The Labour Party

[Scottyboi]

You have to admit, the way he ate that sandwich was just plain wrong. You can’t trust a man who eats a sandwich like that to run the country.

People like that attract enemy radar, they attract sharks, always want to sit at the captains table and they muck about.

 

[Ban-jani]

You have to admit, the way he ate that sandwich was just plain wrong. You can’t trust a man who eats a sandwich like that to run the country.

I thought Ed would have been a brilliant PM.

I know you’re joking but I just thought your post was the easiest to reply to.

 

[The perfect fumble]

But you want to dismiss it over a perceived notion of what you consider to be be more "Important". That is absolutely shameful.

Clearly what you consider important, is important, it is the benchmark, regardless of the fact that what it is you regard as important is left tantalisingly vague.

Nevertheless, anyone who disagrees, even if they are uncertain as to what it is they are disagreeing with, is clearly shameful.

 

[George Hannah]

Clearly what you consider important, is important, it is the benchmark, regardless of the fact that what it is you regard as important is left tantalisingly vague.

Nevertheless, anyone who disagrees, even if they are uncertain as to what it is they are disagreeing with, is clearly shameful.

Are you suggesting that "anti-Semitic racism being encouraged by the Labour Party", the description just given of the Panorama findings by its Deputy Leader, is unimportant?

 

[The perfect fumble]

Are you suggesting that "anti-Semitic racism being encouraged by the Labour Party", the description just given of the Panorama findings by its Deputy Leader, is unimportant?

Is that a direct quote?

A link would help.

 

[cibaman]

I am not missing the point, Ed started the process but typically we saw the media concentrate on how he ate a bacon butty rather than his policies. Then you had the mindless nonsense about him being unfit for government and the SNP scare stories.

You also miss the point that the leader of the labour party is not a dictator, the policies are decided on at conference, by the members.

Labour should never be a centrist party, I was unrepresented under Blair. We differ politically obviously, but Labour has always been a broad church and whilst I disagreed with Blair on many things he was better than the Tories so I voted for him. Now the Labour right think the Tories or Lib Dems are the better option. Loyalty for you.

If labour do win the election their policies can’t just be decided by an annual conference. The pm needs to have some latitude to take decisions quickly. The issue then is how do they give the pm that freedom whilst also providing some oversight. Where would the balance of power rest between the cabinet and his inner circle ?

 

[BobKowalski]

I am not missing the point, Ed started the process but typically we saw the media concentrate on how he ate a bacon butty rather than his policies. Then you had the mindless nonsense about him being unfit for government and the SNP scare stories.

You also miss the point that the leader of the labour party is not a dictator, the policies are decided on at conference, by the members.

Labour should never be a centrist party, I was unrepresented under Blair. We differ politically obviously, but Labour has always been a broad church and whilst I disagreed with Blair on many things he was better than the Tories so I voted for him. Now the Labour right think the Tories or Lib Dems are the better option. Loyalty for you.

It’s not about being a dictator or who decides policy. A leader sets the tone for the party. The Republicans under Trump act differently than they would under a leader like Bush. The Tories are lining up to throw diplomats under the bus in service of Johnson but under a different leader with a different take would parrot the opposite. Not to mention their reaction if it was Corbyn doing the throwing.

At some point leaders have to lead and mean it. Rightly or wrongly Corbyn comes across, to me at least, as going through the motions on this issue as opposed to issues he actually cares about. Impressions matter. Tone matters.

 

[George Hannah]

Is that a direct quote?

A link would help.

word for word on a Sky news interview, after one with John McDonnell in which he referred to the 'serious charges' that have been made.
Coverage starts with Wes Streeting about 2 hrs 17 back from the current time on their online feed
https://news.sky.com/watch-live

 

[Rascal]

If labour do win the election their policies can’t just be decided by an annual conference. The pm needs to have some latitude to take decisions quickly. The issue then is how do they give the pm that freedom whilst also providing some oversight. Where would the balance of power rest between the cabinet and his inner circle ?

I should have been clearer, the manifesto is. Of course a PM needs to make changes as situations change. Power ultimately rests with Parliament, if a PM makes changes to policy and the majority disagree, it does not pass. Then of course power moves to the membership, who if they are not happy can vote against a Labour PM, they finally it goes to the electorate, who if they are not happy they can vote for somebody else.

I suppose every PM in history has used a different method and the balance of power will swing according to method. As cabinet is traditional bound by collective responsibility I would have thought any change would have to have cabinet approval. Obviously every PM has an inner circle who they rely on and they will use their influence according to the method used. The power the PM has is to sack the cabinet members who disagree, that is not new, its happened through out history. Other factors will influence of course, such as size of majority, hard decisions are more difficult with a small majority as May has found.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

I'm sure that once corbyn eventually goes labour will magically become jew-friendly again, just as it magically became anti-Semitic around the time corbyn looked like he might be in danger of becoming Pm. It's very much like ffp isn't an issue when city is not winning stuff, but magically becomes a thing when we are.

