly “everyone under 40, perhaps you can explain why Labour’s level of support, as low as it has recently been, gas been consistently higher than Corbyn’s approval level? Whatever rationalization you might cling to any objective oerson would say Corbyn is a huge drag on Lanour’s electoral prospects.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

I know nothing of the sort Ken, so stop accusing me of bad faith

you should reassess your simplistic black and white lingo.

there is ample evidence of anti-semitism in some parts of the Labour Party. Corbyn to his shame and to his cost has latgely looked the other way.

as for your repeated monsense that any othrr leader would drive away Labour supporters, particularly “everyone under 40, perhaps you can explain why Labour’s level of support, as low as it has recently been, gas been consistently higher than Corbyn’s approval level? Whatever rationalization you might cling to any objective oerson would say Corbyn is a huge drag on Lanour’s electoral prospects.

1) There is no "ample evidence" of antisemitism.   There is simply ample evidence that a lot of Labour Party members and supporters(and some MPs) recognize that the Palestinians have massive, legitimate grievances against the Israeli government.  Some of the people who recognize that are anti-Zionist(that is, they want the current State of Israel replaced by a secular democratic state in which all faiths and all people are equal).  While I respect the optimism and good intent of those who advocate this,  I personally don't take that position at this stage, because I don't believe it will be workable without a massive reconciliation program, which would primarily be focused on admitting that a lot of the anger Palestinians feel towards Israel is justified and on healing the wounds inflicted by various Israeli governments on the Palestinian community, although it would also address situations in which Palestinian forces have used excessive force or harmed innocent Israelis.  This position is clearly not antisemitic.  There are, I think, a larger group of people who would identify as non-Zionist or, as might be better stated, neutrals between the Israeli and Palestinian sides.  These people-from what I can see, Corbyn is in this camp-support a two state solution, but believe that, to get there, there has to be the same reconciliation and validation process I listed above.  Like the first group, they believe that both national communities have a right to live on these lands and have equal roots in these lands-mainly, they don't believe that it's appropriate to ask any country, anywhere, to simply go out of existence as currently constituted.  It obviously goes without saying that this position is not antisemitic as well.  Another group who are among those who are falsely accused of antisemitism are the remnants of left-Zionism.  They recognize that Palestinians have been treated unjustly, but still hold to the myth that there was something noble and heroic in creating the State of Israel in and of itself, and perhaps still hold to the conviction-delusional, in the view of a lot of people-that there's still the possibility that there might be a future Israeli government which, unlike Netanyahu and Trump, doesn't oppose peace and which accepts, also unlike Netanyahu and Trump, that it's never going to be possible to get peace WITHOUT the creation of a Palestinian state, because it will never be possible to get the armed Palestinian factions to give up the armed struggle without something they can call victory.  These are the three groups who are being accused of antisemitism by the Labour Right.

There is no "ample evidence" of actual prejudice against Jewish people or against Judaism as a set of religious traditions and cultures within Labour.  And there is nothing said by anyone who criticizes what the Israeli government does to Palestinians in the UK that can possibly be called antisemitic.

And funny thing...nobody ever accused Corbyn of abetting or refusing to fight antisemitism-or of being a covert antisemite himself-before he won the Labour leadership in overwhelming landslide victories in 2015 and 2016.  Even Margaret Hodge, the women who started the frenzy about this, never called him anything remotely like that before then. Does it not strike you as being in the least suspicious that this accusation was only made AFTER Corbyn won the leadership?  Or that one of those who helped fan this accusation, Alistair Campbell, was caught, during the 2005 election, proposing that Labour fight the election campaign against the Tories, whose leader at the time, Michael Howard, had been a Jewish child refugee brought to the UK and was then made to convert to Christianity by his adoptive parents, that would have had clearly antisemitic imagery in which Howard was depicted as a flying pig, and another in which Howard was pictured with a swinging Shylock-like wig?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/feb/11/advertising.politics

All we have are accusations...most of which are ludicrous, such as the accusation that a man brought in to investigate a constituency party in Liverpool was asked if he was Israeli-in truth, as the recording of the conversation revealed, the man was simply asked "where he was from"-which most likely meant which part of the UK  the man was from-especially since the person who asked this man the question was himself Jewish.

