Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 62.7 % ❤ 1.6 % :thumbsup: 5.3 % 😯 1.2 % :grinning: 20.5 % 🧥 1.2 % 🙏 1.9 % 😟 1.6 % :cry: 2.8 % :shit: 1.2 %
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
The Weeping Angel wrote:
Wed Oct 30, 2019 1:20 pm
Call me paranoid but this makes sense.

Yes, and thank goodness for that.
Last edited by Abernathy on Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
Excellent as usal from Marina Hyde. ... ty-leaders
In fact, it has been rather difficult not to think of Nigel’s American friend all week, given that Johnson is pushing a “people versus parliament” election, while Corbyn is pushing for “people versus the elites”. Both of these are explicitly populist positions, with both the main party leaders claiming to speak for “the people”, an apparently homogenised mass being held back by an elite establishment that doesn’t include themselves. We might well be so far gone as a country not to notice this any more, but this should be a major alarm bell. Every single person buying into this “people versus –” stuff, on either side, should be extremely careful.

Populism, whether left or right, always ends badly. Honestly, what are the great populist success stories? Apart from Daenerys Targaryen. Oh, wait …

But honestly: where in the world is it really working out harmoniously for the people governed by these guys? The rightwing horror stories from the Philippines to Brazil barely need rehashing. But – and apologies for lapsing into political technicalese – the ones on the left all turn out to be divisive shits, too. Once leftwingers couldn’t eulogise Venezuela any more, their fandom transferred to Evo Morales in Bolivia. Forgive the spoilers, but if you’re keeping up with the show you’ll note that Evo has since trampled over liberal democracy, and Bolivia is this week mired in violent political protests amid claims he rigged the election.

There are many Corbyn supporters who believe that the only way to defeat right populism is with left populism. But on what evidence? Among those who seriously study the rise of the radical and far right, this is not widely concluded to be the case. Political scientist Cas Mudde, an expert in this field, stresses that neither “the people” nor “the elite” should ever be homogenised and essentialised, and that “politicians have to stop pretending to speak for ‘the people’”. Our societies are pluralist, and much more complex than such dangerous simplification allows.
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
Not to mention she's talking flat out bollocks.

Anyhow it seems that for some reason the Jewish Labour Movement won't be campaiging for labour. ... h-1.490895
In a damning indictment of Jeremy Corbyn’s failure to tackle antisemitism, JLM stated: "Fighting racism, prejudice and intolerance is at the heart of our Labour values – it is the failure of the leader and his supporters to live these values which has led us to take this stance.”

The 2,000-member organisation, who have previously sent activists across the country to campaign with MPs during elections, stressed that the stance ahead of the December 12 poll “does not mean that we no longer support the Labour Party’s policies and its historic values, nor do we wish to see Boris Johnson or Jo Swinson in Downing Street.”

JLM’s election statement means that they will not support Labour candidates in any of the key north London marginal seats of Finchley and Golders Green, Hendon or Chipping Barnet.
oboogie liked this
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
Abernathy wrote:
Sun Nov 03, 2019 9:46 pm
What would Whinegums say ?
Probably that there a bunch of centrists melts. I found this on Corbyn's role during the troubles.

The inconvenient truth for Jeremy Corbyn is that we, of course, know why he hung up on Stephen Nolan and we know why it took John McDonnell 13 years to offer such a risible, caveated apology.
It is because they wanted the IRA to win.
Their pious homilies to the peace process will not wash with anyone. Their commitment to a united Ireland was total. The relationships they invested in for decades were with terrorists organisations not democratic nationalist parties. It has proved a hard habit to break for them as Nick Cohen and others have demonstrated.
Corbyn and McDonnell had nothing to do with the peace process. Not a single person involved in the negotiations that led to the Belfast agreement has come forward to support McDonnell’s assertion that he played an active role. No historic accounts of the process include them. Corbyn and McDonnell were partisans. They were irrelevant bystanders. McDonnell’s abject attempt to suggest that he was acting as a peacemaker remains almost as insulting as the remarks that prompted the forced apology.
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
Jews shouldn't take Corbyn's brushes with antisemitism too personally as its an outcome of his idiocy not its motivation. If Israel moved into the Soviet camp in the 1940s (as was discussed in left wing Israeli circles) and waged conflict with Western imperialist lap dogs in the Gulf States, Corbyn would regard Zionism as a liberationist movement worthy of full support. Any human rights violations by the Israeli state would be ignored or explained away by Corbyn in the Morning Star in the name of big picture anti-imperialist realpolitik.
Tubby Isaacs liked this
  • 1
  • 823
  • 824
  • 825
  • 826
  • 827
  • 846
Priti Patel

Very unusual for MI5 to put their prints (even off[…]

Brexit Fuckwit Thread

I suspect the UK’s most experienced trade ne[…]

Diane Abbott

Notable that the only person who has openly said[…]

Meanwhile in Germany[…]