United Kingdom 2

NDPP wrote:

If he's professionally finished in UK he should consider moving to Canada where this run-with-hounds-hunt-with-hare 'leftism' is more the rule than the exception. Sounds like he'd fit right in on babble too.

And then we have a mutt or two here on Babble that like sitting on the laps of the likes of Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, and Boris Johnson. Not a pretty sight. 

UK voters would choose to stop Brexit if given another referendum, Irish premier says

‘All the polls suggest that’s what the British people actually want, but their political system isn’t able to give them that choice’

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-latest-boris-johnson-deal-ireland-border-second-referendum-a9138851.html

No Ken.

The only way to get a referendum is not electing Corbyn because the preposterously unpopular Corbyn is unacceptable to the huge majority of voters.

The truth is the opposite to what you endlessly assert. Corbyn’s leadership makes Johnson’s re-election, and Brexit, so likely.

Lib Dems becoming de facto leader of  Remain

Liberal Democrats to stand aside in seat of ex-Tory Dominic Grieve in hint of possible Remain alliance

Talks have been underway for months between the Remain-backing parties

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-grieve-seat-liberal-democrats-remain-alliance-general-election-a9144956.html

nicky wrote:

No Ken.

The only way to get a referendum is not electing Corbyn because the preposterously unpopular Corbyn is unacceptable to the huge majority of voters.

The truth is the opposite to what you endlessly assert. Corbyn’s leadership makes Johnson’s re-election, and Brexit, so likely.

It goes without saying that anyone the PLP would prefer to Corbyn would be incapable of bring Corbyn's voters to the polls.  And Labour can't ever win another election if it goes back to only getting the voters it got before Corbyn-if it goes back to that, it will be stuck at the 30% support it had in the 2015 election for the rest of eternity.  Labour can never generate enthusiastic public support unless it has a left wing leader who stands on an unambiguously socialist and antiwar program.  

It's doomed to lose under Yvette Cooper or the Owen Smith, or Thornberry(who is pre-discredited because the PLP likes her, since that means it's impossible that she holds any socialist convictions).

And the PLP would never back Starmer, because they won't accept anyone who isn't a frothing reactionary.

Learning From Brexit

https://monthlyreview.org/2019/10/01/learning-from-brexit

"Costas Lapavitsas' (The Left Case Against the EU) is recognized as the leading work advocating LEXIT, the left-wing case for Brexit, and for nations leaving the European Union more generally. In light of current Conservative British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's commitment to exit the EU by October 31, even if it means a no-deal Brexit, the role of the left takes on growing importance.

Moreover, this raises issues of the EU generally, including the dominance of neoliberalism within it and the question of German hegemony. Given the importance of these issues, we are publishing two assessments of Lapavitsas' book followed by his extensive response..."

'Brexit poses the most important political challenge for the European left since the debacle of Syriza in 2015. The first step is briefly to sum up the current state of the EU, bringing out the implications for sovereignty, democracy and radical social change...'

There are ambiguous cases for both positions.  I'd probably be Remain if it were possible to have a clearly socialist government as an EU country, but it clearly isn't, based on the restrictions on spending and the ability to nationalize.  Without being able to deficit-spend in at least some situations and without the ability to take parts of the economy out of the profit sector-which has to be done to get those sectors into democratic worker control/management, since there's no practical way to achieve that under UK law without some sort of state intervention-without those tools, socialism can't be built.

The Scandinavian social democracies in the EU are ONLY social democratic, in any living sense-the social wage has been continually cut in ALL of those countries-because the EU did not exist when the social democratic parties came to power in those countries.  It was only before the existence of the EU that social welfare states could be constructed, and the National Health Service could not have been started without the ability to easily nationalize the health sector of the UK economy.

The Remain leadership has had four years to address these issues, and to address the role EU constraints played in turning the North and Northeast of England into an economic dead zone, has had four years to propose a real strategy to reform the EU or any willingness to defy EU restrictions before a reform agenda could be implemented, yet none of them have done so at all.  They've focused solely on fighting for Remain, and just fighting for Remain in itself is a neoliberal, pro-austerity project.

