All things Labour Party

You're just projecting feelings onto a random group of people - you're better than that.

In fairness, if you read some of the comments on Twitter and Facebook, you'll see there is a lot of genuine hatred towards JC from large sections of a certain demographic. Of course, it's wrong to tar them all with the same brush, but it must be acknowledged that that hatred exists.

Labour is one of two parties with a chance of winning the election. Anti-Semitism in Labour is slightly more newsworthy than Anti-Semitism in the EDL.

Oh come on. The EDL isn't even a political party. It's just an irrelevant bunch of hate filled thugs who somehow seem to get a lot more attention than they deserve.

"Right wing parties" also includes the Tories. They got more of the vote in the last election, which makes them currently the biggest party in the UK, so why is racism in their ranks not more newsworthy than it is in Labour?

In fairness, if you read some of the comments on Twitter and Facebook, you'll see there is a lot of genuine hatred towards JC from large sections of a certain demographic. Of course, it's wrong to tar them all with the same brush, but it must be acknowledged that that hatred exists.

I know this will attract more claims of whataboutery but I'm going to post it anyway because it is relevant to the current discussion about media bias...

In the last few days, an aide to Theresa May has publicly outed a gay man against his will in revenge for blowing the whistle on potential breaches of campaign spending during the Brexit referendum. And instead of apologising to the victim of this outing, May has issued a statement giving the aide her full backing and confidence.

Where is the media outrage about the PM endorsing homophobic bullying in her party? Can you imagine the field day they would all be having if it were Corbyn who had done this?

I admit, this week I am feeling quite snidey and negative. Although to be fair, most news is depressing so it's an easy trap to fall into.

Anyway, why lower yourself to responding to a sixth-former? How about going back to your busy thread on the nerve agent attack in Salisbury? x

See this is what I am talking about.old chap. Rather than coming across as someone who wants a kinder fairer society you come across as bitter and enjoying trying to demean. I assume like a lot of fervent socialists you actually quite like money but just get annoyed with those that have more than you. Power to the people.

I know this will attract more claims of whataboutery but I'm going to post it anyway because it is relevant to the current discussion about media bias...

 

In the last few days, an aide to Theresa May has publicly outed a gay man against his will in revenge for blowing the whistle on potential breaches of campaign spending during the Brexit referendum. And instead of apologising to the victim of this outing, May has issued a statement giving the aide her full backing and confidence.

 

Where is the media outrage about the PM endorsing homophobic bullying in her party? Can you imagine the field day they would all be having if it were Corbyn who had done this?

I think Johnny has new sixth form comrade.

 

So why is it perfectly OK for the entire country to be discussing antisemitism in Labour, but when someone quite rightly points out that it is just as rife, if not more so, in other parties it can be just dismissed as whataboutery?

The issue is the leader being anti Semitic or appearing to tolerate it.

If May had called some racists friends, had she joined anti black Facebook pages, if she had friends that were racist, had she defended a racist picture, had she been called the racists poster girl, by John Major or Nigel Lawson. What if her own mps marched in a protest against racism in the Tory party. What if May set up an enquiry into racism in the Tory party, then ennobled the head of that enquiry straight after the party was exonerated , before then admitting that there were pockets of racism in the party. If May did all that, would you accept as a defence of her, that all parties had racists in them. I doubt you would.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think Johnny has new sixth form comrade.

Another demeaning comment, thanks.

See this is what I am talking about.old chap. Rather than coming across as someone who wants a kinder fairer society you come across as bitter and enjoying trying to demean. I assume like a lot of fervent socialists you actually quite like money but just get annoyed with those that have more than you. Power to the people.

#facepalm.

In fairness, if you read some of the comments on Twitter and Facebook, you'll see there is a lot of genuine hatred towards JC from large sections of a certain demographic. Of course, it's wrong to tar them all with the same brush, but it must be acknowledged that that hatred exists.

TBF, Facebook and Twitter is mainly faux hatred - we all know that with the ridiculous trolling that happens on there. People don't use social media the same way they talk face to face - so I find it hard to equate what is written on there to actual hatred. To be fair, I'm sure some people do hate him, but I also guarantee they don't exactly know why they hate him.

