Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Gnasher]

They're not going anywhere 

 

https://labourlist.org/2020/10/exclusive-unions-release-joint-statement-on-labour-suspension-of-corbyn/?amp&__twitter_impression=true

[Rico1304]

7 hours ago, Kevin D said:

 

Is it also possible that people trying to assess the veracity of Corbyn's hatred of Jews might be swayed by learning the greatest Jewish intellectual alive today - according to the New York Times - reckons it is an absolute crock of shit?

So the people who worship him will embrace it, the people who don’t won’t take the slightest bit of notice. Or more likely won’t even know of the letters existence. Pissing in the wind. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

If they are trying to assess Corbyn in the light of this new report, they might well notice that the letter from Chomsky and the boys doesn’t mention anything about the findings, anything about his response, or anything about Starmer’s actions. Of course Corbyn isn’t some massive Jew hating mentalist. The report, which is independent and from a credible group of people, found that he was responsible for a party where serious leadership failures resulted in unlawful harassment, discrimination, and political interference. His response to that was to reject those findings and say the scale of the problem was overstated. No, a load of the claims of him being an antisemitic nut job were overstated, but that shouldn’t be mixed up with the findings of the report. The report, by no stretch of imagination, is the ‘weaponisation of antisemitism’. The party’s action in suspending Corbyn until a review is not a ‘weaponisation of Jewish pain’. There has, in my view, clearly been a weaponisation of antisemitism in the fight against Corbyn but let’s not pretend there aren’t other issues. 

[Gnasher]

12 hours ago, Section_31 said:

 

Don't see how, he's been getting grief from day one. Corbyn loyalists trash him all day, every day on blogs and twitter and in meetings, McClusky has pulled money, and this was before any of it. He had nothing to lose by taking the step he did.

I think hes got a lot to lose, divided party's rarely win elections, it's not just McClusky its six other unions now. Also if the Labour mps who disagree simply walk away as Numero suggests then bitter and public by elections may be fought pitting Labour v Labour, which if occured would be a disaster.

[skend04]

People undermining Corbyn = bad.

Corbyn undermining yet another Labour leader = he's not a racist because Noam Chomsky wrote a letter. 

 

He's got form for being a duplicitous little so and so, yet he's almost beatified whilst achieving nothing in his career. Not a single piece of legislation has passed with his name on despite "being a Labour member since I was 16". Why he's so idolised when the current government is in, in no small part down to his leadership, is beyond me.

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I think hes got a lot to lose, divided party's rarely win elections, it's not just McClusky its six other unions now. Also if the Labour mps who disagree simply walk away as Numero suggests then bitter and public by elections may be fought pitting Labour v Labour, which if occured would be a disaster.

The unions are hardly spoiled for choice. They’re run by old Labour and they’re pissed that Corbyn got suspended. It’s not for them to interfere in Labour Party procedure. It’s up to them if they want to give funds, but they need to be careful because they represent a lot of people. There’s going to be varying views in the group they represent too. If MPs walk away to form a small new party, representing those views that were crushed last time around, and the unions jump ship to them, then those unions will likely split too. No longer will it be about pooling together to get influence over one of the major parties. There’s a reason they don’t pay all their subs to the SWP. It’s all just BS because Corbyn has been suspended. If he gets kicked out then it’ll be time to look again. But even then, it’s all about one guy. If he stays there’s unlikely to be any split. So, for now, it’s all hot air. I’d call a lot of bluffs over this. Because the choice is this, get inside or leave and get crushed. For the unions it’s represented by one of the two parties that can win or throw money down the drain. 
 

Anyway, it’ll all blow over with him not being booted. If he does, then we will see. 

[Kevin D]

1 hour ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

If they are trying to assess Corbyn in the light of this new report, they might well notice that the letter from Chomsky and the boys doesn’t mention anything about the findings, anything about his response, or anything about Starmer’s actions. Of course Corbyn isn’t some massive Jew hating mentalist. The report, which is independent and from a credible group of people, found that he was responsible for a party where serious leadership failures resulted in unlawful harassment, discrimination, and political interference. His response to that was to reject those findings and say the scale of the problem was overstated. No, a load of the claims of him being an antisemitic nut job were overstated, but that shouldn’t be mixed up with the findings of the report. The report, by no stretch of imagination, is the ‘weaponisation of antisemitism’. The party’s action in suspending Corbyn until a review is not a ‘weaponisation of Jewish pain’. There has, in my view, clearly been a weaponisation of antisemitism in the fight against Corbyn but let’s not pretend there aren’t other issues. 