All we have is a lot of accusations made by people on the Labour Right-the section of the party which was historically the most antisemitic part of Labour, as evidenced by the record of Ernest Bevin, a Jew-hating bull who was Foreign Secretary in the Attlee government, a government that barred virtually all Jewish refugee immigration to the UK even after 1945 and who, personally, tried to force a boatload of Jewish refugees seeking to make landing at Haifa to turn around and offload its passengers in Germany, of all places.  Accusations are simply accusations.  It matters who makes accusations-especially since everyone making them is making them solely as part of an antisocialist, antidemocratic agenda.

And I didn't say that no possible successor to Corbyn at ALL could win the votes of the young.  I said no successor from the right wing of the party could do that.  Since the Labour Right has no policies that appeal to anybody who isn't at least 45 and a millionaire, I think you'd pretty much have to concede the point.

Whatever else happens, it must be accepted that Blairism is extinct and that the right wing of the party, for once, owes the party loyalty it has always demanded that the left wing show to any right wing leader.

It's impossible for Labour to ever win another election the way Blair did-and it would be worse than losing for Labour to fight an election-as it would have with Liz Kendall or David Miliband-on a platform massively to the RIGHT of Blair.

Labour needs to be socialist and internally democratic to be alive and relevant.  

 

 

 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

If John McDonnell were the successor, he would win the young.  As would pretty much anybody on the Left.  But Labour has to be Left to get the votes of the young.

Debater

Councillor Gary Poole resigns from the Labour Party to protest its Anti-Semitism:

https://twitter.com/CllrGaryPoole/status/1150727692762910721

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The Labour Party isn't antisemitic.  It's never anti-semitic simply to criticize what the Israeli government does to Palestinians.  There's no reason for this slur to keep being perpetuated against the party, when it's the Right that does the actual antisemitism.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Debater, you haven't been participating in this thread until very recently, so perhaps you did not see this video about the claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters, which was linked in post #283. I highly advise you to watch it.

nicky

Corbyn will not be able to sweep this under the carpet.

Meanwhile, more than 200 former and current Labour staffers demanded an explanation from party bosses over the treatment of the Panorama whistleblowers.

The staffers wrote to Corbyn asking for more support for whistleblowers after the programme in a letter coordinated by the former MEP candidate Amy Fowler. It says staff watched the programme on Wednesday night with “alarm and anxiety” and that the party’s response has been “to smear Jewish victims, and former staff, accusing them of acting in bad faith”.

It says: “The way the party has threatened and denigrated these whistleblowers is appalling, hypocritical and a total betrayal of Labour’s core values. Exposing racism and corruption represents Labour values in action, and these whistleblowers should be thanked, not demonised.”

It also addresses a series of questions to Corbyn about the extent of his knowledge of any interference in antisemitism cases and the workplace atmosphere in the party.

“The crisis has moved beyond a question of rules and disciplinary processes, to a question of a political culture, and crucially, leadership,” the letter says. “As its leader, the moral responsibility for Labour’s antisemitism crisis ultimately sits with you. Own that responsibility, or give it away to someone who will.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/15/labour-staffers-letter-jeremy-corbyn-whistleblowers

of course The Guardian is a Blairite rag which should not be taken seriously. right Ken? Unlike Red Pepper or whatever that clarion of truth is called that you recommend.

 

josh

See, you're allowed to be smeared.  But you're not allowed to defend yourself.  Defending yourself, or defending others, from charges of anti-Semitism is now anti-Semitism.  Paging George Orwell.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

What nicky is saying is that the antisemitism smear against Corbyn has now become so large and powerful that the truth is irrelevant. No surprise there.

