Starmer As Labour's leader - what should he do?

438 posts / 0 new
Last post
nicky

NDPP, are you talking about the “great whistleblower and freedom fighter” who conspired with the Trump campaign to put him in power and who, like him, is likely a rapist to boot?

NDPP

No. That's the  propaganda construction long debunked and created by those the fearless leader of the UK Labour Party  worked on behalf of. Except you forgot 'the Russians' bit of the demonization. You're misinformed of course and should review your mistaken assumptions unless, as I suspect, you prefer them to actual proven realities. Thanks for disclosing, will let you, Ken et al get back to flogging the dead horse that is UK Labour under Sir Keir.

Matt Kennard With 5 Key Questions For UK's New Labour Leader

https://twitter.com/TheGrayZoneNews/status/1269070916941725696

"The public deserves answers about Keir Starmer's relationship with the national security establishment, including MI5 and The Times newspaper, and his former role in the Julian Assange case..."

NDPP

"As the Black Lives Matter struggle challenges racist police brutality on an international scale, Sir Keir Starmer delivers a powerful, uncompromising and heartfelt message of solidarity - WITH THE POLICE!

https://twitter.com/JohnOCAP/status/1277630553420898307

"Keir Starmer has declared that the call from BLM to defund the police is 'nonsense."

Sir Keir Starmer is a Pig Politician. See #153

NDPP

Labour MP: 'The Party that Created the NHS and Founded NATO'...

https://twitter.com/JoshuaYJackson/status/1308366038568964097

"Founded NATO.' Creating a militarist organization led by former Nazis complicit in the deaths of millions and threatening world peace isn't something to be proud of Angela."

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

NDPP, are you talking about the “great whistleblower and freedom fighter” who conspired with the Trump campaign to put him in power and who, like him, is likely a rapist to boot?

Trump didn't scrape in because of Assange.  He scraped in because HRC ran a horrifically awful campaign and took the "firewall states" for granted.

What nicky's post does illustrate, however-since nicky's views, in many respects, echo those of the establishment wing of the Democratic Party in the States- is why those establishment Dems are all in on the prosecution/persecution of Assange.  They still can't accept that Trump's Electoral College victory was entirely their own fault, and they want the book thrown at Assange because, if he is given a life sentence, it gives them another excuse for an avoidable defeat that nobody but themselves bears responsibility for.

nicky

No Ken, that’s not accurate at all. There were many reasons for Clinton’s loss but Assange’s meddling was surely one of them. Trump’s win was so close that Assange was likely enough to put him over the top. Of course we’re were other reasons that also could have been decisive by themselves.

NDPP

No it wasn't. Not even close. But the very few who did bother to read those godawful emails will never ever see the Democratic Party the same way again.

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

No Ken, that’s not accurate at all. There were many reasons for Clinton’s loss but Assange’s meddling was surely one of them. Trump’s win was so close that Assange was likely enough to put him over the top. Of course we’re were other reasons that also could have been decisive by themselves.

Assange's role was far less important than

1) The fact that Hillary never held a rally in the Wisconsin or Michigan, and only one in Pennsylvania in the fall campaign, but focused instead on trying to flip states like Arizona and Georgia that everyone knew she was never going to flip.  The arrogance of that choice offended and drove away hundreds of thousand of voters in those states, many in the Democratic base itself, who sat out the election in disgust at the dismissiveness they'd been subjected to;

2) The fact that Hillary never mentioned the Sanders items she had had to accept in the Democratic platform in her campaign ads-ads that focused solely, instead, on the useless, irrelevant themes of A) "it's time for a woman as president", B) "Defend reproductive choice", a valid issue, but hardly the most important item on most of the country's agenda that year, and C) "Trump is a misogynist scumbag"- a true fact, but a fact that no swing voter anywhere cared about, as the results proved;

3) Her refusal to allow the Democratic platform to explicitly oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade accord, giving Trump his single-most effective wedge issue;