I think it's more just a hatred of the other side and just shows how polarised politics has become. You can see hatred on twitter and Facebook against May, the Tories, the Greens, so called "Blairites" etc etc. I don't think corbyn is hated any more than most from that lot. It does suit a narrative to think that Corbyn gets more hate though. In my experience it's mostly ridicule.

There is also a massive hatred towards people who just vote Conservative on Social Media, that's why you get so many 'shy' Conservatives.

Agree it's mostly ridicule, which I guess in some camps can be seen as 'hatred'.

There is also a massive hatred towards people who just vote Conservative on Social Media, that's why you get so many 'shy' Conservatives.

 

Agree it's mostly ridicule, which I guess in some camps can be seen as 'hatred'.

I know this will attract more claims of whataboutery but I'm going to post it anyway because it is relevant to the current discussion about media bias...

 

In the last few days, an aide to Theresa May has publicly outed a gay man against his will in revenge for blowing the whistle on potential breaches of campaign spending during the Brexit referendum. And instead of apologising to the victim of this outing, May has issued a statement giving the aide her full backing and confidence.

 

Where is the media outrage about the PM endorsing homophobic bullying in her party? Can you imagine the field day they would all be having if it were Corbyn who had done this?

Yep, 100%. This is the issue where Corbyn doesn't have any press ally's, and the Conservatives do. It's not right, but it won't change until Labour put someone in place who the press can get behind.

See this is what I am talking about.old chap. Rather than coming across as someone who wants a kinder fairer society you come across as bitter and enjoying trying to demean. I assume like a lot of fervent socialists you actually quite like money but just get annoyed with those that have more than you. Power to the people.

TBF, from what I remember about Johnny, he has quite a lot of it (money)...

Exactly. I've seen a hell of a lot more vitriol thrown at senior members of the Tory party or just regular Tory voters. I don't buy that it's just Corbyn that is subjected to hate.

It's not, and it's naive/wilful ignorance to think that's true.

Labour is one of two parties with a chance of winning the election. Anti-Semitism in Labour is slightly more newsworthy than Anti-Semitism in the EDL.

Quite. It's newsworthy in good measure because Jew-hating shouldn't exist in Labour at all. Dimwitted Corbynistas have now taken to quoting research that shows that anti-Semitism is no stronger on the Left than on the Right. That's actually a damning conclusion for a faction of the party that has stood on an anti-racist platform.

So why does it exist?

One problem is virtue signalling, which is endemic among Corbynistas. The rush to ally with any anti-Western, anti-capitalist figure leads someetimes into trouble. The arch virtue signaller Corbyn himself is a repeat offender with this. He wrote a letter of support to a vicar who then argued that Israel was behind 9/11. He was 'delighted' when an Islamist cleric won an appeal to travel to the UK - a man who said that Jews kill Christian children to drink their blood. And he donated to a group called Deir Yassin Remembered, a perfectly good cause in itself (google it), except that its leading figure, Paul Elsen, is a Holocaust denier. Then there was the mural...

Overlaid with this is what you might call the Virtue Delusion, which is the belief that as my intentions are pure I can do no wrong. (Actually Corbyn shares this delusion with Blair). This ends up being straightforward denial. So whenever anyone highlights anti-Semitic behaviour in the Labour party, there's a Corbynista rush to claim it's all smears and lies. The collateral damage of this is to those Jewish Labour party activists and members who are consequently accused of manipulating a media witch hunt (itself a trope in Jew-hating rhetoric).

Then there's the problem of local political alliances. Local Labour parties in certain parts of Britain have close relations with communities among whom Jew hating is of epidemic proportions, and Jew hating becomes a sort of infectious disease. This is essentially what happened with Naz Shah. You get so used to Jew-hating rhetoric in everyday conversation that it's so easy to blurt out repeats of it in public. (I don't believe that Naz Shah is an anti-Semite by inclination.)