NDPP

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Debater, you haven't been participating in this thread until very recently, so perhaps you did not see this video about the claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters, which was linked in post #283. I highly advise you to watch it.

NDPP wrote:

And this...

"Norman Finkelstein was raised in New York's Coney Island neighborhood by Maryla Husyt Finkelstein and Zacharias Finkelstein, both Polish Jews who survived the Nazi holocaust. Here's his view on Corbyn Anti-Semite claims..." WATCH:

https://twitter.com/angelcakepics/status/1144194715786645506

 

nicky

I search my posts in vain to see what justifies Michael m in saying:

"What nicky is saying is that the antisemitism smear against Corbyn has now become so large and powerful that the truth is irrelevant."

 First  I don't believe it is a smear to say that:

1. Anti-Semitism is rife among a large number of Corbyn's supporters.

2. Corbyn is condoning it by looking the other way

3. Labour needs to confront this issue foursquare and not pretend it doesnt exist.

The Guardian article exposes a fresh concern: that Corbyn's inner circle to trying to intimidate the whistleblowers with personal attacks. This tactic is of grave concern.

It is one thing to address the allegations itself, but it is quite another to denigate and slander the whistleblowers as individuals.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

I search my posts in vain to see what justifies Michael m in saying:

"What nicky is saying is that the antisemitism smear against Corbyn has now become so large and powerful that the truth is irrelevant."

 

What I mean is that you keep posting every piece of anti-Corbyn propaganda without concern for its source or veracity. As long is it defames Corbyn, you love it. The more successful the smears seem to be, the more you crow in triumph. At the same time, you refuse to confront the factual points and arguments of the many reputable people who point out the phony nature of this smear campaign. If you would like to correct that, you could start by saying what you think of the comments by Norman Finkelstein linked in post 412.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

1.  Antisemitism is NOT rife among Corbyn's supporters-a lot of them are non-Zionists, but as even nicky would have to concede, it's not antisemitic to be non-Zionist.  Zionism is not synonymous with Judaism(it didn't exist for most of Jewish history, after all).

2.  As it is not "rife", there's nothing for Corbyn to look over.

3.  There is no justification for auto-expelling people on accusations of antisemitism, because that would simply be a recipe for a witch hunt.  Anti-Corbyn MPs would use autoexpulsion to essentially force all Corbynites out of the party on "accusations".

4) In his three decades of public life before winning the Labour leadership, nobody ever associated Corbyn with antisemitism, and nobody associated the Labour Left with it either.  There is clearly no merit to the charge now, and the whole point of it is simply to force all socialists out of the party and force the party to adopt policies which, as nicky would have to admit, would make it impossible for any Labour member or supporter to support the Palestinian cause.  

5) Those pushing the antisemitism smear will not stop until everything socialist or Left has been erased from the party and Labour has once again lowered itself to the essentially Tory policies of Tony Blair-policies on which Labour would never win another election, policies essentially nobody in the wider British electorate even wants Labour to reduce itself to again.

It would be one thing for people to simply oppose Corbyn-but there is no excuse for falsely accusing the man of condoning a form of bigotry he has spent his entire career opposing OR for imposing the absurd idea that the only way a person can prove that they are not an antisemite is for that person to become an unquestioning Likudnik.

NDPP

On Contact: George Galloway on Populism, Racism and Antisemitism

https://youtu.be/dQbFeBGNImc

"Chris Hedges discusses with George Galloway, former UK MP, the state of politics in the UK and USA racism, and Islamophobia and antisemitism."

nicky

Michael, I think all the sources i reference are reputable and mostly relatively left-wing. You may not care for the Guardian but it has been a voice of the moderate left for decades and maintains a much higher degree of responsible journalism than much up the MSM, particularly the Murdoch press.

