Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[VladimirIlyich]

Agreed. I think you have probably nailed my issue with Corbyn as well. He doesn't have a credible plan to win back power. I think only on 3 occasions since the war has Labour gained an overall majority from opposition, Attlee just after the war, Wilson got a paper thin majority which he lost during the parliament and then Blair. No one from the left wing . England is a right leaning country and you compromise and deal on that basis or you have a secession and start your own movement ; which probably has to happen now.

I get your criticism of Corbyn,I really do,and I think its valid but if he hadn't have stood and understood the need for the party to start recognising how out of touch with the people who should be voting for it then nothing would have changed. The fact that we are even discussing the pros and cons of a left wing labour leader is fantastic and has actually changed the whole debate.

I have no doubt Corbyn himself doesnt think he's going to be there long term but is just waiting for a successor with more modern ideas such as Clive Lewis,or some people's favourite Dan Jarvis.

[Jairzinho]

I get your criticism of Corbyn,I really do,and I think its valid but if he hadn't have stood and understood the need for the party to start recognising how out of touch with the people who should be voting for it then nothing would have changed. The fact that we are even discussing the pros and cons of a left wing labour leader is fantastic and has actually changed the whole debate.

I have no doubt Corbyn himself doesnt think he's going to be there long term but is just waiting for a successor with more modern ideas such as Clive Lewis,or some people's favourite Dan Jarvis.

 

Corbyn has to remain in charge for the time being precisely so that the next leader is someone like Clive Lewis rather than someone like Dan Jarvis.

[VladimirIlyich]

Corbyn has to remain in charge for the time being precisely so that the next leader is someone like Clive Lewis rather than someone like Dan Jarvis.

Very much so. I will never vote for a corporate stooge over him and I expect plenty of others will not either.

[Hades]

I personally judge them on their actions as much as,maybe more than,their words. Not being prepared to speak out on benefits and concede to have 'lost the debate' means that they dont belong in a party that is supposed to represent the less able in society. If they have 'lost the debate' then these MPs are part of that problem and simply not deserving of their position. As for the country being right wing,I dont necessarily buy this but it is symptomatic of how little opposition the modern Labour Party has done to oppose the corporate overtaking of the traditional media. I also believe the groundswell of support in getting Corbyn elected leader shows that there is an appetite for change to modern politics but will probably have to come from an Alliance or a purge of New Labour/Old Tory policies and/or MPs.

 

PS,this post was probably more in reply to Sect 31 but I am not going to rewrite the whole post because on my phone.

You don't have to be a leftist to be a leftist, but they are leftists.

 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

I'd also really like Labour to start speaking about creating newer small and medium sized businesses as part of any future manifesto. The last Labour governments regional development agencies were a great idea and a success. My brother in law worked in one and really enjoyed it. Of course he lost his job when the Tories slashed their budgets and closed a lot of them but has gone on to bigger and better things.

I reckon that pushing an alternative to facelees and bullying corporate businesses will,and always has,been a vote winner. Its also a good way to jump on the self sufficiency bandwagon,after brexit,and the redistribution of wealth angle too.

[Jairzinho]

I'd also really like Labour to start speaking about creating newer small and medium sized businesses as part of any future manifesto. The last Labour governments regional development agencies were a great idea and a success. My brother in law worked in one and really enjoyed it. Of course he lost his job when the Tories slashed their budgets and closed a lot of them but has gone on to bigger and better things.

I reckon that pushing an alternative to facelees and bullying corporate businesses will,and always has,been a vote winner. Its also a good way to jump on the self sufficiency bandwagon,after brexit,and the redistribution of wealth angle too.

 

Agreed. They should be pointing out that enormous cunt corporations are the reason that every other shop in towns are boarded up.

 

My town is now essentially Tesco - which has killed all the butchers, clothes shops, florists, bakers, etc. Wetherspoons - which has killed every other pub. And one bookmaker. That's it. 

 

The other shops that pop up are those doing weird, niche stuff. For example we now have a milkshake shop, a dog grooming parlour, etc. Things that Tesco doesn't quite cover, essentially. Obviously they all go bust after a year or two and are replaced by other weird, niche stuff that has absolutely no prospects of remaining a viable business in a small/mid sized town.