If they wanted to work for Remain and Reform, the Remain leadership would NOT have spent the last four years trying to force Corbyn to fight for the right-wing project of Remain and Leave It Go At That-and they would not have spent the last four years blaming Corbyn for the Leave victory when there is nothing he could have said or done that would have prevented it.

This bloody-mindedness on the part of the Remain leadership, their insistence on making hostility to Corbyn and his supporters a key element of what they've done, of continuing to push for a second referendum before the election when all of them know there will never be the votes for a second referendum in the current parliament and that therefore there is no good reason to keep pushing for that OR keep pushing for Labour to go all-out Remain, has done more damage to their cause than any other choice of tactic could possibly have done.  They could probably have had Remain had they dealt with the issues I've referenced; instead, they insisted on making it a combined Stop Leave/Destroy Corbynism campaign, and there is no excuse for their arrogant stupidity in doing that.

Let the people vote, eh!

If Quebec can allow referendums why can't the UK, eh! 

How likely is a Final Say referendum on Brexit now?

With a no-deal Brexit on 31 October extremely unlikely, there are now two possible routes to a people’s vote

https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/politics-explained/boris-johnson-final-say-brexit-election-corbyn-labour-a9143961.html

NorthReport wrote:

Brexit: Voters are turning against no deal as deadline approaches, poll suggests

Just a third of those questioned think Boris Johnson should crash the UK out of the EU without a deal if he cannot reach agreement with Brussels this month

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-deadline-boris-johnson-eu-poll-voters-a9146196.html

ALL that can be done before the election is to stop "no-deal".  It isn't possible to get a second referendum before the election and no good comes of trying.

Labour wouldn't get even that 30% under a "moderate"-i.e., a reactionary, because you have to be a right wing extremist to have been willing to abstain on May's cuts in the social wage-nobody could do that and then ever support any humane, egalitarian policies AFTER making it clear they were fine with letting the Tories make life even worse for the poor, and Labour can't stand for anything to the left of the Tories if it is led by someone who isn't in solidarity with the poor-everyone who stayed loyal to Corbyn after all these years would instantly and permanently switch to voting for the Greens,  for Plaid Cymru in Wales or for the SNP or other left parties in Scotland, and almost all of the young people who came into politics because Corbyn inspired them would leave again.

What could anyone the PLP approved-we know the PLP would allow no one but right-wingers on the leadership ballot to replace him, no one to the left of Owen Smith would be permitted-ever possibly say to young voters that could ever connect with them?

Labour can't win young voters with a "it's enough that it will be US doing it" message, which is the only message the anti-Corbynites would allow.

None of the anti-Corbynite MPs retain any socialist values at all.   They don't even retain any "social democratic" values. They're all glad Kinnock abandoned socialism after 1987, leaving nothing even vaguely reminiscent of it behind.

Why should the PLP-a tiny group made up of people who only hold their seats because Kinnock or Blair imposed them as candidates against the wishes of their constituency parties decades who, all of whom hold seats any Labour candidate would automatically hold at any general election-have any more of a say in who's leader than anyone else?

And how can you justify the fact that they've spent the last years doing nothing to fight the Tories while focusing instead on the pointless task of attacking and slandering their own leader?

There was never any chance that what the PLP has been doing was ever going to serve the greater good.

And Labour can't win an election if it switches to a leader who could never be popular to the young?

The young will only vote Labour if it is antiausterity, anticapitalist and antiwar.

And Corbyn is only unpopular because they've spent the last four years

nicky wrote:

So why Ken is Labour doing so badly with young voters at the present?

could it be because the young overwhelmingly oppose Brexit and Corbyn has betrayed them on that issue?

Corbyn hasn't betrayed them.  He is giving them everything they could ask on that by committing to a second referendum if elected.  Since it is clear, based on all previous votes in the current parliament, that there will never be the votes for a second referendum and since everyone knows Corbyn can't have Labour go all-out Labour without guaranteeing Labour will lose every seat where Leave won, this is all they can expect Corbyn to do.  And no possible replacement for Corbyn would be able to switch the party to an all-out Remain position either.

Corbyn campaigned hard for Remain in 2015, making more appearances for Remain than any other Labour figure.  He never blocked any other Labour figure from campaigning for Remain, and he didn't stop the "Labour machine", whatever that means, from campaigning for Remain either-Labour doesn't have any such thing as a "machine" anyway, and at some point you're going to have to accept the fact that a strong, passionate Labour case for Remain simply didn't and simply doesn't exist.