 

Numero, is it fair to call them an impartial body as things like this are ongoing:

 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

I think hes got a lot to lose, divided party's rarely win elections, it's not just McClusky its six other unions now. Also if the Labour mps who disagree simply walk away as Numero suggests then bitter and public by elections may be fought pitting Labour v Labour, which if occured would be a disaster.

So you are willing to risk all that on one man? #notacult

[AngryOfTuebrook]

14 hours ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

Right now it’s what needed to happen so this shit could start to heal. I personally hope he just steps down, but he won’t. 

Is this what healing feels like?

 

I would have thought that healing involved different parts of the Labour Party and different Jewish individuals and organisations finding some sort of common ground. All that has happened here is that Starmer seems to have thrown the weight of the party machinery firmly on one side of a pre-existing divide.

[Gnasher]

10 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

So you are willing to risk all that on one man? 

No.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Is this what healing feels like?

That very much depends on the ailment. Sometimes splinters have to be removed before the wound can heal. Sometimes surgery makes things feel worse before they get better. Either way, the root of the problem needs dealing with before any healing can happen. He needs to take back control, clean up the inherited mess, then go about planning for the future. 

[Section_31]

2 hours ago, skend04 said:

People undermining Corbyn = bad.

Corbyn undermining yet another Labour leader = he's not a racist because Noam Chomsky wrote a letter. 

 

He's got form for being a duplicitous little so and so, yet he's almost beatified whilst achieving nothing in his career. Not a single piece of legislation has passed with his name on despite "being a Labour member since I was 16". Why he's so idolised when the current government is in, in no small part down to his leadership, is beyond me.

I think you raise a good point there. Corbyn is like Sanders and (don't shoot) Trump in that he's a politician for people who don't like politicians and politics. If it was a presidential election he'd probably have more of a chance, certainly in 2017 he would have done. 

 

But as a Parliamentary operator he's seriously wanting, as you say, he's never achieved anything policy-wise as an MP, never been near the shadow front bench I don't think, wasn't particularly good (or seemingly that interested) in leading the PLP, he was more into the idea of a mass movement - nothing wrong with that, but it didn't pan out for whatever reason. 

 

People raging at Starmer are often doing so because they don't like what he represents, someone from 'the Parliamentary establishment' who seemingly is tying  to (re) build a party machine aimed at winning a general election. 

 

Whether he does or not remains to be seen, but for my money that's the fundamental difference between them. 

[sir roger]

He offered to heal, but seems more like he is looking at amputation.

[Numero Veinticinco]

4 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

I would have thought that healing involved different parts of the Labour Party and different Jewish individuals and organisations finding some sort of common ground.

What fantasy world is this. It has been tried. Corbyn failed at doing that and when he tries this, it was shown that he was responsible for a party of unlawful harassment and discrimination. No, singing kumbaya isn’t going to work any more. Certainly not if the one needed to show some remorse and contrition disputes the findings and says it’s overblown and doesn’t apologise. No. Those responsible need dealing with, those who talk of breaking away need to be brought to heel or getting rid of. Make no mistake, this is Corbyn and his team’s mess. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Kevin D said:

 

Numero, is it fair to call them an impartial body as things like this are ongoing:

 

Wasn’t that some bullshit about a donation to a friend in 2013 that was declared twice instead of once. Nobody serious suggests that EHRC isn’t impartial. 

[cloggypop]

4 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

Wasn’t that some bullshit about a donation to a friend in 2013 that was declared twice instead of once. Nobody serious suggests that EHRC isn’t impartial. 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/01/jeremy-corbyn-questions-impartiality-ehrc-conducting-antisemitism-inquiry

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, cloggypop said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/01/jeremy-corbyn-questions-impartiality-ehrc-conducting-antisemitism-inquiry

Like I said...