The Corbynites by pretending that there is no problems are simply apologist who allow perpetuation of the problem.

josh

The Guardian is weaponizing anti-Semitism because it wants to bring Corbyn down over the EU.  Israel's supporters are weaponizing it because they want to bring him down over Palestine.  Blairites are weaponizing it because they want to bring him down because he opposes neo-Thatcherism.  And the Conservatives and their media are weaponizing it because they want to defeat Labour.

And this tactic has leap frogged the pond:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-democrats-are-totally-anti-israel-and-anti-jewish

 

contrarianna

nicky wrote:

Michael, I think all the sources i reference are reputable and mostly relatively left-wing. You may not care for the Guardian but it has been a voice of the moderate left for decades and maintains a much higher degree of responsible journalism than much up the MSM, particularly the Murdoch press.

The Corbynites by pretending that there is no problems are simply apologist who allow perpetuation of the problem.

"Apologists for a problem" is another BS smear.  If nicky isn't already on the job keeping the colonials in line, there are always employment opportunities: 

2 July 2019
UPDATE: GCHQ are currently advertising to recruit more trolls to carry out precisely the activity I outline here. As their advertisement puts it:

"We are looking to recruit individuals who can contribute to a step change in the UK’s ability to project cyber power against our adversaries, in order to keep the UK safe. You will be at the forefront of the nation’s covert online capability. We want people who can help support and run operations that disrupt and degrade our adversaries’ ability to do us harm, and contest malign activity in cyber space."

I do hope this helps cut through the cognitive dissonance for those of you who found it difficult to come to terms with the truth of the below....

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/how-to-spot-a-twitter-tr...
 
On some issues the Guardian is more progressive than average MSM, but when it comes to the UK security state, UK foreign policy, and core US/UK imperialism, it is in documented and obvious collusion--and a regular printer of fabrications.

The Guardian’s direct collusion with media censorship by secret services exposed
By Thomas Scripps 
22 June 2019
....
Last week, independent journalist Matt Kennard revealed that the paper’s deputy editor, Paul Johnson, was personally thanked by the Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice (or D-Notice) committee for integrating the Guardian into the operations of the security services.

Minutes of a meeting in 2018 read: “The Chairman thanked Paul Johnson for his service to the Committee. Paul had joined the Committee in the wake of the Snowden affair and had been instrumental in re-establishing links with the Guardian.”

D-Notices are used by the British state to veto the publication of news damaging to its interests. The slavish collusion of the mainstream media ensures that such notices function as gag orders.

Johnson joined the committee in 2014 and evidently excelled in his performance. A separate set of minutes from the first meeting attended by Johnson records the Guardian’s close collaboration with military officials....

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/06/22/guar-j22.html

Images of Matt Kennard's source documents for this story here:

https://twitter.com/DCKennard/status/1138793429184503808

Accordingly, Corbyn anti-militarism stance makes him a target of UK military/intel, and its servile Guardian. 

Media smoothed way to Corbyn target practice
3 April 2019

....
Then, there was the serving British general who was given a platform by the Sunday Times – anonymously, of course – to accuse Corbyn of being a threat to British national security. The general warned that the army’s senior command would never allow Corbyn near Number 10. They would launch a coup first.

But no one in the corporate media or the political establishment thought the interview worthy of much attention, or demanded an investigation to find out which general had threatened to overturn the democratic will of the people. The story was quickly dropped down the memory hole. Those who sought to draw attention to it were told to move on, that there was nothing to see.

And now, this week, footage has emerged showing British soldiers – apparently taking their commanders’ expressed wishes more seriously than the media – using a poster of Corbyn as target practice out in Afghanistan....

https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2019-04-03/corbyn-army-target-practice/

The plot to keep Corbyn out of power
3 July 2019
....
The Guardian has been typical in mischaracterising Williamson’s remarks not once but each time it has covered developments in his case. Every Guardian report has stated, against the audible evidence, that Williamson said Labour was “too apologetic about anti-semitism”. In short, the Guardian and the rest of the media have insinuated that Williamson approves of anti-semitism. But what he actually said was that Labour was “too apologetic” when dealing with unfair or unreasonable allegations of anti-semitism, that it had too willingly accepted the unfounded premise of its critics that the party condoned racism....