4) Her all out support for the bloodsoaked, militarist LBJ/"Scoop Jackson" Democratic foreign policy tradition, which gave Trump another wedge issue by allowing him to present himself as the peace candidate- a presentation, bogus that it is, that he continues to this day in his insincere yet loud denuniciation of "endless wars"- a presentation which leaves the Biden-Harris wing of the party running to his right on military policy;

If the Clinton campaign had been explicitly anti-TPP, had run ads specifically appealing to Sanders voters and promising them that their issues would be a real part of her agenda as president- none of the Sanders items in the platform were in any way unpopular- if she had treated working-class voters of all races as being just as important as the wealthy white suburbanites she was courting in Georgia and Arizona- the ones who were never GOING to vote for her, because wealthy white suburbanites never vote for anyone but the most right wing candidate in the race- if she had done any of that, she would have won.

Her campaign did none of that, and, four years later, the Democratic establishment is insisting on running an exact replay of her failed campaign this year.   

That is why the establishment anti-progressive Dems are obsessed with passing the blame from themselves to Assange; they would rather stop any real change within the Democratic Party and lose by continuing to run as centrist militarists than win by letting the party change, letting it at least go New Deal 2.0 on economic issues.

Assange is a sometimes exasperating character, but he did not cause Trump.   The epic incompetence of the Clinton-Kaine campaign did that, combined by the epic stupidity of the Democratic establishment in insisting that the party nominate the least popular, least-electable and most-distrusted candidate they could find.  

And they've probably lost most of the next generation in the process.

There is a real danger that the Biden-Harris campaign will replicate the Tom Dewey GOP presidential campaign of 1948, in which Dewey, by saying nothing, lost what should have been an unlosable election.

And there is an even worse danger that, if that happens, the establishment Dems will once again argue that Democrats need to move even "further to the center" for 2024-they'll probably end up arguing that the party should just embrace the current GOP platform, with the sole exception of being mildly "pro-choice" and mildly pro-LGBTQ.

And that, after doing that, they will STILL pound their fists on the table and insist that all progressives have a moral obligation to "vote Blue- no matter WHO!"

 

NDPP

Three Labour MPs Lose Roles For Voting Against Overseas Operations Bill

https://twitter.com/richimedhurst/status/1308964435843780608

"Labour sacked 3 of its junior shadow ministers who defied the whip and voted against the legislation. Synchronous to the prosecution of journalist Julian Assange, MPs who object to torture are also silenced in the UK."

Bill would decriminalize war crimes/torture by UK soldiers with 5 year statute of limitations. See thread for more details. UK Labour under Starmer takes another giant step rightwards. In his previous role with the Crown Prosecution Service, Starmer also played a key role in the UK's lawfare against Julian Assange.

Ken Burch

 There's no way supporting that kind of bill or any part of the "national security state" mentality can gain Labour votes-there's no large block of voters who'd want left-of-centre domestic policies AND a state apparatus that suppresses dissent while keeping the permanent war economy going.  Social and economic justice and militarism can't co-exist.

NDPP

Senior MP Chris Bryant Nominates Joe Biden for Nobel Peace Prize

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/joe-biden-nominated-nobel-peace...

"Labour's Chris Bryant announced his move on the eve of the presidential debate between Mr Biden and Donald Trump."

Oh look the UK pseudo-left is already slobbering on the shoes of the next potential American overlord in chief.

NDPP

"Keir Starmer whips MPs to ABSTAIN on Tory bill to legalise crimes, including murder, by intelligence operatives."

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1314962863048585222

SIR Starmer's a pig. Look at his history with the CPS Crown Prosecution Service and his role in the UK Assange stitch-up conspiracy with USA, Sweden and Moreno's Ecuador.

NDPP

"Given his support for catastrophic privatized UK government coronavirus policy, when will Labour kick lobbyist-bankrolled Assange-persecutor Sir Keir Starmer OUT? After another 40k die in the worst G20 COVID death rate?"

https://twitter.com/afshinrattansi/status/1315675979361251329

josh
  • Sources say Keir Starmer is infuriated with Stephen Kinnock for using Commons debate to accuse Israel of behaviour 'tantamount to profiting from the proceeds of crime'
  • Labour did not deny reports that Mr Kinnock had been reprimanded for remarks
  • Mr Kinnock also called on UK to 'ban all products that originate from Israeli settlements in the occupied territories'
     

Keir Blair.