 

[The perfect fumble]

word for word on a Sky news interview, after one with John McDonnell in which he referred to the 'serious charges' that have been made.
Coverage starts with West Streeting about 2 hrs 17 back from the current time on their online feed
https://news.sky.com/watch-live

Watched it, Watson is featured and he talks at length, but that direct quote, I can't find it.

 

[Rascal]

It’s not about being a dictator or who decides policy. A leader sets the tone for the party. The Republicans under Trump act differently than they would under a leader like Bush. The Tories are lining up to throw diplomats under the bus in service of Johnson but under a different leader with a different take would parrot the opposite. Not to mention their reaction if it was Corbyn doing the throwing.

At some point leaders have to lead and mean it. Rightly or wrongly Corbyn comes across, to me at least, as going through the motions on this issue as opposed to issues he actually cares about. Impressions matter. Tone matters.

I really don't think you can compare the US and UK systems of government.

A Labour leader sets goals, the membership either accept them or don't. I actually think impressions and tone delves into the realms of personality politics, I personally have had enough of that, as personality is not a replacement for ideas.

 

[roxy]

I actually thought the BBC programme was a disgrace, it was a full frontal attack on the Labour party, made by a known far right wing extremist with Islamophobic views. There was no balance to it at all and whilst I don't buy conspiracy theories its timing is questionable to say the least. I am a supporter of the BBC too, but it let itself down and I think it will face recriminations because a lot of it was innuendo and conformation bias.

Are you @rascalmcfc on Twitter? If so, you tweeted this earlier
If you're not I apologise but did you watch it or not?

I can say in all honesty I do not know anybody who is anti semitic, I know I am not, I have no reason to be. The constant barrage of anti semitic accusations aimed at the likes of me has made me question my beliefs which is not a bad thing as we should all be open to having our beliefs examined.

As I alluded to, I really do think the constant barrage of accusations is more likely to make people anti-Semitic, people will become defensive and lash out and it will have a negative effect, people without the courage of their convictions can be easily swayed to believe in conspiracy theories, I have seen it online with people lashing out at Labour MPs who members of Labour friends of Isreal. Why there is a need for Labour friends of Isreal has always seemed odd to me. We have enough problems in our country without spending time worrying about others. I certainly would not be abusive to anybody who is a member of LFI though, its their choice.

You seem to be a respected poster on here & I'm delighted you aren't anti-semitic but are you really saying that people shouldn't complain about genuine anti-semitism because it might lead to more anti-semitism?

And if you don't think there should be a Labour Friends of Israel on the grounds that we shouldn't be worrying about others then presumably you feel the same way about Labour Friends of Palestine & the Middle East? I thought the whole point of Labour & the socialist political movement was to worry about others? Labour certainly took South African apartheid fairly seriously.

Do you think that a Labour party member making a video calling someone "a fucking Jew" is anti-semitic? Or asking a disputes investigator if he's from Israel? And, if so, should these people be members of the party that I assume you're a member of? Only very small percentage of Germans were involved in the killings of Jews in WW2 but that doesn't make it right does it?

 

[urban genie]

My response to last night will be too lengthy for my morning break

 

[Rascal]

@roxy Yes that is me pal

I watched it early this morning to see if the twitterati hysteria was everything it made it out to be.

No, I am not saying people should not complain, in fact I encourage them to complain because it is abhorrent. My point was more that people who are very steadfast in their views are likely to be more defensive and more virulent if they are deemed to be continually anti semitic without proof. It doesn't affect me as I am comfortable and educated enough to understand the difference, some may not and I do genuinely worry that it will become mainstream more out of misunderstanding than out of malice. Its a difficult opinion to put into words to be fair and I am struggling with it. If you continually hear the same story you start to believe it and I did point out I had questioned my own views as I was lumped in with the Anti Semitic stuff due to me being a Labour party member.

I do find the party system of friends with people a bit bizarre, Labour has a friends of the Chagos Islands, etc etc, I seriously think the model is outdated and it should be a cross party movement. There seems to me no reason why certain sections of any party need to proclaim they are friends with anyone, it should be taken as read. Your point about South Africa is a good one, it is a little before my time so I am not sure of what levels of support there were across the political spectrum. But yes you are right as an Internationalist party Labour should look to take care of others where possible, its just my opinion has moved on from that and I believe it should be on a cross party basis and free from political posturing.

As for your last paragraph, they should be banned from the Labour party for life and prosecuted for hate crimes. They are an embarrassment to the Labour party and to the country.

 

[roxy]

@roxy Yes that is me pal

I watched it early this morning to see if the twitterati hysteria was everything it made it out to be.

