|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Thoughts on Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
Looks like a landslide victory.
Some "New" Labour bods have already resigned. Others seem to be very disturbed by this turn of events.
Some Tory bods are very happy and feel like he may be another "image disaster" like Michel Foot. Others are worried he may prove to be a powerful opponent.
My personal view? I'm delighted that he seems intent on dragging Labour back to what it should have been and I feel like for the first time in years there will actually be a point to me voting in an election.
[Adjusted the title to remove the excess apostrophe. -Gwai]
[ 16. May 2016, 08:09: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
He will probably take voters away from my party (The Greens), but I still think he is a great choice. The reason is I am more committed to general socialist ideals being promoted than the particular focus of my party. I think the Greens can also work with him and others to provide a voice of the left.
A lot was made of why Labour lost the last election. I think one reason is that they were seen as Tory-lite - all the same ideas, just less confident. At least now they should have a clearer identity.
Can he win the next election? Actually, I think he might be able to. I am not saying he will, or that it will be an easy time for him, but I think he has a lot of integrity and honesty, and the electorate do respect that. I also think he might actually talk about policy, not just criticise this government.
I say part of The One Show in Guildford, where they asked random people on the street about certain policies which they agreed with, only to reveal that they were Corbyn policies. Most of the interviewees were shocked and appalled that they were agreeing with someone who wanted to destroy their families, their livelihood and their country.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I say part of The One Show in Guildford, where they asked random people on the street about certain policies which they agreed with, only to reveal that they were Corbyn policies. Most of the interviewees were shocked and appalled that they were agreeing with someone who wanted to destroy their families, their livelihood and their country.
Problem is, the Tories famously came up against this between Hague and Cameron - polls showing people agreed with them on a policy until they knew it was them. They eventually overcame this by coming up with a leader people didn't think that about...
Personally, I think that Labour are following the Tory stages-of-grief playbook. We're now immediately post the 2001 General Election, and they've elected IDS because he makes them feel good and pure about themselves. Meanwhile I suspect more than a few around the country, as with IDS in 2001, are thinking "what on earth are you doing?"
I wonder what the odds are on the next but one Labour leader being the next Labour prime minister?
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
It may well be that the next Labour Prime Minister isn't yet a member of the House of Commons.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I think there is something in the stages of grief theory. But I see it more as a nervous breakdown, when a party has been in power a long time, and then loses. There are the classic signs of mourning - denial, anger, sadness, eventual acceptance.
The Tories went through this after 1997, and Labour are going through it now. However, it is perhaps surprising how strong the revulsion against Blairism has been, and by extension, against neo-liberalism.
I think the political future is clear - if the world situation stays reasonably calm, and there is reasonable prosperity for 5 years, the Tories are a shoe-in next time. Labour can only win (with our without Corbyn), if there is some disaster in either area, e.g. a hideous war, an economic collapse, mass poverty, and so on. I suppose leaving the EU would be wild card for everybody.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Stays !?!
Have you not noticed the multiple wars, mass poverty and migration that are happening now ?
There are bodies washing up on the beaches of europe FFS
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
He'll probably win me back from the Greens ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Stays !?!
Have you not noticed the multiple wars, mass poverty and migration that are happening now ?
There are bodies washing up on the beaches of europe FFS
True enough, but Tory voters probably live in a bubble, where things like that don't impinge. I think for Labour to win will require some kind of big emergency, e.g. a really hideous war in Syria. Mass poverty exists, correct, but not enough yet, to produce revulsion agin the Bullingdon boys.
In a sense, starving the poor has become the lingua franca of British politics, although given a nicer name.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Stays !?!
Have you not noticed the multiple wars, mass poverty and migration that are happening now ?
There are bodies washing up on the beaches of europe FFS
Yeah, but not round here though. Said ignorant #$÷%s everywhere. Anyway, we should leave Europe cos they want us to have loads of immigrants, and so does that Corbyn bloke. Said the same group of people.
More seriously, his approach of "we should accept mass immigration" is likely to feature heavily in the coming days.
