The Labour Party

[Vic]

Lord Ahmed retires from Parliament days before expulsion

Lord Nazir Ahmed sexually and emotionally exploited a vulnerable woman, a conduct report concludes.

www.bbc.co.uk

Not sure of our twitter/news aggregators are broken or just ignoring major news stories like this because they dont suit but ive stuck a link on in case anyone feels like commenting.

He's facing more serious charges than this, but he's not been a Labour peer since 2013. Has the Tory MP being investigated for rape been suspended from the Tory party yet? (Yeah yeah I know they can't without revealing son identité.)

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Your problem there is that it wasn't "the left" who'd been loyal party members for years who made Corbyn leader but people who paid a few quid to join just to make him leader.

Labour leadership contest: The truth about £3 party supporters and Jeremy Corbyn

These supporters were a significant boost to Mr Corbyn. According to Labour List, 84 per cent of the £3 voters backed him.

Meanwhile, among the full Labour Party membership, 49.6 per cent voted for him - meaning, contrary to widespread perception, he would have comfortably won the leadership even without the backing of those who paid £3 to be 'supporters'.

He also won even more comfortably in 2016 after the supporters fee was raised and he had to make a legal challenge to get on the ballot.

Labour leadership election: members' vote breakdown

He had a strong and legitimate mandate. Unfortunately the right-wing element of the party joined hand-in-hand with the right-wing and Liberal press in smearing him. He was also unsuitable on a personal level as a leader and was too indecisive, proud and stubborn for his own good and ultimately contributed to his own downfall. Issues such as ethical foreign policy, Equivocation over NATO and focus on Israel - Palestine were a distraction and a waste of time and effort.

Domestic economic issues and narrative were far more important and were neglected or undermined by Corbyn. If only Mcdonell had not made poor decisions in the past and poisened his own personal profile, I get the impression he would have coped with the responsibility of the office much more competently. Obviously Brexit played a huge role and it was probably always going to end in defeat after the result of the referendum.

Now Starmer has a clear mandate. Hopefully he can move beyond these issues after implementing the report and abide by the spirit in terms of avoiding political interference in disciplinary matters in the future. Builds on his pledges and establishes a clear narrative and a transformative package of policies that will change our society and economy for the better. Soft-left is alright by me, as long as you have the desire and belief that you can change society for the better. But the third-way politics of the past must stay there.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Labour leadership contest: The truth about £3 party supporters and Jeremy Corbyn


He also won even more comfortably in 2016 after the supporters fee was raised and he had to make a legal challenge to get on the ballot.

Labour leadership election: members' vote breakdown

He had a strong and legitimate mandate. Unfortunately the right-wing element of the party joined hand-in-hand with the right-wing and Liberal press in smearing him. He was also unsuitable on a personal level as a leader and was too indecisive, proud and stubborn for his own good and ultimately contributed to his own downfall. Issues such as ethical foreign policy, Equivocation over NATO and focus on Israel - Palestine were a distraction and a waste of time and effort.

Domestic economic issues and narrative were far more important and were neglected or undermined by Corbyn. If only Mcdonell had not made poor decisions in the past and poisened his own personal profile, I get the impression he would have coped with the responsibility of the office much more competently. Obviously Brexit played a huge role and it was probably always going to end in defeat after the result of the referendum.

Now Starmer has a clear mandate. Hopefully he can move beyond these issues after implementing the report and abide by the spirit in terms of avoiding political interference in disciplinary matters in the future. Builds on his pledges and establishes a clear narrative and a transformative package of policies that will change our society and economy for the better. Soft-left is alright by me, as long as you have the desire and belief that you can change society for the better. But the third-way politics of the past must stay there.

Starmer isn't getting elected on those pledges.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I don't vote for anyone who is purposefully racist.
Far too many in the Labour Party are. Not just to people of a Jewish heritage either.
BTW I voted Labour in 1992, 1897 and 2001

By that record you haven't voted Labour for 5 consecutive elections.