Now, however, we have leading liberal commentators such as the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland claiming not only that Israel is integral to their Jewish identity but that they speak for all other Jews in making such an identification. To criticise Israel is to attack them as Jews, and by implication to attack all Jews. And therefore any Jew dissenting from this consensus, any Jew identifying as anti-Zionist, any Jew in Labour who supports Corbyn – and there are many, even if they are largely ignored – are denounced, in line with Lansman, as the “wrong kind of Jews”. It may be absurd logic, but such ideas are now so commonplace as to be unremarkable....

https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2019-07-03/plot-corbyn-out-power/

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

nicky wrote:

Michael, I think all the sources i reference are reputable and mostly relatively left-wing. You may not care for the Guardian but it has been a voice of the moderate left for decades and maintains a much higher degree of responsible journalism than much up the MSM, particularly the Murdoch press.

The Corbynites by pretending that there is no problems are simply apologist who allow perpetuation of the problem.

How have you not noticed that The Guardian has been on an unrelenting vendetta against Corbyn from the moment he won the leadership?  That they were attacking him BEFORE the antisemitism canard had been invented?

BTW, nicky, Corbyn is supporting a second referendum.  Isn't that enough?  It's not reasonable to demand that Labour back Remain in the referendum even if they negotiate a soft Brexit deal that's significantly better than the Tories hard Brexit.

And you would, I assume, concede, as anyone on the left would have to concede, that the EU's rules on spending, tax and nationalization have to be radically changed if any form of progressive governance is to be made possible.

Debater

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Debater, you haven't been participating in this thread until very recently, so perhaps you did not see this video about the claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters, which was linked in post #283. I highly advise you to watch it.

I find it curious that the Canadian Babblers here are so defensive of Corbyn.  It's clear that he has a problem and is not considered a great leader.  I don't claim to be an expert on the entire subject, but did you see the new letter I posted above by the Labour councillor who has quit the party in protest of its anti-Semitism?  So these criticisms are not just coming from the Conservatives or the media, but from long-time Labour members themselves.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Debater wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Debater, you haven't been participating in this thread until very recently, so perhaps you did not see this video about the claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters, which was linked in post #283. I highly advise you to watch it.

I find it curious that the Canadian Babblers here are so defensive of Corbyn.  It's clear that he has a problem and is not considered a great leader.  I don't claim to be an expert on the entire subject, but did you see the new letter I posted above by the Labour councillor who has quit the party in protest of its anti-Semitism?  So these criticisms are not just coming from the Conservatives or the media, but from long-time Labour members themselves.

Please watch the video. It explains the situation much better than I ever could. But in short, the attacks on Corbyn come  from the economic and political establishment. In this case it is channeled through the vehicle of the Israel lobby, which includes many current Labour Party members, who are seemingly more attached to the Israeli government than they are to their own country or their own party. Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein both believe that the claims are totally false, and intended to defeat the left wing movement that Corbyn leads. As I noted earlier to nicky, none of us here care that much about Corbyn (although he seems to be a very decent and intelligent person), we care about the socialist message that he preaches.

nicky
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Watson wants to do a witch hunt.  He knows perfectly well-as do you, nicky-that Labour does not have a significant incidence of antisemitism and that the left wing of the party has always been the fiercest opponents of antisemitism of any part of the British political spectrum.  He, and you, also know perfectly well that criticism of what the Israeli governmennt does is virtually NEVER antisemitic-it almost all cases, it is based on the reality that what the Israeli government has done to Palestinians, on a continual basis, since 1948, is utterly indefensible.