The rest of my thoughts are on the "future of socialism" thread.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Should have said 'a hideous war in Syria, where British troops are involved'.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Should have said 'a hideous war in Syria, where British troops are involved'.
Well, Corbyn has said he can't ever forsee circumstances where British troops would be deployed abroad hasn't he? So the government will do well to get any approval for that, but since we are now killing people in drone strikes, who cares...
Interesting to read how far apart Tom Watson and Corbyn are.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
I think the Tories would be making a mistake if they underestimated Corbyn. I think Peter Hitchens summed it up well today
quote:
Do not underestimate Jeremy Corbyn. Labour’s Blairites lie dead and dying all over the place because they made that mistake. Tory Blairites such as David Cameron might be wise to learn from this, especially given last week’s dismal, shrinking manufacturing and export figures, which were pushed far away from front pages by other stories, but which cast doubt on the vaunted recovery...
Actually, I dislike many of Mr Corbyn’s opinions – his belief in egalitarianism and high taxation, his enthusiasm for comprehensive schools, his readiness to talk to terrorists and his support for the EU. Oddly enough, these are all policies he shares with the Tory Party. But I like the honest way he states them, compared with the Tories’ slippery pretence of being what they’re not.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3232372/PETER-HITCHENS-Labour-real-lefty-proper-conservatives.html
[ 13. September 2015, 16:14: Message edited by: Bibliophile ]
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I have to say that I'm a bit impressed by the amount of doomsday predictions that have come up just because he's the party leader.
He must be good.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
Is his success really caused by grief? All the signs seem to point to the fact that he simply provides an actual real alternative from the Tories rather than the "tori lite" Labour had been offering.
I don't see it as the outcome of grief but hope. People were just tired of not being given a meaningful choice.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
George Spigot and other Shipmates
We'd already started discussing the Corbyn factor in "The Future of Socialism" thread.
But I'm going to let this thread stand and do a bit of traffic redirection on the other one.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
I think my gut instinct leant slightly towards Cooper.
But to be honest, any Labour leader would be slaughtered by the right wing press for being a far left lunatic. You might as well have Corbyn slaughtered for a sheep as Kendall for a lamb. And frankly, I doubt Labour would get anywhere by playing within the rules the Tories were setting.
The other point is Scotland. I don't think Labour has much chance unless it can reestablish itself north of the border, and if it can't do so under Corbyn I doubt it could have done so under any other candidate.
The main thing though is that Labour's fortunes depend on Fallon making the Liberal Democrats electable in the seats that the Tories took off them last time.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
As an American I don't have much insight. However I do see some interesting parallels with the current American Presidential election marathon.
The Democrats had moved "centrist" and the Republicans further to the right in the past few elections. At some point though, when there are hard time, people start wanting a choice other than pro-wealthy right and pro-wealthy far right.
The Republican process is a debacle because of Trump, but if he's factored out, it does seem like there's not a great choice. The Democrats are watching as Hilary Clinton, heir to the centrist neo-liberal movement is fading in the polls, while an independent socialist is showing her a competitive race in the early pro-liberal states. Neither Trump or Sanders would have been imaginable as serious candidates in the past.
I chalk it down to the hard times making people realize that the major parties are aligned with the wealthy, and that the people aren't just "not-yet-wealthy-". It's taking some fumbling around to try to carve out a party that represents that group.
Does this seem similar to the British situation?
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
It appears Chuka Umunna has left the shadow cabinet "by mutual agreement"
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Hmm. Well, I am no socialist but this is what I would advise Corbyn:
You will never be Prime Minister...
I wouldn't be too sure about that.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
(Is it possible to ask for removal of the grocer's apostrophe from the title? It's starting to hurt.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
The British electorate have shown their willingness to flirt with a charismatic leader in the form of Ukip's ;farage.
I suppose there is a theoretical chance that it will throw out 30 years of politics-bland and go for Corbin 's Labour.