Ken Burch

And the most recent poll has Labour back down to six points behind the Tories...pretty much destroying the "nothing matters more than changing the leader" narrative.

We were all told that Labour would be way ahead in the polls with ANYBODY ELSE- we were even being told this during the last election, by people in the party who were trying to make sure Labour lost just so they could GET a leadership change.

Turns out it doesn't work, in practical political terms, to tell large chunks of the party they're totally to blame for what the other part of the party did and should now either shut up or leave, defend what you did to the leader they supported, and demand they get behind the leader you preferred after years where you refused to do the same.

Turns out there was no massive bloc of voters who were going to swing Labour in response to Labour's leader telling huge numbers of Labour supporters and activists to go eff themselves, especially if you're going to keep smearing them all with accusations that they're antisemites just because they aren't Likudniks.

Turns out you can't win an election by vilifying and punishing the people whose votes you need.

nicky

Funny Ken , how despite your analysis, Labour took the lead for the first time since the election in this poll released just today:

Labour retake their lead in the latest @OpiniumResearch poll, as the Conservatives fall slightly.

LAB: 40% (-)
CON: 38% (-2%)
LD: 6% (-)
SNP: 5% (-1%)

 

 

josh

Labour suspends Jeremy Corbyn over reaction to anti-Semitism report

Responding to the EHRC's findings, Mr Corbyn said he was "always determined to eliminate all forms of racism" and "regretted it took longer to deliver... change than it should".

But he claimed his team had "acted to speed up, not hinder the process", and that the scale of anti-Semitism in the party had been "dramatically overstated for political reasons".

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-54730425

Corbyn needs to leave the party now.  And form a new one.

nicky

I agree with you Josh. Corbyn needs to leave the Labour party which he has embarrassed and disgraced.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/29/labour-suspends-jeremy-...

josh

Sorry, it's the other way around.  There needs to be a true party of the left.  Not a Blairite party led by Sturmer, where any dissent is grounds for suspension.  If the left stays in party Blair, they deserve what they get.

josh

We are appalled that Jeremy Corbyn has been suspended from the Labour Party and the whip withdrawn. He has a proud record of fighting all forms of racism and antisemitism. This is an attack both on Jeremy and on the majority of party members.

https://twitter.com/JVoiceLabour/status/1321823776720490498?s=20

nicky

Corbyn's apologists should listen to Angela Rayner, one of his closest supporters in his leadership bids:

"Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, who was promoted to the shadow cabinet under Corbyn, said the former party leader had “an absolute blind spot” on appreciating the scale of the problem.

Asked by BBC Radio 4 about Corbyn’s suspension, she said: “I’m devastated that it’s come to this. Today should be about really listening, reading and taking in the report.”

She rejected the idea that the issue had been exaggerated for partisan reasons, saying people should read the EHRC report: “I think that brings shame on us, and there’s no mitigation of that, and we have to acknowledge that and do something about it.”

Asked about Corbyn’s response, she said: “I’m deeply, deeply upset by the circumstances, and upset that Jeremy wasn’t able to see the pain that the Jewish community have gone through.

“Jeremy is a fully decent man, but as Margaret Hodge said, he has an absolute blind spot, and a denial, when it comes to these issues. And that’s devastating.”

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

In my opinion, Angela Rayner has just revealed herself as a careerist asshole willing to embrace any lie to advance her own power, and eventually wealth. Disgusting.

josh

All he said was that it was dramatically overstated for political reasons.  Which is true.  

josh

Michael Moriarity wrote:

In my opinion, Angela Rayner has just revealed herself as a careerist asshole willing to embrace any lie to advance her own power, and eventually wealth. Disgusting.

She's deputy leader under a Blairite for a reason. 