[magicrat]

I get your criticism of Corbyn,I really do,and I think its valid but if he hadn't have stood and understood the need for the party to start recognising how out of touch with the people who should be voting for it then nothing would have changed. The fact that we are even discussing the pros and cons of a left wing labour leader is fantastic and has actually changed the whole debate.

I have no doubt Corbyn himself doesnt think he's going to be there long term but is just waiting for a successor with more modern ideas such as Clive Lewis,or some people's favourite Dan Jarvis.

I fear most of the country are not engaged in the debate over whether to have a left wing leader; they are more preoccupied with the Polish fella down the road that got a job they didn't want anyway. Maybe we have to accept that for the foreseeable future a left wing agenda is not going to capture the hearts and minds of enough people to matter electorally. The real question is whether you accept a Labour lite party which may get a few things done or effectively start a new movement of the left with a very limited chance of success. Neither is very appealing to be honest as without power it's largely pointless,

[skend04]

Several local council elections last night and the Labour vote share took quite a hit with gains made by Lib Dems and UKIP. Corbyn and his followers appear to be doing a great job chiming with those that can be arsed to vote. Only it's a great job for their opposition.

[Neil G]

I fear most of the country are not engaged in the debate over whether to have a left wing leader; they are more preoccupied with the Polish fella down the road that got a job they didn't want anyway. Maybe we have to accept that for the foreseeable future a left wing agenda is not going to capture the hearts and minds of enough people to matter electorally. The real question is whether you accept a Labour lite party which may get a few things done or effectively start a new movement of the left with a very limited chance of success. Neither is very appealing to be honest as without power it's largely pointless,

No, no and no.

[Anubis]

Corbyn has to remain in charge for the time being precisely so that the next leader is someone like Clive Lewis rather than someone like Dan Jarvis.

I agree. Given the exposure Lewis is now getting I suspect he'll run in the next leadership election.

[Rico1304]

Luciana Berger's troll. Fucking state of this dopey cunt:

 

 

He's the same tit who was sending Stella Creasey rape threats the other year, what a useless shitbag he must be. He said Berger would 'get it like Jo Cox', I guess he was half right though, she'd definitely get it.

Did you se Baddiel's tweet yesterday?

 

To paraphrase 'Police tracked him down using an identikit of how they imagined he'd look '

[Gnasher]

Did you se Baddiel's tweet yesterday?

To paraphrase 'Police tracked him down using an identikit of how they imagined he'd look '

 

 

Yes but unfortunately the mainstream media and political commentators threw out to the wider world that this is how a person who supports Jeremy Corbyn looks.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Thing is, most of them are to the left. People keep going on about Blairites but Blairites haven't been in charge since, well, Blair. Brown was left wing, he was notoriously favourable to spending big bucks helping the poor (one of the things his enemies didn't like). Ed miliband was made leader at the expense of his Blairite brother. They still both lost. Labour's issue is that it's on the wrong side of the media and the zeitgeist. I've known about four labour MPs quite well and they were all what I'd call broadly left wing and/or liberal, but all felt that they had to keep a lid on a lot of it in modern Britain. They all got an email from the party about four years back telling them not to get into debates on benefits because it had 'lost the argument' This is a right wing country, there's a gargantuan amount of people out there who are anti immigration and think people on benefits are swinging the lead. I don't know what the solution is beyond some kind of secession, but I think it's daft to try and pigeon hole MPs as though everyone except Corbyn is some kind of sellout.

I'm not convinced.

 

With the media relentlessly repeating its daily narratives against immigrants, against Muslims, against people on benefits and against the EU, it's no surprise that people start to think there may be something to it; after all, there's no smoke without fire, is there?  (Obviously, Liverpool fans - more than most - know that there is.)  Labour lost the last two elections by playing along with these narratives, assuming that that's what the electorate wanted and not realising that they were basically arguing the case for parties who promised to be "tough" on immigrants, Muslims, benefit claimants and the EU.

 

The irony is, when voters - even Tory voters - are asked what policies they support, they come out in favour of higher taxes for the rich, stricter regulation of the banks, nationalisation of the railways, nationalisation of the utilities, fairer benefits which do not leave people destitute, etc.  

