The Labour Party

[meltonblue]

The fucking state of politics in this country.

Its just the fucking state of this country. The politicians we elect are reflective of us as a society.

 

[Rascal]

The problem you appear to have is that you find the Tories unpalatable but you are also totally opposed to the only realistic alternative i.e. a centre left party.
The politics you aspire to are outdated and frankly unrealistic and have no popular support , you will never get the niche Government you crave.

Yet the politics I support would have won the election before last if it was not for the behaviour of the cunts at Party HQ

I keep hearing that my politics is out of date, yet I posted a manifesto that got wide approval on here and it was the manifesto of Michael Foot, a proper Socialist. Corbyn got more votes than Blair as well. The only people who want a centrist Labour party are the Capitalist class, they need to feel safe and that there money is safe and they will do everything in their power to promote that **** Starmer. There see I am denying anti Semitism again, I should be expelled from the party, but too late as I left the party as soon as that spineless **** Starmer took over.

The problem now is I can no longer post Socialist thought as I will be accused of supporting antisemitism or denying antisemitism. The debate has been effectively closed down. That should be a warning to democracy, but it wont be, it will be used over and over again to shout down the left.

 

[hilts]

Yet the politics I support would have won the election before last if it was not for the behaviour of the cunts at Party HQ

I keep hearing that my politics is out of date, yet I posted a manifesto that got wide approval on here and it was the manifesto of Michael Foot, a proper Socialist. Corbyn got more votes than Blair as well. The only people who want a centrist Labour party are the Capitalist class, they need to feel safe and that there money is safe and they will do everything in their power to promote that **** Starmer. There see I am denying anti Semitism again, I should be expelled from the party, but too late as I left the party as soon as that spineless **** Starmer took over.

The problem now is I can no longer post Socialist thought as I will be accused of supporting antisemitism or denying antisemitism. The debate has been effectively closed down. That should be a warning to democracy, but it wont be, it will be used over and over again to shout down the left.

In fairness Rascal no debate has been shut down, people get accused of being all kinds of stuff on here, and I think PB saw it as I did like you and others have continually played down the problem in the Labour Party over Antisemitism.

Natural bias is within all of us so as a passionate socialist you will naturally be drawn to those who downplayed it, you may have put more emphasis on the stories of Machiavellian plots than someone who isn’t.

With everything that has come out over the years I think saying Labour has an issue with Antisemitism brought on by a strong support of Palestine isn’t misplaced. And to also say that those in charge originally denied, deflected then dragged their heels on the subject is where the truth lies. I think the frustration is that no matter what comes out it still gets downplayed by supporters of the left.

I don’t think PB actually thinks you are an antisemetic(you would need to ask him) I certainly don’t. But did your judgement get clouded because you didn’t want to believe others socialists could be?

By the way I agree that Starmer must have known what was going on and went along with it and is now using it to ‘clean’ the party. He has basically jumped on the lifeboat and let the boat sink.

 

[Rascal]

In fairness Rascal no debate has been shut down, people get accused of being all kinds of stuff on here, and I think PB saw it as I did like you and others have continually played down the problem in the Labour Party over Antisemitism.

Natural bias is within all of us so as a passionate socialist you will naturally be drawn to those who downplayed it, you may have put more emphasis on the stories of Machiavellian plots than someone who isn’t.

With everything that has come out over the years I think saying Labour has an issue with Antisemitism brought on by a strong support of Palestine isn’t misplaced. And to also say that those in charge originally denied, deflected then dragged their heels on the subject is where the truth lies. I think the frustration is that no matter what comes out it still gets downplayed by supporters of the left.

I don’t think PB actually thinks you are an antisemetic(you would need to ask him) I certainly don’t. But did your judgement get clouded because you didn’t want to believe others socialists could be?

By the way I agree that Starmer must have known what was going on and went along with it and is now using it to ‘clean’ the party. He has basically jumped on the lifeboat and let the boat sink.

I didn't mean on here specifically I meant in general.

If you look at the CAA website and their allegations, some , not all are bonkers. They can twist any sort of statement as fits there own definition. They eve accused Kaufman of being anti semitic because he criticised the Isreali government approach to Palestine and likened it to the actions of the Nazis. Now, as I have said I am not well up on the area, I don't get involved in it as the debate has always been poisonous and above my head. But if you cant make a point in Parliament where parliamentary privilige exists then that is closing debate. I asked out of genuine reasons why what Kaufman said was antisemitic, because I don't know. So if the boundaries are unclear then I risk crossing the boundaries not because I am antisemitic but because I don't know the CAA definition of what they say is antisemitic.