Corbyn's position leads to a second referendum and voting for Labour with Corbyn as leader is the only way to get a second referendum.

It the votes haven't been there in the House for a second referendum yet-and they haven't-nothing anyone can do or say between now and October 31st can cause those votes to appear.

Why even pretend otherwise?  Why continue to obsess on getting a second referendum now when a second referendum after the election is the only way to get it and is more than any other party leader is offering on this.

Remain is not more important than ending the Tory government and building a socialist future.  

And the reality is, the only thing that can be accomplished before October 31st is the defeat of "no-deal".  Corbyn is fighting harder for the defeat of no-deal than the LibDems, who are obsessed instead with the pointless fight for a referendum that cannot ever be approved in the current parliament.

What matters is defeating the Tories.   Nothing can be worse than keeping them in power, and its meaningless to get the Tories out unless they are replaced in power by an anti-austerity, anti-greed, pro-equality and justice Labour Party.  Labour can only be that party under a left-wing leader.

How Number 10 View the State of the Negotiations

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/how-number-10-view-the-state-of-th...

"...Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they've probably succeeded. So the main effect of it will probably be to help us win an election by uniting the leave vote and then a no deal Brexit. History is full of such ironies and tragedies..."

nicky wrote:

For you Ken:

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/10/07/corbyn-would-be-taking-a-massive-gamble-calling-an-election-when-hes-so-far-behind-in-the-leader-ratings/

Corbyn wouldn't be behind if those in the PLP who've spent the last four years slandering him admitted he was innocent of all charges.

1) As I've proved, support for a united Ireland-which was Labour policy in the Eighties and which is still the goal of the Social Democratic and Labour Party in Northern Ireland-was never support for or a defense of the tactics of the IRA. 

2) As I've proved, Corbyn has always opposed antisemitism; he just didn't want to make it impossible to criticize what the Israeli government does to Palestinians without getting expelled from the party-and expelling critics of Israel was the only reason the tiny, irrelevant portion of the IHRA guidelines Corbyn and the majority of Labour members or supporters didn't accept were ever written.  And of the 200 accusations of antisemitism referred to Jenny Formby, only twelve were found to have anything to do with Labour members or supporters at all.   None of the emails sent to Luciana Berger were from Labour people and Corbyn wasn't leader when they were sent.  That's the whole thing.  Corbyn never did anything to deserve being accused of hating Jews or tolerating hatred of Jews and you knew it the whole time.

3) As I've proved, the votes for a second referendum can never be found in the current parliament if they haven 't been found yet, and it wasn't Corbyn's fault that the Remain campaign in the referendum was incompetent and had no compelling arguments for their position.  Corbyn campaigned hard for Remain-it's just that Remain couldn't have won in '15.  Therefore, hounding Corbyn on the EU issue is unjustified.

That's pretty much it. 

Corbyn's opponents in the party need to admit Corbyn and his supporters never deserved to be treated as if Corbyn's victory in the leadership contest was illegitimate or that he didn't deserve the same respect as anyone they'd have preferred.

It's the PLP who caused this situation.  There was no excuse for them spending four years treating their leader as no previous party leader was ever treated.

And the idiots don't realize that they have pre-emptively discredited anybody they could possibly impose in the leadership if they did force Corbyn out.  There is no "Labour moderate" in the whole of the PLP who has any personal charisma, who has any support from the young-Labour can never win another election where youth voter turnout is not  as high as it was in 2017.   How do you imagine anyone who has played an active role in the anti-Corbyn hate campaign could ever connect with Corbyn's supporters?  Why would you think any such figure would ever actually disagree with the Tories on any major issues?  Tom Watson doesn't.  Neither does Yvonne Cooper.   

Labour can't win any future elections if it does what you want and goes back to being the party of dreary, bitter left-haters and CEO's, which it would under any leader you would prefer.