No, I am not saying people should not complain, in fact I encourage them to complain because it is abhorrent. My point was more that people who are very steadfast in their views are likely to be more defensive and more virulent if they are deemed to be continually anti semitic without proof. It doesn't affect me as I am comfortable and educated enough to understand the difference, some may not and I do genuinely worry that it will become mainstream more out of misunderstanding than out of malice. Its a difficult opinion to put into words to be fair and I am struggling with it. If you continually hear the same story you start to believe it and I did point out I had questioned my own views as I was lumped in with the Anti Semitic stuff due to me being a Labour party member.

I do find the party system of friends with people a bit bizarre, Labour has a friends of the Chagos Islands, etc etc, I seriously think the model is outdated and it should be a cross party movement. There seems to me no reason why certain sections of any party need to proclaim they are friends with anyone, it should be taken as read. Your point about South Africa is a good one, it is a little before my time so I am not sure of what levels of support there were across the political spectrum. But yes you are right as an Internationalist party Labour should look to take care of others where possible, its just my opinion has moved on from that and I believe it should be on a cross party basis and free from political posturing.

As for your last paragraph, they should be banned from the Labour party for life and prosecuted for hate crimes. They are an embarrassment to the Labour party and to the country.

That’s a good response. Thanks.

 

[BobKowalski]

I really don't think you can compare the US and UK systems of government.

A Labour leader sets goals, the membership either accept them or don't. I actually think impressions and tone delves into the realms of personality politics, I personally have had enough of that, as personality is not a replacement for ideas.

It’s not a US or U.K. thing but a leadership question and an organisation does reflect the person in charge of it. The leaders goals become the party's goals. People lower down look to reflect what the leadership wants and take their cues from the leadership. Corbyn is not in my view anti-Semitic but he is not instinctively hostile to anti-semitism and that permeates down and allows it to grow or be tolerated.

This would not be an issue under a leader who was hostile to anti-semitism because those lower down would know this and check their behaviour accordingly.

Tory MPs under Cameron would defend business and our institutions to the hilt and mean it. Now with the ‘fuck business and our institutions’ leadership in the ascendency the same individuals will throw both under the bus so quickly it would make a hardened Marxist blush. There is no directive telling them to do this. They are just looking at what the leadership wants or accepts and act accordingly.

Leadership matters. Corbyn doesn’t see the problem, doesn’t really believe there is a problem and anyone pointing out the problem is just out to get him or Labour or both. In some cases this will be true, but not in all cases and failing to recognise that and act with intent on the problem means it will not go away.

 

[Ban-jani]

Half way through this now and it’s actually worse than I thought.

It’s quite obvious the racism started when Corbyn took over and harder left members joined the party. At best, Corbyn has been useless in attempting to solve the problem.

It’s harrowing and sinister hearing from the young Jewish members interviewed.

 

[Rascal]

The leaders goals become the party's goals. .

No they don't, Labour is a democratic party. The leader should reflect the memberships goals. He should cajole and persuade but ultimately its down to the members to vote on policy. That why conference is so important. The Tories operate in the manner you say, there conference is a confirmation of the leaders goals, Labours is not. Think of the struggle Kinnock had over clause four.

 

[Rascal]

Half way through this now and it’s actually worse than I thought.

It’s quite obvious the racism started when Corbyn took over and harder left members joined the party. At best, Corbyn has been useless in attempting to solve the problem.

It’s harrowing and sinister hearing from the young Jewish members interviewed.

That is what the media want you to believe Ban, don't be so naïve, there has always been an element of anti Semitism across the UK on the extremes of politic's, both left and right. But being hard left does not mean you are automatically anti-Semitic, that is nonsense. Socialism is more class based not racial based although you would think differently given the coverage it gets. It is almost anti semitic in itself to assume that the hard left is that way because you then automatically assume Jews are upper class and do control the money etc etc. Which of course is palpable nonsense. Jewish voice for Labour have repeatedly tried to get this message across but it is marginalised and gets no coverage because it does not fit the narrative. You can back this up by the lazy assumption that all muslims are working class so they will automatically vote Labour. which again is palpable nonsense. This is an example of how lazy stereotyping is affecting UK politics to such a degree.

Of course it was harrowing to watch those young people being interviewed and there should be no place in the UK for any form of racial hatred, those who perpertrate it should be banned from the party and reported for hate crimes.

Could Labour have done more, yes they could, i have no doubt about that at all and it handled the situation poorly, figures though put it at 0.06% of the membership and considering the party has over 400,000 members its hardly surprising some of the nutters slip the net. Corbyn has been unambigious in his condemnation of those involved yet it does reflect back onto him as leader, whilst the real fault lies in my opinion with the parties vetting and disciplinary procedures. This is no excuse but it is not easy to monitor the huge amount of stuff that is on social media nowadays and it does amplify issues. An example would be look at this small part of one forum and you see daily people post stuff that is fucking dreadful on many subjects and the procedures here don't always deal with it appropriately. Can you blame Ric for the stuff that is posted?