Auto-expulsion on accusations would mean that the Blairites-remember, Watson is the Blairite of Blairites-would instantly launch a massive wave of accusations-all of them false-against the socialist wing of the party.  

That letter that Debater posted is simply part of this push for a witch hunt against socialists-it was probably drafted in Watson's office.

Why on earth do you believe everything anybody who attacks Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Left ever say?  Why do you take all of that as the absolute truth?

The sickening part of this is that the push to equate criticism of the Israeli government with hatred of Jews-something that it never is in real life-is, itself, based on an antisemitic trope-the despicable lie that Israel as a country and the Israeli government as a government are somehow synonymous with "the Jews"-the attempt to imply that Judaism and Zionism are now, essentially, one the same, is connected with kind of bigoted right-wing hate speech that created terms like "the Zionist Occupation Government", a phrase ACTUAL antisemites like the Liberty Lobby used to use to imply that every Jewish person on the planet was somehow part of a conspiracy to place the interests of the Israeli government above of the national interest of countries like the U.S. and Canada.

Why on earth, should anybody, in order to prove that they are not an antisemite, be required to use an antisemitic trope?

Jews are a variety of peoples from a variety of places, many with wildly differing cultural traditions.

Judaism is a variety of faith traditions ranging from the Chasidim to the Reformed.

Israel is simply one country among a variety of the world's countries.

Zionism is simply one nationalist movement in a world of nationalist movement.

None of those are synonymous with any of the other.

Is that really so difficult to understand?

And while Jeremy Corbyn is hardly infallible or flawless-neither he nor his supporters have ever claimed he was either of those things-he has never, at any point in his life, done or said anything to deserve being accused of abetting a form of bigotry everyone knows he has never abetted or tolerated.

And it's absurd for there to be this much of a frenzy about antisemitism when, for decades, it has been the least-prevalent form of bigotry in the UK and when almost all antisemites in the UK are extreme right-wingers like Nigel Farage.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

In any case, Labour would never be worth electing again if it went back to the kind of policies Watson, Hodge, and Blair want it to go back to-a Labour Party that went back to defending austerity, defending the brutal benefits sanctions policies the Tories have imposed, defending military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world, continuing to slowly kill the NHS by doing public-private partnerships and letting corporations in, would be no different than the Tories.  There's nothing Labour could still disagree with the Tories on if it went back to that(as the 187 Blairite MPs in the PLP are obsessed with dragging it back to, even though nobody else in the party wants Labour to move to the right on anything)that could possibly matter.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Debater wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Debater, you haven't been participating in this thread until very recently, so perhaps you did not see this video about the claims of antisemitism against Corbyn and his supporters, which was linked in post #283. I highly advise you to watch it.

I find it curious that the Canadian Babblers here are so defensive of Corbyn.  It's clear that he has a problem and is not considered a great leader.  I don't claim to be an expert on the entire subject, but did you see the new letter I posted above by the Labour councillor who has quit the party in protest of its anti-Semitism?  So these criticisms are not just coming from the Conservatives or the media, but from long-time Labour members themselves.

1.  The claim that Labour is infested with antisemites has been repeatedly proven to be a right-wing lie.

2.  Corbyn is not flawless, but he is the first decent and honest person who has led the Labour Party in decades.  Some of us don't want to see him replaced by a cynical right-wing hack who would have no support other than the 187 Labour MPs who are only in their seats because Neil Kinnock or Tony Blair imposed them as nominees decades ago, and virtually all of them hold seats Labour would have automatically won with any candidate.  

This whole thing is about forcing Corbyn out and replacing him with a Blairite.  It's never been about anything else.  And there numerous links people have posted-I'd particulary recommend the newest Jonathan Cook link about the plot-which prove that Labour's "antisemitism problem" is a myth.

You have no reason to believe anything nicky posts-nicky seems to live solely to berate Corbyn and his supporters and niclu a;sp thinks Tom Mulcair, of all people, was a better party leader than Corbyn is-as in, the Tom Mulcair who lost more than half of his party's seats in an election where his party started in the lead and who, were he still leader, would be doomed to do badly in this election as well.