Then there's the "anti-Semitism is not anti-Zionism" argument, the basic logic of which might look sound, but it's an awful mess (this post would be too long to explain why). Under this heading is the preposterous Ken Livingstone argument about Hitler being a Zionist, and any number of Corbynistas inadvertently targeting Jews on the grounds that their fighting the good fight.

And finally there's just good old-fashioned Jew-hating for its own sake, which, inside the Labour party or out, really is depressing. There are hundreds of examples of this in Corbyn-era Labour, and they're detailed at length - and with copious corroborating evidence - in Dave Rich's excellent book, 'The Left's Jewish Problem'.

It's not, and it's naive/wilful ignorance to think that's true.

Do people actually hate Corbyn? There's not much to actually hate - his hearts in the right place, but he's a fantasist and just seems completely unsuited to his role. Hate though? Hate is SUCH a strong word.

He is an idealist, and that makes him dangerous, naïve and utterly unsuitable for a role like leader of the opposition, let alone Prime Minister.

He has also been proven to be every bit as hypocritical as any other politician yet maintains the same air and tries to project the same image.

On that basis he is dangerous, and so regardless of the respect I may have for some of his ideals, I hate the prospect of him becoming prime minister. It would be disastrous.

He is an idealist, and that makes him dangerous, naïve and utterly unsuitable for a role like leader of the opposition, let alone Prime Minister.

 

He has also been proven to be every bit as hypocritical as any other politician yet maintains the same air and tries to project the same image.

 

On that basis he is dangerous, and so regardless of the respect I may have for some of his ideals, I hate the prospect of him becoming prime minister. It would be disastrous.

That's the key point.

Quite. It's newsworthy in good measure because Jew-hating shouldn't exist in Labour at all. Dimwitted Corbynistas have now taken to quoting research that shows that anti-Semitism is no stronger on the Left than on the Right. That's actually a damning conclusion for a faction of the party that has stood on an anti-racist platform.

 

So why does it exist?

 

One problem is virtue signalling, which is endemic among Corbynistas. The rush to ally with any anti-Western, anti-capitalist figure leads someetimes into trouble. The arch virtue signaller Corbyn himself is a repeat offender with this. He wrote a letter of support to a vicar who then argued that Israel was behind 9/11. He was 'delighted' when an Islamist cleric won an appeal to travel to the UK - a man who said that Jews kill Christian children to drink their blood. And he donated to a group called Deir Yassin Remembered, a perfectly good cause in itself (google it), except that its leading figure, Paul Elsen, is a Holocaust denier. Then there was the mural...

 

Overlaid with this is what you might call the Virtue Delusion, which is the belief that as my intentions are pure I can do no wrong. (Actually Corbyn shares this delusion with Blair). This ends up being straightforward denial. So whenever anyone highlights anti-Semitic behaviour in the Labour party, there's a Corbynista rush to claim it's all smears and lies. The collateral damage of this is to those Jewish Labour party activists and members who are consequently accused of manipulating a media witch hunt (itself a trope in Jew-hating rhetoric).

 

Then there's the problem of local political alliances. Local Labour parties in certain parts of Britain have close relations with communities among whom Jew hating is of epidemic proportions, and Jew hating becomes a sort of infectious disease. This is essentially what happened with Naz Shah. You get so used to Jew-hating rhetoric in everyday conversation that it's so easy to blurt out repeats of it in public. (I don't believe that Naz Shah is an anti-Semite by inclination.)

 

Then there's the "anti-Semitism is not anti-Zionism" argument, the basic logic of which might look sound, but it's an awful mess (this post would be too long to explain why). Under this heading is the preposterous Ken Livingstone argument about Hitler being a Zionist, and any number of Corbynistas inadvertently targeting Jews on the grounds that their fighting the good fight.

 

And finally there's just good old-fashioned Jew-hating for its own sake, which, inside the Labour party or out, really is depressing. There are hundreds of examples of this in Corbyn-era Labour, and they're detailed at length - and with copious corroborating evidence - in Dave Rich's excellent book, 'The Left's Jewish Problem'.

Dave Rich - dear god.