In reality, as has been said up-thread, without red reappearing N of the Scottish border an outright Labour majority is a bit of a fantasy regardless of who is leading it.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Shadow cabinet appointments coming out now - so far:
- Andy Burnham - Home Secretary
- Lord Falkner - Justice Secretary
- Rosie Winterton - Chief Whip
- Hilary Benn - Foreign Secretary
- Heide Alexander - Health Secretary
- Ian Murray - Scottish Secretary
[ 13. September 2015, 21:08: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Stays !?!
Have you not noticed the multiple wars, mass poverty and migration that are happening now ?
There are bodies washing up on the beaches of europe FFS
True enough, but Tory voters probably live in a bubble, where things like that don't impinge. I think for Labour to win will require some kind of big emergency, e.g. a really hideous war in Syria. Mass poverty exists, correct, but not enough yet, to produce revulsion agin the Bullingdon boys.
In a sense, starving the poor has become the lingua franca of British politics, although given a nicer name.
But he doesn't need to convert the Tory voters. He'll never appeal there, neither would the other candidates. What he needs is to win back the ones who went to UKIP and the Greens. That, and the Scots (which is why Sturgeon was straight onto the attack) should put Labour back in power quite comfortably.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Yvette Cooper has been canny - not taking a frontbench post, but will be chairing a taskforce on the refugee crisis. I wonder if he will find roles for the other two candidates.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Also, am I the only person to think it was extremely rude and ungracious of Jamie Reed to resign before Corbyn had even finished his victory speech ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Personally, I think that Labour are following the Tory stages-of-grief playbook. We're now immediately post the 2001 General Election, and they've elected IDS because he makes them feel good and pure about themselves. Meanwhile I suspect more than a few around the country, as with IDS in 2001, are thinking "what on earth are you doing?"
Iain Duncan Smith never filled concert halls with cheering supporters, though ...
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead
I am
# 21
|
Posted
Rather mixed feelings. As someone cynical of politicians generally, it's good to have someone who isn't yet another Cameron/Clegg/Miliband/Osborne/Blair clone - I mean, how can you tell them apart. Perhaps the Tories will feel the need to have some slightly more human front-benchers. On the other hand...
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Shadow cabinet appointments coming out now - so far:
- Andy Burnham - Home Secretary
- Lord Falkner - Justice Secretary
- Rosie Winterton - Chief Whip
- Hilary Benn - Foreign Secretary
- Heide Alexander - Health Secretary
- Ian Murray - Scottish Secretary
So many shocking bad hats.
[ 13. September 2015, 21:25: Message edited by: Chapelhead ]
--------------------
At times like this I find myself thinking, what would the Amish do?
Posts: 9123 | From: Near where I was before. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Hmm. Well, I am no socialist but this is what I would advise Corbyn:
You will never be Prime Minister...
I wouldn't be too sure about that.
I am sure as eggs George S. I think he could do surprisingly well and perhaps shift the political climate somewhat, but I just don't see enough buyers for the total package.
What I think he has already succeeded in doing is shifting Labour's centre of gravity way over to the left. This leaves lots of room in the centre. The natural party to fill this would be the Lib Dems but they are so mauled at the moment that they may not be able to.
Who else could fill it? Well, a lot of the parliamentary Labour party are now sitting to the right of "new Old Labour" if I can put it like that. I think if there is no defenestration (and I don't think there will be) then it is quite likely that we will see a new SDP by 2020 if not before.
It might not do any better than the original SDP though. It would be even shorter of big names. There's no obvious David Owen figure. Except... and this is a way off beam idea... but let's put it out there... what about Tony Blair? Maybe he is fed up with being a has-been. Maybe he would like to see himself as the saviour of New Labour once again. Is this a mad idea? Probably. Forget I said it.
OK who else could fill the gap in the centre? What about a split in the Conservative party? I think that's quite likely too, with the European referendum coming up. It's just possible that you might get three Europhile centre parties and SNP campaigning for IN with Corbyn Labour, Eurosceptic Tories and UKIP campaigning for OUT.