Arrogant British elites act the same way as our arrogant Canadian elites

Boris Johnson news – live: Tusk accuses PM of 'stupid blame game', after disastrous Merkel call leaves Brexit talks on brink of collapse

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-live-news-update-gove-tusk-merkel-eu-court-no-deal-benn-latest-a9148026.html

Corbyn Has Turned His Back On His Beliefs

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/09/corbyn-has-turned-his-back-on-h...

"Back in the early Nineties, a younger, beardier Jeremy Corbyn would stand up in the House of Commons and say things like this, from 1993: 'Does my honourable friend [Then Labour leader John Smith] recognise that the imposition of a bankers' Europe on the people of this continent will endanger the cause of socialism in the United Kingdom and in any other country?'

Fast forward almost three decades, and the greyer, more smartly dressed Corbyn is within a whisker of No 10. But the assertive anti-EU stands have made way for something more inspired - namely, a political skill which is best described as 'tactical equivocation'...The man of iron-leftist and Bennite principle has been hamstrung by realpolitik, or so the story goes. I propose a different reading of Corbyn's Brexit position..."

Few know more about the actual workings of the EU than LSE professor and ex-Syriza MP Costas Lapavitsas. His in depth analysis of the inherent neoliberal, antidemocratic nature of the European Union is not to be missed. See his comprehensive analysis @ #963 'Learning From Brexit'. Or listen to those talking through their asses based on msm/Remain/Project Fear propaganda about something in fact they  know next to nothing about.

Learning From Brexit

http://rabble.ca/comment/5639746#comment-5639746

The Left Case Against The EU

https://youtu.be/2_hZvBGC_HM

He who ignores history stands a good chance of repeating it Peace is more important than any of this Brexit silliness

NDPP wrote:

Corbyn Has Turned His Back On His Beliefs

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/09/corbyn-has-turned-his-back-on-h...

"Back in the early Nineties, a younger, beardier Jeremy Corbyn would stand up in the House of Commons and say things like this, from 1993: 'Does my honourable friend [Then Labour leader John Smith] recognise that the imposition of a bankers' Europe on the people of this continent will endanger the cause of socialism in the United Kingdom and in any other country?'

Fast forward almost three decades, and the greyer, more smartly dressed Corbyn is within a whisker of No 10. But the assertive anti-EU stands have made way for something more inspired - namely, a political skill which is best described as 'tactical equivocation'...The man of iron-leftist and Bennite principle has been hamstrung by realpolitik, or so the story goes. I propose a different reading of Corbyn's Brexit position..."

You're quoting a right-wing magazine run by the Koch family.  

And why is it so important to you to characterize Corbyn's position as a betrayal?  

As I've said, the man can never go all-out Remain nor no-deal Brexit and still lead Labour to victory.  He needs the votes of his party's Remainers AND Leavers.   You're sounding just as bloodyminded as nicky in all his malicious, spiteful right-wing arrogance.

His dithering, weak capitulations/accommodations at every stage to his political enemies has facilitated a takeover by the Blairite right.  The party is in terrible shape and losing its working class base because of Labour's Brexit betrayal, equivocation and circumlocutions under the 'leadership' of Corbyn.

The Full Brexit: #ForTheManyNotTheEU

https://twitter.com/tfbrexit/status/1182629176513384448

"As early as the 1980s Tony Benn could see how EU membership was destroying representative democracy. This slow burning crisis led to Brexit. Now democracy hangs in the balance..."

George Galloway, MOATS, Ep 17 (and vid)

https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1183439648527282176

Epstein, Yugoslavia 20 yrs. +, Washington DC comings/goings, Is Jeremy Corbyn now 'El Cid'? AND MORE!

I've been following a guy on YouTube named Phil Moorhouse for the last few months. He seems to me to be very smart and well informed. He thinks that the last minute deal is just a ploy, which Johnson will use to escape the requirement for an extension, and then allow a no-deal brexit to happen by default.

And it goes without saying that those who want Labour to go back to being the right-wing party it was under Blair, like nicky, have only been pushing for Corbyn to endorse having the party go all-out Remain because they know that that position would make a landslide Labour defeat a certain, because that position would throw every Labour seat in the North and Northeast of England to the Brexit Party, which would then hold all of those seats for the next ten to fifteen years.  

This has been the motivation of the anti-Corbyn, antidemocratic wing of the PLP the whole time.