 

The lesson has to be that, instead of repeating the craven approach that failed in the last two elections, Labour has to seize the narrative and fight the next election on its own terms.  That way, millions of people can have the option of voting for moderate, sensible and humane policy choices they have never been offered before.  Then Labour will at least have a chance of winning; fighting on the Tory/media terms is a guarantee of failure.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I think the proof is in the pudding  

 

 

Negged!

 

The proof of the pudding is in the eating!

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/index.php?/topic/91114-the-proof-is-in-the-pudding/

[Jairzinho]

I'm not convinced.

 

With the media relentlessly repeating its daily narratives against immigrants, against Muslims, against people on benefits and against the EU, it's no surprise that people start to think there may be something to it; after all, there's no smoke without fire, is there?  (Obviously, Liverpool fans - more than most - know that there is.)  Labour lost the last two elections by playing along with these narratives, assuming that that's what the electorate wanted and not realising that they were basically arguing the case for parties who promised to be "tough" on immigrants, Muslims, benefit claimants and the EU.

 

The irony is, when voters - even Tory voters - are asked what policies they support, they come out in favour of higher taxes for the rich, stricter regulation of the banks, nationalisation of the railways, nationalisation of the utilities, fairer benefits which do not leave people destitute, etc.  

 

The lesson has to be that, instead of repeating the craven approach that failed in the last two elections, Labour has to seize the narrative and fight the next election on its own terms.  That way, millions of people can have the option of voting for moderate, sensible and humane policy choices they have never been offered before.  Then Labour will at least have a chance of winning; fighting on the Tory/media terms is a guarantee of failure.

 

The country will be right wing whilst it is offered nothing else. It's not hard to rig the game is it? Handful of cunts in the media push a right wing message, and the two main parties, the only two with any chance of power due to the voting system, trip over themselves to rim the cunts in the media.

 

Put the same system in place in any other country and they'd soon become right wing.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I think the proof is in the pudding when it comes to whether or not the country is right wing. Thatcher eviscerated this country, I grew up in a school with a leaking asbestos roof and attending hospital appointments with my nan and grandad in a Royal Liverpool Hospital that had broken lights and stank of piss. The whole of Liverpool stank of piss in the 80s. This only came to an end when Major's government had been rocked by scandal, infighting, a recession, and even then it was only when a Labour government came to power that promised to adhere to Tory spending plans and had a business and middle england-friendly face. 

 

The most progressive government we've ever seen was Atlee's Labour and was literally born from ruins. A perfect storm of streets filled with young men back from the war with nothing to lose who knew how to use guns, and bombed out cities. 

 

We turn left when we've got nothing to lose, then when the ship is steadied we kick them out again, just like with Brown when he bankrupted the state to bale out the banks (but was later blamed for the whole mess, amazingly, and never really challenged on that - which reinforces the notion that the media is the enemy now) 

 

My mate is Scottish and is very political (he's the one I mentioned further up the thread who his local Labour party are pushing to try and become a councillor) and he reckons the likes of Wales, Scotland etc are much more left wing than England because the English still feel deep down that they've 'benefited' from Empire, and I think there's some truth in that.

 

There's a right wing superiority that runs through every class of people in England. Thatcher latched onto that with her so called blue collar conservatism, and it also explains why the left here has never been a social movement like it has in somewhere like Spain, it was an academic movement. Atlee and Benn were to the manner born, Ed Miliband's dad was a professor, Corbyn is an intellectual, the KGB used to get half their recruits from academia, many of whom said they didn't do it for money but for their beliefs. 

The leader of Podemos is a Professor of Political Science.  And the only reason Corbyn is where he is is because of a social movement.

 

You may have a point about the English and their Imperial sense of superiority, but I'm not convinced that that's the main factor at play here.  I think people, generally, are politically illiterate for as long as they can afford to be.  As a result, they tend to accept whatever the headlines are telling them, without a second thought.  When you give them something to think about - such as the Scottish independence referendum or Corbyn's campaign for the leadership - increasing numbers of them start asking questions and they start openly discussing possible answers.  That can only be good for democracy.  (Incidentally, I wouldn't necessarily say that that process leads to left-wing conclusions, but it generally leads to conclusions which are considerably to the left of the propaganda spouted by our "mainstream" media and political class.)