What I'd really like to see would be a completely new part in the centre. I'd be up for some sort of Christian Democrat party like the one Elaine Starkey's husband tried to start, for example. Maybe. I think this is very unlikely though.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
If he's going to be inclusive, that means accepting a mixed bag I guess.
The big appointment will be the chancellor - some are saying it might be Angela Eagle.
(I absolutely don't think Tony Blair will end up
leading another political party, for one thing I doubt he'd be prepared to take the pay cut.)
[ 13. September 2015, 21:49: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
The big appointment will be the chancellor - some are saying it might be Angela Eagle.
It's John McDonnell.
Expect to hear much more about the time he said Bobby Sands should be 'honoured' and how IRA bombs brought peace to Northern Ireland.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
In reality, as has been said up-thread, without red reappearing N of the Scottish border an outright Labour majority is a bit of a fantasy regardless of who is leading it.
The New Old Labour will face their first real test in the Scottish Government elections next year. Of course, there isn't an SNP yellow-wash to overturn in Holyrood so Labour doesn't need as big a swing as it will for the next Westminster election. Part of the issue would be whether Scottish Labour is seen as being able to operate independently of the UK party or just be a "branch office". I think Corbyn will be seen as a lot less controlling than Milliband, and so let Scottish Labour have more independence in pursuing policies for Scotland without constantly checking with the Party down south (actually, I expect that to be more the case for party at local level across the country). Although, it could easily turn into a vote the SNP lose if their gamble of mentioning another referendum (even if it's just to identify the circumstances and timescale rather than actually hold one) in their manifesto back fires with a considerable ground swell of not wanting to go through that again in the next 10 years.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Let me be clear, I abhor the killing of innocent human beings. My argument was that republicans had the right to honour those who had brought about this process of negotiation which had led to peace. Having achieved this central objective now it was time to move on. The future for achieving the nationalists' goals is through the political process and in particular through the Northern Ireland assembly elections... Irish republicans have to face the fact that the use of violence has resulted in unforgivable atrocities. No cause is worth the loss of a child's life. No amount of political theory will justify what has been perpetrated on the victims of the bombing campaigns.".
John McDonnell
Nonetheless, I think it is rather good idea not to make him a shadow northern ireland minister.
[ 14. September 2015, 06:14: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
From the Guardian on 16th May 1999
quote:
"The idea that he sacrificed his family for his political career is misleading, because his prospects are limited, at best. There has never been any propect of a government job for him, and party loyalists are rumoured to be trying to bar him from standing as Labour candidate at the next election.
What he has going for him is the respect due to someone who never sold out."
The full article is here.
The article was about the sad news that he and his wife had split up because she wanted their son to go to a selective school in a different borough, and he did not approve.
Non UK Shipmates who have strayed into this thread will need to know that the Guardian is a broadly left newspaper and that selective v comprehensive schooling has long been a matter of major political acrimony to the UK left.
Obviously, 16 years later, this article has been proved wrong.
I've already said on a different thread that Jeremy Corbyn represents things I really detest in politicians. I see him as the negative image of John Redwood.
Corbyn has won because lots of people want someone who, as they would see it, 'has never sold out'. They admire an inflexible commitment to dogma and doctrinal principles as the highest integrity, more important than the practical or personal parts of life.
My question is this. Why? Why is this regarded as admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it about this that some people find so inspirational? It is very often the same people who would call those who apply the same approach to e.g. certain dead horses as bigots?
So why are they called bigots, but the political dogmatists get let off that accusation? I can't see the difference. It's the humourless dogmatism that is so alarming, in whatever cause, whether socialism, flat rate taxation, or religion. It's what killed Michael Collins, what underlay so much of the violence of the Reformation, and what attracts socially dislocated young men into ISIS (or whatever it calls itself this week).
This forcing the outside world to fit our own dogmatic spectacles because reality is easier that way, is something most of us have to grow out of. Those that don't, or those that use it to control others, should not be let anywhere near power.
So can Shipmates answer my questions. Why is this so admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it that people find so admirable about something so dangerous and destructive? Can somebody persuade me I'm wrong?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I'm pretty gobsmacked at him appointing Charlie Falconer to shadow at justice and as shadow Lord Chancellor.