You can expect nearly identical resignation letters from other Labour figures to keep popping up.  They are all from the Blairite/Blue Labour wing of the party and the people releasing them would be scheming to force Corbyn out no matter what-they want to drag Labour back to Blair's policies, even though there's no large bloc of voters in the UK who want Labour to move that brutally far to the right again.

nicky

Debater,

I

don't know if you have followed our ongoing discussion of Corbyn’s merits or not. If you have, you will no doubt have noted that Ken charmingly cuts and pastes the same simplistic talking points over and over. He makes sweeping unsupported claims about the wonders of Corbyn and the complete perfidy of anyone who doubts his saintliness.

He dwells endlessly on the meme that TOM Mulcair lost about 1/3 of the NDP’s previous vote and that since I was a supporter of TOM (and still think he would compare well to the current federal “leadership” of all parties) that this delegitimizes anything I say about Corbyn. He neglects to mention that Corbyn lost 2/3 s of the Labour vote in the recent EU election.

whenever anyone ventures a criticism of Corbyn, Ken, channeling Joe McCarthy, claims there is “a conspiracy so immense” led by shadowy  Blairites, Zionists, and probably bankers and free masons.

He claims that the huge reservations about Corbyn amongst sincere Labour Party members and a vast majority of its MPs is “ only” motivated by a desire to replace him with some right winger for whom “ no one under 40” would ever vote.

No Ken, many sincere Social Democrats pray that Labour replaces Corbyn in order to avert the electoral catastrphre that looms. They recognize him as the biggest impediment to Labour regaining power and replacing a terrible Conservative government with a progressive reforming one. That, Ken, is the motivation and not the evil plots of your fantasies.

nicky

“In recent months Corbyn’s leadership ratings have dropped substantially and in the latest Ipsos Mori polling 75% of those sampled said they were dissatisfied with his leadership. This is the highest negative ever recorded of any opposition leader and suggests that he is a an electoral liability. Even most LAB voters in the polling say they they are dissatisfied.”

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/17/60-lab-peers-pay-for-guardian-ad-to-tell-corbyn-that-he-fails-the-test-of-leadership/

“Boris Johnson wants to hold an early general election “while Jeremy Corbyn is still around”, senior allies have said as his team plans to overhaul the Conservative Party’s campaign machine.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/conservative-leadership-race-boris-johnson-plans-early-election-to-hit-corbyn-h7d0rq090

 

 

 

 

josh
nicky

Josh, the surest way to destroy the Labour Party is to keep Corbyn as its leader.

those who want him replaced are trying to save it.

his dwindling band of supporters try to neutralize criticism of him by falsely claiming it only comes from Blairites and right wingers. This is false.

josh

No, they are out to destroy the party because they didn't get their way.  Meanwhile, the left of the party, including Corbyn, stayed loyal throughout all the years of Blairite neo-Thatcherism and neo-con foreign policy. 

nicky

So how do you explain this Josh?

“In recent months Corbyn’s leadership ratings have dropped substantially and in the latest Ipsos Mori polling 75% of those sampled said they were dissatisfied with his leadership. This is the highest negative ever recorded of any opposition leader and suggests that he is a an electoral liability. Even most LAB voters in the polling say they they are dissatisfied.”

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/07/17/60-lab-peers-pay-for-guardian-ad-to-tell-corbyn-that-he-fails-the-test-of-leadership/

“highest negative ever recorded.” Does that not open your myopic yes just a little?

josh
nicky

Imagine how much better Labour would be doing if it were not handicapped with the most unpopular leader ever.

josh

Well, I guess the leaders of the other parties must be even more unpopular.

nicky

No Josh, you can't find refuge in that delusion. 

Read the passage : Corbyn  has "the highest negatives ever recorded." 