[sir roger]

Piece in the Independent saying that if Corbyn wins there is already a plot in place for the coup people to set up a separate party within parliament, ask Bercow to acknowledge them as the official opposition & take legal action to win the party name.

 

Can see the first two as possibly achievable but can't see them winning the name if Corbyn has done nothing outside labour party rules.

[VladimirIlyich]

Piece in the Independent saying that if Corbyn wins there is already a plot in place for the coup people to set up a separate party within parliament, ask Bercow to acknowledge them as the official opposition & take legal action to win the party name.

 

Can see the first two as possibly achievable but can't see them winning the name if Corbyn has done nothing outside labour party rules.

These cunts will stop at nothing to get their own way. The real reason is that most would be shown for the lazy,London-centric careerists they actually are.

I've also noticed how much publicity the corporate PR man is getting for his challenge from the usually Labour negative, right wing media. Coincidence? I think not.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Piece in the Independent saying that if Corbyn wins there is already a plot in place for the coup people to set up a separate party within parliament, ask Bercow to acknowledge them as the official opposition & take legal action to win the party name.

 

Can see the first two as possibly achievable but can't see them winning the name if Corbyn has done nothing outside labour party rules.

The two Tories who defected to UKIP in the last Parliament had the good grace to resign their seats and stand again as Kippers, against an official Tory candidate.

 

If that report is correct, then the Labour plotters are planning to act with less integrity than a Tory/Kipper.

 

I do hope they're proud.

[VladimirIlyich]

Just had a quite bizarre thought but the Labour coup reminds me of the exact reason that the defendant in Making A Murderer was 'potentially' framed.

The exposure of a heavily subsidised,lazily and complacently run organisation is suddenly threatened with being held to account for its actions in representing the people who,for a large part,fund it and depend on it for protection.

[Anubis]

The fight for the name and resources would be against the members and unions. Good luck with that.

[magicrat]

The two Tories who defected to UKIP in the last Parliament had the good grace to resign their seats and stand again as Kippers, against an official Tory candidate.

 

If that report is correct, then the Labour plotters are planning to act with less integrity than a Tory/Kipper.

 

I do hope they're proud.

Playing devils advocate I think they would argue they are sticking to the agenda on which they were elected and got their mandate from the voters in the GE. The Tory defectors clearly couldn't claim that argument. I think we will find in coming months the argument in Labour will

center around which faction represents the true values of the movement, It's not black and white given the Labour party was founded in order to win power and bring about change its hard to make a case for Corbyn ever winning power . 300,000 part members will probably elect him again but where is he going to find 20 times that amount to turn out from the wider electorate.  Meanwhile Theresa May cracks on with wrecking the country.    

[Jairzinho]

Playing devils advocate I think they would argue they are sticking to the agenda on which they were elected and got their mandate from the voters in the GE. The Tory defectors clearly couldn't claim that argument. I think we will find in coming months the argument in Labour will

center around which faction represents the true values of the movement, It's not black and white given the Labour party was founded in order to win power and bring about change its hard to make a case for Corbyn ever winning power . 300,000 part members will probably elect him again but where is he going to find 20 times that amount to turn out from the wider electorate.  Meanwhile Theresa May cracks on with wrecking the country.    

 

It's harder to make the case that the coup is being carried out by Democratic Socialists. Which, according to my membership card, is what the party is.

[jimmycase]

Piece in the Independent saying that if Corbyn wins there is already a plot in place for the coup people to set up a separate party within parliament, ask Bercow to acknowledge them as the official opposition & take legal action to win the party name.

 

Can see the first two as possibly achievable but can't see them winning the name if Corbyn has done nothing outside labour party rules.

 

They could only be recognised as the official opposition if they were the largest single party.

 

I dont think they have an earthly.

[Jack the Sipper]

These cunts will stop at nothing to get their own way. The real reason is that most would be shown for the lazy,London-centric careerists they actually are.

I've also noticed how much publicity the corporate PR man is getting for his challenge from the usually Labour negative, right wing media. Coincidence? I think not.

 

As opposed to the gruff northerners from the mines that make up Corbyn and his inner circle.