Corbyn's problem is that he feels so strongly about the plight of the Palestinians that he has let that cloud his judgement about some obvious anti-semitism within the party and has led him to be associated with some pretty unsavoury people. I think he is also an agitator at heart so likes to cause a stir to bring attention to his main gripe of Israel, and pander to his friends on the extreme left. A decent leader would have stamped out anything that appears anti-semitic ages ago because the negative effects on the party are obvious.

To claim he is thick enough to hate someone purely because of their race or religion is a bit dumb, especially considering his historic stance against apartheid.

TBF, from what I remember about Johnny, he has quite a lot of it (money)...

Yeah and youre not getting any of it. Especially if you're disabled #taxistheft

 

To claim he is thick enough to hate someone purely because of their race or religion is a bit dumb, especially considering his historic stance against apartheid.

This doesn’t make sense. Just because you’re not homophobic doesn’t mean you can’t be sexist, or hate Muslims. Would you say Donald Trump can’t be racist because of his historic stance towards Jews & Israel?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This doesn’t make sense. Just because you’re not homophobic doesn’t mean you can’t be sexist, or hate Muslims. Would you say Donald Trump can’t be racist because of his historic stance towards Jews & Israel?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No because they are different people. Corbyn seems like quite a reasonably intelligent, principled chap. As someone who has campaigned against racism and bigotry it would seem odd for him to hate someone just because of their religion. Trump on the other hand...

The issue is the leader being anti Semitic or appearing to tolerate it.

 

If May had called some racists friends, had she joined anti black Facebook pages, if she had friends that were racist, had she defended a racist picture, had she been called the racists poster girl, by John Major or Nigel Lawson. What if her own mps marched in a protest against racism in the Tory party. What if May set up an enquiry into racism in the Tory party, then ennobled the head of that enquiry straight after the party was exonerated , before then admitting that there were pockets of racism in the party. If May did all that, would you accept as a defence of her, that all parties had racists in them. I doubt you would.

So why haven't the Tories set up their own internal inquiry after the findings of the home affairs select committee in 2016 that the issue of antisemitism was no more or less prevalent in the Labour party than in other parties? I fully acknowledge that the Labour inquiry could and should have been handled better, but at least they carried one out. Did the Tories? No, they just swept the report under the carpet and ignored it, probably with their fingers in their ears going "LA LA LA!!!". Corbyn has obviously f*cked up big time by accepting Chakrabati's findings then climbing down and admitting that there is still an issue within his party, but that doesn't exonerate the Tories.

God help them if they ever actually did hold a full and thorough inquiry into racism in the party; on the available evidence they would probably end up having to expel half the party. How the actual f*ck can a serving foreign secretary get away with describing African people as "Picaninnies" without being sacked? Again, can you imagine the outrage in the press if one of Corbyn's shadow cabinet did that?

Oh and if you want to bring up the issue of having racist friends and keeping the company of people with questionable views, then does this not count?...

I can't be certain that she ever actually used the word 'friends' to describe them, but inviting the Saudi royal family to Chequers for dinner and doing an arms deal with them that enables British firms to profit from the murdering of civilians in Yemen is still pretty tasteless IMO. These people are about as antisemitic as it is possible to get (Jewish people aren't even allowed into the country), so it's pretty hypocritical for the Govt to be complaining about Corbyn associating himself with unsavoury types while cosying up to one of the most authoritarian regimes in the world.

But I'm sure this can all be dismissed as just whataboutery

Oh come on. The EDL isn't even a political party. It's just an irrelevant bunch of hate filled thugs who somehow seem to get a lot more attention than they deserve.

 

"Right wing parties" also includes the Tories. They got more of the vote in the last election, which makes them currently the biggest party in the UK, so why is racism in their ranks not more newsworthy than it is in Labour?

The Tory party is not particularly right wing.

Edit - although I suppose if your study categorised it as such then it doesn't really matter either way so not worth arguing about.

The Tory party is not particularly right wing.