What were the reasons you didn't vote for Blair in 05, Brown in 10 and Milband in 15?

 

[squirtyflower]

So policy wise you think the party is great and is needed to solve the inequality in society and bring about fairness, decent housing for all, decent schools, decent hospitals, proper taxation of wealth, social justice, etc etc etc., You think all those are the right and proper policies that will benefit everyone in the country. You think that don't you, but they are unelectable only because of antisemitism.

The schools are decent.
It’s the Labour Party and their tools (could be the other way round) in the two major unions opposing improvements.

 

[ROCKET80]

I don't vote for anyone who is purposefully racist.
Far too many in the Labour Party are. Not just to people of a Jewish heritage either.
BTW I voted Labour in 1992, 1897 and 2001

1897? That's impressive.

Going from the content in this post, can we assume you didn't vote for the Tories in the last election?

It's just some of your past posts come across (to me anyway) as 'pro Boris' and for someone who states they don't vote for anyone who is purposefully racist, voting for Boris and the Tory party would be somewhat hypocritical.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Starmer isn't getting elected on those pledges.

Please elaborate.


Here is my take:


1. Economic justice- arguably electable. especially as we have seen inequality worsen under the pandemic and the people affected (the 5%) are not a vote winning group for labour

2. Social justice- arguably electable I think we will see a greater appreciation for how much benefits actually are and greater interest in retraining after all the upheaval

3. Climate Justice- should be an election winner but even if it isn’t, I don't believe it will be counterproductive. It's the right thing to do.

4. Promote peace and human rights- Perhaps not, but it's the right thing to do. He can't be called a hypocrite by taking this line on this issue after all his years as a Human Rights QC.

5. Common ownership- Arguably electable once you put the point across. Outsourcing has been disastrous for the public sector finances and has eroded knowledge, skills and trust in public services and provided a poorer level of service. Another issue highlighted by the pandemic.

6. Defend migrants’ rights- Arguably not. But again, it's the right thing to do. I'd actually go further than votes for EU citizens and make it all non-nationals after they had reached a minimum residency/settled status. Three years residency seems fair. Non-citizen voting was permissible in the states of the USA before the rise of nativist sentiment.

7. Strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions- Arguable with employers abusing furlough and getting staff to work and degrading workers other rights- Pandemic should have an influence here too.

8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity- with certain regions getting unfair treatment I can see some people warming to this in the lost Northern heartlands

9. Equality- doesn't actually say much, pretty vague. Labour should take this position anyway. largely neutral. Things like LGBT+ issues can stay outside of any manifesto and be passed once in power

10. Effective opposition to the Tories- should be a vote winner on the basis that poor performance as an opposition was a continued criticism of Corbyn.

The Ten Pledges as a good foundation but they need to be fleshed out and expanded on with policies and grouped together under a common coherent narrative.

​

 

[Rascal]

I don't vote for anyone who is purposefully racist.
Far too many in the Labour Party are. Not just to people of a Jewish heritage either.
BTW I voted Labour in 1992, 1897 and 2001

So you don't vote at all anymore then i take it.

The Tories are racist, Labour are racist, Brexit lot are racist, even the cuddly Lib Dems and the Greens will have racists in the party too.

I would love to hear what all these people who say the UK isn't institutionally racist have to say about that. Maybe the UK is institutionally racist despite what all the white nationalists say.

 

[Rascal]

Labour leadership contest: The truth about £3 party supporters and Jeremy Corbyn


He also won even more comfortably in 2016 after the supporters fee was raised and he had to make a legal challenge to get on the ballot.

Labour leadership election: members' vote breakdown

He had a strong and legitimate mandate. Unfortunately the right-wing element of the party joined hand-in-hand with the right-wing and Liberal press in smearing him. He was also unsuitable on a personal level as a leader and was too indecisive, proud and stubborn for his own good and ultimately contributed to his own downfall. Issues such as ethical foreign policy, Equivocation over NATO and focus on Israel - Palestine were a distraction and a waste of time and effort.