[Kevin D]

18 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

I think you raise a good point there. Corbyn is like Sanders and (don't shoot) Trump in that he's a politician for people who don't like politicians and politics. If it was a presidential election he'd probably have more of a chance, certainly in 2017 he would have done. 

 

But as a Parliamentary operator he's seriously wanting, as you say, he's never achieved anything policy-wise as an MP, never been near the shadow front bench I don't think, wasn't particularly good (or seemingly that interested) in leading the PLP, he was more into the idea of a mass movement - nothing wrong with that, but it didn't pan out for whatever reason. 

 

People raging at Starmer are often doing so because they don't like what he represents, someone from 'the Parliamentary establishment' who seemingly is tying  to (re) build a party machine aimed at winning a general election. 

 

Whether he does or not remains to be seen, but for my money that's the fundamental difference between them. 

 

I think that's a fair assessment, but I also think it's worth pointing out the masses of Bame who joined Labour because they had someone who represented a multi-racial working class coalition.

 

I also think we've seen the value of moral leadership and clarity in the last 6 months. I don't know if it can win an election with first past the post, but I was proud to have voted for Corbyn and think he was wrong to resign.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

28 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

That very much depends on the ailment. Sometimes splinters have to be removed before the wound can heal. Sometimes surgery makes things feel worse before they get better. Either way, the root of the problem needs dealing with before any healing can happen. He needs to take back control, clean up the inherited mess, then go about planning for the future. 

This looks a bit like removing a splinter by chopping a hand off. I'm not convinced it's in the best interest of any party but the Tories. 

[Gnasher]

If anyone fancys getting in touch with their MP or any MP here you go..

 

https://www.writetothem.com/

[Numero Veinticinco]

19 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

This looks a bit like removing a splinter by chopping a hand off. I'm not convinced it's in the best interest of any party but the Tories. 

Suspending somebody - one person - is chopping a hand off? I think this is an overreaction by overreacters who like to overreact. It’s almost as like some people think Corbyn is the left. He isn’t.

[Numero Veinticinco]

27 minutes ago, Kevin D said:

 

I think that's a fair assessment, but I also think it's worth pointing out the masses of Bame who joined Labour because they had someone who represented a multi-racial working class coalition.

 

I also think we've seen the value of moral leadership and clarity in the last 6 months. I don't know if it can win an election with first past the post, but I was proud to have voted for Corbyn and think he was wrong to resign.

Wrong to resign? He lost two elections, and the second of which was by fucking huge margin. How could he have possibly carried on? People want to talk about splits in the party, well there certainly would have been splits in the party if that happened. 

[Kevin D]

9 minutes ago, Nummer Neunzehn said:

Wrong to resign? He lost two elections, and the second of which was by fucking huge margin. How could he have possibly carried on? People want to talk about splits in the party, well there certainly would have been splits in the party if that happened. 

 

My view was that having lost decisively to Johnson, it was appropriate for Corbyn to resign.

 

I thought his position was untenable.

 

I've now reassessed that.

 

The scale of PLP chicanery and shenanigans that have been revealed made me reassess. Had Corbyn won 3,000 more votes in 2017, he would be the PM. In my view, it's fair to think that had the party actually been try to win the election as was their stated purpose, then everything would be different.

 

Moreover, in light of the pandemic, the ideas Corbyn has spent his life advocating grow and grow in moral prestige. Whether it's opposing the 2019 Bolivian coup, disavowing laws that allow security forces to murder/shag who the MET wants, or demanding a living wage, or BLM. He's not a natural leader, by any means, but he knows right from wrong and doesn't equivocate.

 

He's a person I want to vote for.

[Numero Veinticinco]

This 3000 votes thing is just a touch blinkered. If you count close seats it was closer than that. As it is if you do it in any year. The thing that isn’t being said is that by the same standard that he was just over 2200 votes from the potential of being able to form a coalition, May was just over 200 votes from being able to form a majority. 

Edit: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html

[Kevin D]

I think that's fair. 

 

I also think it's fair to say that we have no evidence that senior members of the Conservative party had no interest in winning the election. We do have information that is true of the PLP heirarchy.