All other leaders are less unpopular, even PM May who has always rated higher then Corbyn.

josh

Not a surprise when he is under unrelenting attack and smearing from both within and without his party, and from the Daily Mail to the EU Guardian.  It's a testament to him and true Labourites that both he and the party are still standing.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

The only way Labour would have a leader who wasn't under that kind of attack, nicky, would be if it were led by another Tory like Blair, or Hodge, or Watson.  The only type of Labour leader who wouldn't be getting smeared by the corporate press and the BBC and the British political establishment in general would be a supporter of austerity and low taxes for the rich and perpetual war in the Arab/Muslim world.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Proof that Jeremy is a committed opponent of antisemitism and always has been:  https://www.facebook.com/GlasgowForCorbyn/videos/2308005649458300/

NDPP

Europe's Unelected Leader

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/07/16/europes-unelected-leader/

"Ursula von der Leyden's coronation is an insult to democracy. Fortunately for her, popularity is not an issue for unelected Eurocrats. With the appointment of von der Leyden, the EU has abandoned any pretence of democratic influence over its governing structures..."

 

Labour's Brexit Capitulation is the End of Corbynism

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/07/17/long-read-labours-brexit-capit...

"The Labour party's recent Brexit capitulation is a betrayal of Labour supporters who voted LEAVE and were promised in the 2017 election that the party would respect the majority's decision. It has also proven that the Labour Party cannot be used for genuinely transformative ends and it heralds the end of Corbynism as a political project. Clearly, Labour is heading the way of Syriza: a supposedly radical, left-populist movement that promised genuine transformation but ended up enacting EU diktat..."

NDPP

Democracy: The Unfinished Revolution

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/07/08/democracy-the-unfinished-revolu...

"This is an opportunity we should seize. In this era of democratic hunger, the case should be made not simply for leaving the EU, but for dismantling all the other ways in which the people's will is filtered, hampered and in many cases outright thwarted. Not just the EU, but every institution that is unaccountable to the people..."

nicky
josh

LOL.  Yes, let's bring back Gordo and Ed Millband.  Oh,, I forgot, Milliband was considered too far left.  And anti-Israel.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

It would be pointless for Labour to fight an election with Tom Watson as leader.  The only reason for Labour to exist is to oppose the entire Thatcher/Major/Cameron/May status quo.  And no one who still defends the Iraq War has any moral right to claim to be Labour.

The Spectator, in case you've somehow missed this, is one of the most right-wing rags in all of the UK.  It supported Hitler and Mussolini in the Thirties.

The only way Watson could win the leadership would be for all left candidates to be barred from the ballot-as Watson himself seems to recognize by his apparent decision to rule out seeking the leadership himself.

BTW, that article itself labeled the campaign against Corbyn as a plot.  Why would you ever want to support plotters and conspirators?  Nothing left ever results from plotting and treachery and it can't serve the greater good of the Left for what is supposed to be the Left party only having leaders the anti-Left faction of the party-the faction which has no public support-approves of.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

More about how Labour was run when the claque who say Corbyn's supporters racist or antisemitic ran it:  https://novaramedia.com/2019/03/03/no-labour-hasnt-always-been-an-anti-r...

nicky

But first comes actually winning an election. The strong sense is that McDonnell, along with much of the shadow cabinet, is infuriated by everything that gets in the way of that. Imagine the despair of losing an election to Boris Johnson and facing another five years of social destruction. Day after day it gets clearer that Corbyn is the chief obstacle: weak, vacillating, glum and scoring the lowest ever poll ratings for an opposition leader as he fails to grasp the severity of Labour’s crisis over antisemitism and Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/18/jeremy-corbyn-weak-leadership-labour-poverty-john-mcdonnell

josh

If Boris Johnson wins, it will be the fault of those who have done everything possible to obstruct the verdict of the 2016 referendum.  

nicky

You’re right Ken. Only Red Pepper is authoritative or objective

NorthReport

Pages