NorthReport

Labour need to stop all their infighting and focus on all the chaos created in the country by the Johnson Conservatives. Now is a golden opportunity for Labour to create the conditions required to win the next election. 

NDPP

When you continually appease a powerful lobby like the Zionists such things can be expected to happen. Obviously with Corbyn, what goes around has come around.

nicky

Have any of you you even read the EH Report? It's pretty damning.

Funny how Rayner was so recently a darling of the Corbynites. They are as oblivious to the truth as the Trumpites whom they resemble in so many ways.

josh

NDPP wrote:

When you continually appease a powerful lobby like the Zionists such things can be expected to happen. Obviously with Corbyn, what goes around has come around.

Yeah, Corbyn was an appeaser.  SMH

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

Have any of you you even read the EH Report? It's pretty damning.

Funny how Rayner was so recently a darling of the Corbynites. They are as oblivious to the truth as the Trumpites whom they resemble in so many ways.

It's enough that Corbyn is no longer leader.  He never deserved to be made into a pariah.  And the right-wingers like yourself, the ones who still won't admit that criticism of the Israeli government is never bigotry against Jews, are only pushing for the man to be made into a pariah because you want Labour to go back to the 1997 policies...the ones that weren't different than the Tories.

Never mind that the voters don't want Labour to go back to those policies.

Never mind that it would be meaningless to win an election on those policies, even if that were possible.

There was no good reason to press it to this point.

nicky

Ken, I challenge you to point to anything I have ever said that supports the curretn Israeli government or its policies towards the Palestinians. 

You can't. So stop repeating this slur.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

Ken, I challenge you to point to anything I have ever said that supports the curretn Israeli government or its policies towards the Palestinians. 

You can't. So stop repeating this slur.

While the negative fact that you have not said something "that supports the curretn Israeli government or its policies towards the Palestinians" is mildly interesting, what I'd really like to hear is just what your actual positions on Israel/Palestine are, nicky.

For example, I believe that Israel is currently an apartheid state which is illegally oppressing the Palestinian people. For this reason, I support BDS. How do you come down on these issues?

I will be pleasantly shocked if you give a straight answer to this question, but I ask it nonetheless.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Here's a video by Toronto YouTuber David Doel explaining in some detail the background and meaning of the suspension of Corbyn. I thought it was worth the 14 minutes I spent watching it.

NDPP

josh wrote:

NDPP wrote:

When you continually appease a powerful lobby like the Zionists such things can be expected to happen. Obviously with Corbyn, what goes around has come around.

Yeah, Corbyn was an appeaser.  SMH

 

NDPP wrote:

Jeremy Corbyn Must Stop Pandering To Labour's Israel Lobby

https://electronicintifada.net/content/jeremy-corbyn-must-stop-pandering...

"Corbyn has for three years attempted to appease Israel lobby groups as if the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Labour Movement and the Jewish Leadership Council were genuine anti-racists. They are not. Their primary function is to lobby for Israel, an  institutionally racist, apartheid state. The message time and time again is that Israel and its lobby groups cannot be satisfied except through total capitulation. They want Corbyn to go."

Winstanley (2018)

Ken Burch

nicky wrote:

Ken, I challenge you to point to anything I have ever said that supports the curretn Israeli government or its policies towards the Palestinians. 

You can't. So stop repeating this slur.

That's the only possible interpretation that can be made of your insistence that Labour adopt not only the parts of the IHRA guidelines that dealt with bigotry against Jews-the parts Corbyn and his supporters were all glad to adopt- but the parts that equate criticism of the Israeli government with bigotry against Jews, when no comments that can be made about a state are ever equivalent to bigotry against a community, religion, or ethnic group.

nicky

And where did I say that Ken?

Labour is is well rid of this useful idiot for the Conservatives who single handedly delivered a majority for Johnson.

Ken Burch

Corbyn did nothing to deserve suspension.  It was perfectly legitimate for him to say that the AS situation was exaggerated.  