Domestic economic issues and narrative were far more important and were neglected or undermined by Corbyn. If only Mcdonell had not made poor decisions in the past and poisened his own personal profile, I get the impression he would have coped with the responsibility of the office much more competently. Obviously Brexit played a huge role and it was probably always going to end in defeat after the result of the referendum.

Now Starmer has a clear mandate. Hopefully he can move beyond these issues after implementing the report and abide by the spirit in terms of avoiding political interference in disciplinary matters in the future. Builds on his pledges and establishes a clear narrative and a transformative package of policies that will change our society and economy for the better. Soft-left is alright by me, as long as you have the desire and belief that you can change society for the better. But the third-way politics of the past must stay there.

It amazes me how the £3 supporters and momentum controlling the party narrative has stuck so solidly over the last few years despite it being utter nonsense.


The thing is and its not something i get involved with there is a part of the left who are supporters of Palestine and they do see Israel as an apartheid state. Its a throwback to when the Labour party and Corbyn amongst others fought apartheid in South Africa. Apartheid surely everyone agrees is abhorrent, it is discrimination and segregation based on racial/ethnic/religious grounds and should have no place in the modern world and anybody who does support it are the real racists. Now I simply do not know enough about the issue to have formed an opinion i can support with facts and evidence so I leave the Palestine issue alone but there are a number who do and they are vociferous in their support of Palestine. This is where I need to definitely educate myself because for the life of me I can not see why supporting Palestine makes you automatically antisemitic especially when a good number of Jewish people also support a free Palestine state.

Maybe PB could educate us here, because i do not believe i am or have ever been racist or antisemitic.

Is criticism of the Israeli state antisemitic?
Is criticism of Netanyhu antisemitic?
Is supporting a Palestinian state antisemitic?

If the answers to these questions are yes, then

Is criticism of Saudi Arabia Islamophobic?
Is criticism of Palestine Islamophobic?
Is supporting Israel Islamophobic?

If the answers to this are yes, then

Is supporting Cuba anti American
Is criticising Merkel anti German
Is supporting NATO anti Russian

If the answers to this are yes, then

Is supporting America anti everybody
Is criticising Trump anti white
Is criticising the UAE anti City

If the answers to this are yes, then

Is supporting the Tories Islamophobic
Is criticising Johnson anti white
Is supporting the SNP anti English.

If the answers to this are yes, then

Is using the term Cultural Marxist antisemitic
Is criticising Islam pro-Israel
Is supporting Putin anti American

Because to me the way this is going means it is now not allowed to criticise or have an opinion to the contrary or you will be automatically a racist of some form or another.

Maybe we are all racist, and if we are then we should all admit it and maybe something then can be done about it. Even then though the racists claim they are not racists they are concerned about dilution of British culture so is being British racist.

I am fucked if i know the answers to the above questions, we all have some form of inherent bias that informs our opinions yet the pro-free speech lobby will say you cant say anything anymore without being racist and the racists will see we cant be racist anymore because its against the law and that is unfair.

Now i have wrote this long post and will I be considered antisemitic for writing it?
Is it possible to be unconsciously antisemitic because you have not got a full grasp of the issues at hand?
Is it possible i am just a racist twat who should be banned from the forum for being a racist?

 

[Saddleworth2]

8. Radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity- with certain regions getting unfair treatment I can see some people warming to this in the lost Northern heartlands

I think if presented correctly this could be a vote winner. It is central to the long term future of the UK that we become far less South East centric with investment in infrastructure spread round the country and devolved power granted to local government. NW, NE, Midlands, SE, SW. Devolve as much as possible and leave Westminster with a far slimmer slice of overarching governance.

The Ten Pledges as a good foundation but they need to be fleshed out and expanded on with policies and grouped together under a common coherent narrative.

Group everything behind the top three pledges and sharpen the focus. A Labour party manifesto based on Economic, Social and Climate justice would do well as long as it was presented with passion and exceptional leadership by KS.