Of course I have natural bias, of course I support those whose views mirror mine, but I don't support anyone 100% because I am not a clone nor am I a sheep, I think for myself and I have my own views which happen to fit others and not vice versa. But as I said yesterday by association I am guilty, but Starmer who sat in the shadow cabinet with the person he expelled is not guilty. How is that fair?

I don't like Starmer as I have said many times on here, the reason I don't like is not personal, it is because I don't agree with his politics, he is probably a nice fella, but he has lied and cheated his way to the leadership in my opinion and for that reason I cannot support him nor back his calls for unity because they are empty calls aimed at securing his position and not the parties future.

 

[hilts]

I didn't mean on here specifically I meant in general.

If you look at the CAA website and their allegations, some , not all are bonkers. They can twist any sort of statement as fits there own definition. They eve accused Kaufman of being anti semitic because he criticised the Isreali government approach to Palestine and likened it to the actions of the Nazis. Now, as I have said I am not well up on the area, I don't get involved in it as the debate has always been poisonous and above my head. But if you cant make a point in Parliament where parliamentary privilige exists then that is closing debate. I asked out of genuine reasons why what Kaufman said was antisemitic, because I don't know. So if the boundaries are unclear then I risk crossing the boundaries not because I am antisemitic but because I don't know the CAA definition of what they say is antisemitic.

Of course I have natural bias, of course I support those whose views mirror mine, but I don't support anyone 100% because I am not a clone nor am I a sheep, I think for myself and I have my own views which happen to fit others and not vice versa. But as I said yesterday by association I am guilty, but Starmer who sat in the shadow cabinet with the person he expelled is not guilty. How is that fair?

I don't like Starmer as I have said many times on here, the reason I don't like is not personal, it is because I don't agree with his politics, he is probably a nice fella, but he has lied and cheated his way to the leadership in my opinion and for that reason I cannot support him nor back his calls for unity because they are empty calls aimed at securing his position and not the parties future.

Like I said I agree on Starmer and I found the Kaufman link odd, however if you see a list and debate only the ones you think have been unfairly treated then that’s bias in itself. I haven’t read all the thread so you may have denounced others.

Anyhow we could go round in circles here so out of curiosity would you say the following is true(no caveats)

labour had a problem with some anti Semitic behaviour, for either political or ideological reasons those in power firstly denied, then deflected and then dragged their feet dealing with it. Those at the top including Corbyn, Macdonnell, Starmer must have known and have caused unnecessary pain to Jewish people.

 

[Gray]

Jeremy and his equally obnoxious brother could start their own party “Two Fingers to Anybody Who Doesn’t Agree With Us”.

 

[Rascal]

Corbyn brought himself into disrepute today. Typical of his approach that has seen us in the wilderness. He, not KS, has chosen this path.
Loads of whataboutery of the Tories going on. However, the old adage of get your own house in order and don't throw stones, has never been more appropriate.

No whataboutery from me.

Starmer has split the party, it started with his treatment of RLB and he has gone out of his way to get rid of the left just like Blair and Kinnock before him did. Why the fuck are these people even in the Labour party, they are just using it as vessel for power, they are not Socialists, they are metro liberals.

What Starmer and his mystery backers want is a much smaller Labour Party, one where the membership has little or no influence, one where donors money is more important than members money so that at the next and subsequent elections the fight is over which party gets to maintain the neo-liberal status quo which of course benefits only a small number of people including Starmer's mysterious donors. Starmer does not care about the left, he actively wants rid of the left because mass memberships are a hinderance to establishment politicians. They get in the way of the most important thing, making their friends and backers more cash.

The left have ideals and for want of a better phrase "want to change the world" that does not fit with the capitalist class and as a result the capitalist class will do everything in their power to stop mass membership parties gaining traction.

The report, quite rightly of course has to be recognised for what it is and acted upon with utmost haste because antisemitism is a stain on society but the pros and cons of the report pale into significance when it is examined in a purely party political focus. It has all but destroyed the labour party, it has created the perfect conditions for the marginalisation of the left and all this at a time when the biggest threat to our country since WW2 is being woefully mismanaged by a gang of buffoons with a nut job as leader. Sadly said buffoons and nutjob now have a free pass to carry on with their wanton destruction of the UK state, their handing of taxpayers money to their mates and the continual lying about levelling up. This is because if nutjob and his buffoons lose the next election, the nuh=job and buffoon dopplegangers will be in place and the whole shebang carries on unabated, inequality, poverty, homelessness will not be addressed, what will matter is who gave either nutjob and buffoons the most cash.