For the last five years in the UK, for no valid reason, the media and the political establishment acted as if AS was the most prevalent and rapidly-growing prejudice in the country- as if there was more AS than anti-BAME prejudice, more than Islamophobia, more than xenophobia-it was treated as if it was the prejudice that mattered more than any other, and it was linked, again and again and again, with solidarity with Palestine.

(side note:  I hope even nicky would agree that British Palestinians who are Labour Party members can be exempted from the apparent requirement that all Labour members must be Zionists-especially since there is no longer any such thing as a Zionist perspective that acknowledges that Palestinians have any legitimate grievances or are the victims of any injustices at all.  It is impossible for a Palestinian to be "pro-Israel" without totally surrendering in their own fully justified struggle for liberation).

No, thanks to what your right-wing antisocialist hero Starmer is doing, every Labour Party member will now be obligated to be a Likudnik, to be a defender of every aspect of the Occupation, of everything the IDF does, of every injustice.  They will all be required to unquestioningly endorse, as you clearly do, the narrative that Palestinians and other Arabs are morally indistinguishable from the Caesars, the Inquisitors, the Tsars and Schikelgruber.

It is impossible to adhere to the IHRA guidelines and show any humanity towards Palestinians at all, or dissent in any meaningful way from anything Prime Minister-for-life Netanyahu does to Palestinians.

And your insistence that every aspect of the IHRA guidelines and examples be endorsed by Labour can only mean you endorse that.

Corbyn was never slow in fighting AS-the worst violator of them all, Livingstone was out of the party within a year of Corbyn's victory in the leadership fight, and it makes no difference whether he was expelled or whether he resigned on the verge of expulsion.

Starmer, in refusing to stop the war against Corbyn, has destroyed party unity and has destroyed any chance for a Labour victory at the next election.  

There is no way to go forward from what has happened and, after anathemizing a man who did nothing to deserve anathemization, to offer a positive, radical transformative vision for the future.  There is no way to punish a person undeserving of punishment one day, and offer anything hopeful and positive the next day.

You've got what you wanted nicky, but made a Labour victory, even if it is still possible, meaningless.

Ken Burch

Why, I ask again, was it not MORE than enough to adopt those parts of the IHRA guidelines-as Corbyn willingly did-that dealt with bigotry against Jewish people-a bigotry Corbyn always did everything he possibly could to oppose?

Why was it necessary to adopt those parts of the guidelines and examples that equate virtually all criticism of Israel with bigotry against Jews-an equation which, ironically, is itself an "antisemitic trope", as it implied that Israel is synonymous with inseparable from Judaism as a set of faith traditions and Jews as a group of people from a variety of cultures and countries?

And what is the point of demanding that everyone "support Israel's right to exist" when it already does exist, has existed for over seventy years, and will never NOT exist?  The question of Israel's survival as a country is not in question, and there is no reason to ever equate opposition to what Israel does to Palestinians or even principled, progressive opposition to Zionism as an ideology with AS?

That is the core of the issue.  There is no reason a person should have to support Zionism simply to prove they aren't an antisemite.  Israel is simply a country.  It is not a synonym for all that is Jewish or all who are Jewish.  And an increasing number of people in the world's Jewish communities are distancing themselves from what the Israeli government does to Palestinians and rejecting the idea that what that government does to Palestinians is, in any sense, in their name.

Why, in the midst of that, should Labour be essentially banning debate and requiring its members to be Likudniks, as the IHRA does?  What is the point?  Why shouldn't it be just as easy and just as legitimate to critique the Israeli government as it is to critique any OTHER government on the planet?

 

Ken Burch

This proves that the whole thing was never anything but a pretext to purge the entire Left from the party:

https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1321862860864147458/photo/1

 

Ken Burch

Corbyn's own statement, from his FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbynMP/

There was nothing in that statement he deserved suspension for.

My statement following the publication of the EHRC report:

“Antisemitism is absolutely abhorrent, wrong and responsible for some of humanity’s greatest crimes. As Leader of the Labour Party I was always determined to eliminate all forms of racism and root out the cancer of antisemitism. I have campaigned in support of Jewish people and communities my entire life and I will continue to do so.