Its not particularly right wing socially or even economically - but it seems to give priority to corporations over individuals. There is too much tolerance of corporate takeovers based on false and unkept promises, misleading advertising, utterly dishonest merchandising and mendacious media. More attention needs to be paid to consumer protection and ethical standards

He is an idealist, and that makes him dangerous, naïve and utterly unsuitable for a role like leader of the opposition, let alone Prime Minister.

 

He has also been proven to be every bit as hypocritical as any other politician yet maintains the same air and tries to project the same image.

 

On that basis he is dangerous, and so regardless of the respect I may have for some of his ideals, I hate the prospect of him becoming prime minister. It would be disastrous.

A Russian Spy, a racist and an IRA Sympathiser walks into a bar...

"What are you drinking tonight Mr Corbyn?", asks the barman

A Russian Spy, a racist and an IRA Sympathiser walks into a bar...

 

"What are you drinking tonight Mr Corbyn?", asks the barman

Boom boom. Long time no see Balders. How've you been?

Pathetic Blairites still trying to sabotage their own party and accidentally just before local elections too.

tbf mate, i think this is a lot more than that.

Regardless of how Jezza feels on the issue, he is in charge of Britain's official opposition. Whether he condones anti semitism or allowed it to thrive under his hap hazard management style, he needs to sort it our asap.

In my opinion, any openly racist politician should be stripped of their seat. The hate that is spreading in the US and Europe has no place in Britain.

Well well well, what a surprise...

Turns out that Jonathan Goldstein, the chair of the Jewish Leadership Council who orchestrated the anti-Corbyn protest on Monday, is listed as a director of M&C Saachi, alongside Maurice Saachi - the FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY!

But I'm sure that's just a coincidence

In my opinion, any openly racist politician should be stripped of their seat.

So do you think Boris Johnson should be deselected then? ?

So why haven't the Tories set up their own internal inquiry after the findings of the home affairs select committee in 2016 that the issue of antisemitism was no more or less prevalent in the Labour party than in other parties? I fully acknowledge that the Labour inquiry could and should have been handled better, but at least they carried one out. Did the Tories? No, they just swept the report under the carpet and ignored it, probably with their fingers in their ears going "LA LA LA!!!". Corbyn has obviously f*cked up big time by accepting Chakrabati's findings then climbing down and admitting that there is still an issue within his party, but that doesn't exonerate the Tories.

 

God help them if they ever actually did hold a full and thorough inquiry into racism in the party; on the available evidence they would probably end up having to expel half the party. How the actual f*ck can a serving foreign secretary get away with describing African people as "Picaninnies" without being sacked? Again, can you imagine the outrage in the press if one of Corbyn's shadow cabinet did that?

 

Oh and if you want to bring up the issue of having racist friends and keeping the company of people with questionable views, then does this not count?...

 

 

I can't be certain that she ever actually used the word 'friends' to describe them, but inviting the Saudi royal family to Chequers for dinner and doing an arms deal with them that enables British firms to profit from the murdering of civilians in Yemen is still pretty tasteless IMO. These people are about as antisemitic as it is possible to get (Jewish people aren't even allowed into the country), so it's pretty hypocritical for the Govt to be complaining about Corbyn associating himself with unsavoury types while cosying up to one of the most authoritarian regimes in the world.

 

But I'm sure this can all be dismissed as just whataboutery

Spot on.

Well well well, what a surprise...

 

Turns out that Jonathan Goldstein, the chair of the Jewish Leadership Council who orchestrated the anti-Corbyn protest on Monday, is listed as a director of M&C Saachi, alongside Maurice Saachi - the FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY!

 

But I'm sure that's just a coincidence

What are you saying? That's there's a Jewish hegemony controlling business and politics?

No because they are different people. Corbyn seems like quite a reasonably intelligent, principled chap. As someone who has campaigned against racism and bigotry it would seem odd for him to hate someone just because of their religion. Trump on the other hand...

Lol, principled ?

Opposed the EU at every opportunity, until a miraculous about turn which just happened to coincide with his elevation to the party leadership.

Intelligent?

Joins FB groups without realising he’d joined, defended a picture without looking properly at it, met a Czech “diplomat “ without realising he was a spy. ****ged Diane Abbott. Yeah, really intelligent.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Lol, principled ?