What a pitiful state UK politics is in. The biggest fear now, is the rise of anti politics and that should worry everyone whatever your viewpoint, because anti politics is well, we all know that don't we.

 

[Hart of the Matter]

No whataboutery from me.

Starmer has split the party, it started with his treatment of RLB and he has gone out of his way to get rid of the left just like Blair and Kinnock before him did. Why the fuck are these people even in the Labour party, they are just using it as vessel for power, they are not Socialists, they are metro liberals.

What Starmer and his mystery backers want is a much smaller Labour Party, one where the membership has little or no influence, one where donors money is more important than members money so that at the next and subsequent elections the fight is over which party gets to maintain the neo-liberal status quo which of course benefits only a small number of people including Starmer's mysterious donors. Starmer does not care about the left, he actively wants rid of the left because mass memberships are a hinderance to establishment politicians. They get in the way of the most important thing, making their friends and backers more cash.

The left have ideals and for want of a better phrase "want to change the world" that does not fit with the capitalist class and as a result the capitalist class will do everything in their power to stop mass membership parties gaining traction.

The report, quite rightly of course has to be recognised for what it is and acted upon with utmost haste because antisemitism is a stain on society but the pros and cons of the report pale into significance when it is examined in a purely party political focus. It has all but destroyed the labour party, it has created the perfect conditions for the marginalisation of the left and all this at a time when the biggest threat to our country since WW2 is being woefully mismanaged by a gang of buffoons with a nut job as leader. Sadly said buffoons and nutjob now have a free pass to carry on with their wanton destruction of the UK state, their handing of taxpayers money to their mates and the continual lying about levelling up. This is because if nutjob and his buffoons lose the next election, the nuh=job and buffoon dopplegangers will be in place and the whole shebang carries on unabated, inequality, poverty, homelessness will not be addressed, what will matter is who gave either nutjob and buffoons the most cash.

What a pitiful state UK politics is in. The biggest fear now, is the rise of anti politics and that should worry everyone whatever your viewpoint, because anti politics is well, we all know that don't we.

Some obvious truths in what you say and I agree about the state of the party but branding people metro liberals along with neo liberals creates an only one true socialist vision which is not the history of the Labour party. A broad church is the party I joined. A puritan bunch of zealots is what it had become.
BUT. None of this matters. Wrapping up all the issues of the party into a simple response to the report is smoke and mirrors and merely proves Corbyn is unable to give a straight answer. Any BUT or excuse he offers adds to the hurt caused by the antisemitism. He gave KS no choice. Even you must see that? Or do you question the validity of the report also?

 

[BlueHammer85]

They may aswell split and form there own socialist dream party.

They can continue shouting from the sidelines, which they prefer doing anyway - allowing the Tories for even more years in power.

well played dick heads.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/9f044a59db504aac0e8e5427bc4336e3/tenor.gif

 

[Rascal]

Some obvious truths in what you say and I agree about the state of the party but branding people metro liberals along with neo liberals creates an only one true socialist vision which is not the history of the Labour party. A broad church is the party I joined. A puritan bunch of zealots is what it had become.
BUT. None of this matters. Wrapping up all the issues of the party into a simple response to the report is smoke and mirrors and merely proves Corbyn is unable to give a straight answer. Any BUT or excuse he offers adds to the hurt caused by the antisemitism. He gave KS no choice. Even you must see that? Or do you question the validity of the report also?

Labour is a Socialist party or it is nothing. If I am a puritan zealot then so be it, it is probably true, because I actually believe in my political stance and see little to be gained from any party that does not reflect my views. The party has to split, I cannot stand by comrades who support neo liberal economics, because neo-liberal economics increases inequality, homelessness, its not a tiger that can be tamed, its an ideology that has to be defeated.

No I don't question the validity of the report, I do question having read it the voracity and mendacious accusations of the CAA against Labour party members and even against members of other parties too, because believe it or not I don't think this is just a Labour party problem, it is a societal issue that reflects the return of populist politics. The antisemitic issue has to be addressed and so do all the other issues that society faces because I fear the rise of Fascism and its inherent need to cause division.