“The EHRC’s report shows that when I became Labour leader in 2015, the Party’s processes for handling complaints were not fit for purpose. Reform was then stalled by an obstructive party bureaucracy. But from 2018, Jennie Formby and a new NEC that supported my leadership made substantial improvements, making it much easier and swifter to remove antisemites. My team acted to speed up, not hinder the process.

“Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong. Of course there is, as there is throughout society, and sometimes it is voiced by people who think of themselves as on the left.

“Jewish members of our party and the wider community were right to expect us to deal with it, and I regret that it took longer to deliver that change than it should.

“One antisemite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media. That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated.

“My sincere hope is that relations with Jewish communities can be rebuilt and those fears overcome. While I do not accept all of its findings, I trust its recommendations will be swiftly implemented to help move on from this period.”

Ken Burch

The EHRC itself stated that Corbyn had every right to question the scale of AS in the party, which proves his suspension is unjustified.

https://skwawkbox.org/2020/10/29/exclusive-ehrc-itself-states-that-corby...

 

 

Ken Burch

The EHRC itself stated that Corbyn had every right to question the scale of AS in the party, which proves his suspension is unjustified.

https://skwawkbox.org/2020/10/29/exclusive-ehrc-itself-states-that-corby...

 

 

Ken Burch

The CAA want a purge of virtually every MP associated with the Labour Left, as this tweet proves:  https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1321862860864147458/photo/1

Ken Burch

That's right...they even want Angela Rayner, the deputy leader, to be punished- and all she ever did was make mild criticisms of the Occupation and the brutality of the IDF.

Ken Burch

You've shown your true colors, nicky.  This was never about AS- you knew Corbyn was innocent of any charges made against him on that- it was about moving Labour back to the 1997 policies- even though nobody wants Labour to go back to that and even though moving to the right at all can only mean going full Tory like Blair did.  

2010 and 2015 proved that policies like that will never make electable again, so what's the point?

I started this thread with positive intent, nicky, but you wouldn't accept that positive intent and kept up your vendetta against Corbyn even though any possible justification for it ended when he stood down as leader. 

Why couldn't you just engage on what I was discussing?  Why did you have to keep on with the "distancing from Corbyn" thing when the election of a different leader was more than distance enough?

You can't possibly believe that, after all this nastiness, Labour under Starmer will offer any radical or even mildly progressive policies at all.  How could it, when it is driving everyone who wants Labour to work for a better world away, when it is becoming an activist-free zone, when it is back under the control of the Alastair Campbell types who care about nothing but turning Labour into a socialism-and-idealism free zone?

You can't crush dreams one day and have any right to claim you want to make life better on the next.

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

You can't crush dreams one day and have any right to claim you want to make life better on the next.

Unless you are an extremely hypocritical human being, which both nicky and Starmer seem to be. They're even proud of their hypocrisy.

josh

Ken Burch wrote:

The CAA want a purge of virtually every MP associated with the Labour Left, as this tweet proves:  https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1321862860864147458/photo/1

Simply a form of McCarthyism.

josh

Ken Burch wrote:

That's right...they even want Angela Rayner, the deputy leader, to be punished- and all she ever did was make mild criticisms of the Occupation and the brutality of the IDF.

Given what she did today. There is some poetic justice in that.

Ken Burch

(self-delete.  Dupe post).

Ken Burch

Ken Burch wrote:

josh wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

That's right...they even want Angela Rayner, the deputy leader, to be punished- and all she ever did was make mild criticisms of the Occupation and the brutality of the IDF.

Given what she did today. There is some poetic justice in that.

"She loved Big Starmer".

Ken Burch

The EHRC report also exonerated Chris Williamson and found that Labour was NOT "institutionally antisemitic".  So, Corbyn is essentially innocent of any wrongdoing.

He had no power to make the disciplinary proceedings against the tiny, trivial number of actual antisemites go any faster, and Livingstone just barely got out before being expelled.  What the hell more could he have done, really?
 

Pages

Topic locked