 

Opposed the EU at every opportunity, until a miraculous about turn which just happened to coincide with his elevation to the party leadership.

 

Intelligent?

 

Joins FB groups without realising he’d joined, defended a picture without looking properly at it, met a Czech “diplomat “ without realising he was a spy. ****ged Diane Abbott. Yeah, really intelligent.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Compared to Trump, yes.

Lol, principled ?

 

Opposed the EU at every opportunity, until a miraculous about turn which just happened to coincide with his elevation to the party leadership.

 

Intelligent?

 

Joins FB groups without realising he’d joined, defended a picture without looking properly at it, met a Czech “diplomat “ without realising he was a spy. ****ged Diane Abbott. Yeah, really intelligent.

Im no Corbyn fan - but he is undoubtedly principled. But he is also a democrat - which means he bends a bit if the majority of the front bench disagree with him. The trouble is he also lacks good judgment and seems a bit shambolic at times.

Lol, principled ?

 

Opposed the EU at every opportunity, until a miraculous about turn which just happened to coincide with his elevation to the party leadership.

 

Intelligent?

 

Joins FB groups without realising he’d joined, defended a picture without looking properly at it, met a Czech “diplomat “ without realising he was a spy. ****ged Diane Abbott. Yeah, really intelligent.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He's clearly principled, however misguided those principles might be.

What he lacks is judgment - a disastrous weakness in political leadership.

A Soviet spy, an IRA supporter and a racist walk into a bar.

Barman says "evening Jeremy, the usual?"

See this is what I am talking about.old chap. Rather than coming across as someone who wants a kinder fairer society you come across as bitter and enjoying trying to demean. I assume like a lot of fervent socialists you actually quite like money but just get annoyed with those that have more than you. Power to the people.

I don't want an income tax cut thanks. I'd rather pay a little more so poor kids can eat and disabled people don't have to sit in their own filth. I know you'd find that hard to believe.

https://evolvepolitics.com/watch-labour-mp-asks-why-tories-cut-subsidised-food-for-poor-kids-but-not-for-mps-theresa-mays-response-is-shocking-video/

A Soviet spy, an IRA supporter and a racist walk into a bar.

 

Barman says "evening Jeremy, the usual?"

Try reading the thread. Your other account has already posted that corker.

I don't want an income tax cut thanks. I'd rather pay a little more so poor kids can eat and disabled people don't have to sit in their own filth. I know you'd find that hard to believe.

https://evolvepolitics.com/watch-labour-mp-asks-why-tories-cut-subsidised-food-for-poor-kids-but-not-for-mps-theresa-mays-response-is-shocking-video/

Boom boom. Long time no see Balders. How've you been?

Life's good. Too good to spend much time on here LOL.

Life's good. Too good to spend much time on here LOL.

Good to hear. Living the life of riley with your crypto money?

He's clearly principled, however misguided those principles might be.

He abandoned one of his major political principles , because he wanted to keep his new members onside. The members are who protect him from the PLP ousting him. He voted leave in the original referendum, voted against Maastricht & Lisbon. He was from the old left that opposed the EU from day one, standing alongside Galloway & his political hero Tony Benn. Look how he campaigned during the Cameron referendum, then contrast it to his campaigning during GE. Tories like Major & Cameron pretended to be Euro sceptical to gain the endorsement of the party and stay in favour with the members, Corbyn has done exactly the same. It maybe politically expedient , but it’s not principled. There is absolutely no doubt had Corbyn been a back bencher he’d have campaigned for leave. Ken Clarke could easily have done the same and abandoned his principle. He could have toned down his EU enthusiasm to win the Tory leadership, but he refused. That’s principled, what Corbyn did, isn’t.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He abandoned one of his major political principles , because he wanted to keep his new members onside. The members are who protect him from the PLP ousting him. He voted leave in the original referendum, voted against Maastricht & Lisbon. He was from the old left that opposed the EU from day one, standing alongside Galloway & his political hero Tony Benn. Look how he campaigned during the Cameron referendum, then contrast it to his campaigning during GE. Tories like Major & Cameron pretended to be Euro sceptical to gain the endorsement of the party and stay in favour with the members, Corbyn has done exactly the same. It maybe politically expedient , but it’s not principled. There is absolutely no doubt had Corbyn been a back bencher he’d have campaigned for leave. Ken Clarke could easily have done the same and abandoned his principle. He could have toned down his EU enthusiasm to win the Tory leadership, but he refused. That’s principled, what Corbyn did, isn’t.

Heaven forbid that I would ever defend a political leader as useless and ruinous as Corbyn, but your argument isn't about lack of principles but the unworkable contradiction between them.

On the one hand, Corbyn, on the principle that he's an unreconstructed Bennite still fighting the 70s, believe that the Common Market, EEC, EU is/are all a 'bad thing'. In his mind (and a small collection of ****wits towards the weirder end of Momentum), it's all an anti-socialist conspiracy. There is little doubt that Corbyn voted to Leave, and has certainly acted in a way that's consistent with that ever since.

On the other hand, as an unreconstructed supporter of Trotskyist entryists from the 80s, he's a believer in the idea - contrary to the founding principles of the Labour party - of the primacy of party members over the PLP.

The problem is that the overwhelming majority of members, and Labour voters, are Remainers. Here's a summary of the track of YouGov polling, which shows 70% Labour voters opposing Brexit.

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/979323292476755968

So how can Corbyn square those two contradictory 'principles'? Basically, he can't, and has to resort to mumbling into his beard and continuing to sabotage remainers - the majority at every level (unions, members, PLP, voters) - in the party, while also giving lip service to the democratic mandate (which he seems to interpret means he can whatever the **** he wants - see also the issue of Trident, for example).

So principles, yes; but judgment, precious little. He's political toddler who can only think in absolutes and is floored when those absolutes are contradictory.

Heaven forbid that I would ever defend a political leader as useless and ruinous as Corbyn, but your argument isn't about lack of principles but the unworkable contradiction between them.

 

On the one hand, Corbyn, on the principle that he's an unreconstructed Bennite still fighting the 70s, believe that the Common Market, EEC, EU is/are all a 'bad thing'. In his mind (and a small collection of ****wits towards the weirder end of Momentum), it's all an anti-socialist conspiracy. There is little doubt that Corbyn voted to Leave, and has certainly acted in a way that's consistent with that ever since.

 

On the other hand, as an unreconstructed supporter of Trotskyist entryists from the 80s, he's a believer in the idea - contrary to the founding principles of the Labour party - of the primacy of party members over the PLP.

 

The problem is that the overwhelming majority of members, and Labour voters, are Remainers. Here's a summary of the track of YouGov polling, which shows 70% Labour voters opposing Brexit.

 

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/979323292476755968

 

So how can Corbyn square those two contradictory 'principles'? Basically, he can't, and has to resort to mumbling into his beard and continuing to sabotage remainers - the majority at every level (unions, members, PLP, voters) - in the party, while also giving lip service to the democratic mandate (which he seems to interpret means he can whatever the **** he wants - see also the issue of Trident, for example).

 

So principles, yes; but judgment, precious little. He's political toddler who can only think in absolutes and is floored when those absolutes are contradictory.

So basically you’re agreeing with me. Because the overwhelming majority of members were leavers, his principles got diluted. Tony Benn would have adhered to the primacy of party members, without compromising his principle. He’d have campaigned to leave whilst accepting the majority wanted to remain.

Contrast him, with Ken Clarke. A man who basically wouldn’t do a Corbyn and therefore didn’t become party leader. That’s what I call principled.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good to hear. Living the life of riley with your crypto money?

I was living the life of Riley before crypto came along :-).

The women I have dated in the last year average 28 YO. I'm 46, so can't complain.

#saintswebs #very #own #sugardaddy

I was living the life of Riley before crypto came along :-).

 

The women I have dated in the last year average 28 YO. I'm 46, so can't complain.

 

#saintswebs #very #own #sugardaddy

Just assure me that the standard deviation is low.