I know JC says he is going to be inclusive but surely 'champagne' Charlie is a bridge too far? If you leave out his background (Edinburgh Academy, Glenalmond, Cambridge) there are still two serious issues:
1. He's never stood for election.
2. The reason he didn't get selected for a labour seat was because he refused to pull his children out of public schools, and he didn't apologise for them being there either.
Given JC's stand over the choice of a selective state school for his own child, I'm amazed.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Helen-Eva
Shipmate
# 15025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Corbyn has won because lots of people want someone who, as they would see it, 'has never sold out'. They admire an inflexible commitment to dogma and doctrinal principles as the highest integrity, more important than the practical or personal parts of life.
My question is this. Why? Why is this regarded as admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it about this that some people find so inspirational? It is very often the same people who would call those who apply the same approach to e.g. certain dead horses as bigots?
The idea that there are simple, pure answers that don't need any kind of compromise is always attractive - I assume that's why fundamentalism is attractive.
Almost no politicians get anywhere without seeming to compromise - Jeremy Corbyn has and that makes him novel and novelty is attractive.
On the assumption that it will be impossible to function as leader of a major political party for any length of time more than about a week without compromise I presume Mr Corbyn is about to lose his USP.
(Appointing Lord Falconer may be the first of the compromises.)
--------------------
I thought the radio 3 announcer said "Weber" but it turned out to be Webern. Story of my life.
Posts: 637 | From: London, hopefully in a theatre or concert hall, more likely at work | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
So can Shipmates answer my questions. Why is this so admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it that people find so admirable about something so dangerous and destructive? Can somebody persuade me I'm wrong?
Dogmatism and inflexibility are not admirable, but I don't yet know that Corbyn is like that. If he is, he will struggle. He seems, though, to be a man who builds bridges, who strives to be consensual, and he has declared his intention to have an inclusive approach as leader in terms of his team and policy making. I will be interested to see how he does. My fear is not that he will be too single-minded, after all, he has no formal power at all, but that he will be too easily distracted, manipulated, stitched-up and watered down. I fear the next few months could be very painful to watch; a good and likeable man being minced by the press and his own party.
But I hope for something different. I am encouraged that pretty much all of the criticism directed at him is of the 'well he's obviously no good and could never be popular' variety. Itself the evidence of rigid thinking in the face of abundant evidence.
There's very little reasoned and evidenced criticism of him. His economic position, the reverse of Labour's position a month ago seems to be self-evidently sensible, supported by pretty much all economists, and gives him a big message to attack the Tories with. The lack of this was what lost the election, most people agree. I've heard little discussion of this from opponents, though. All I hear are voices still saying, we just know he's going to be a disaster.
I look forward to hearing him questioning Cameron and being interviewed by Humphreys. I think he will wrong foot them both by answering questions with reasons, turning off the spin and giving honest opinions and evidence.
I am sick of hearing Cameron trying to persuade me that he's concerned about the poor and needy, when we all know he's not. I am furious at Labour trying to persuade the country that they're as tough and rigorous on economics as the Tories, and that they want to end immigration just as much, too, when we all know that's not true. The Conservatives' priority is the rich, and Labour's priority is the poor.
For those on the left, what a joy it will be to hear someone say that we should be proud to pay benefits to the disabled, because it's the right thing to do. To say that we should play our part in solving Europe's refugee crisis, because we can be better than the fearful, selfish and callous nation the Conservatives want us to be. And for everyone, politics can become about choices, morality and the sort of society we want to build, rather than a fashion parade: which of these people do you think would make the best leader? The tallest one?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
I want to like Jeremy Corbyn. He’s a proper lefty socialist who looks like Obi Wan Kenobi. So far, so good.
But is anyone else bothered by his lack of ministerial experience?
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
Lack of experience is an argument to never let anyone new do anything. I think his age is against him adapting to a new role, because it seems to me that we become less flexible. I think Owen Jones' role as an advisor could be key. He seems to have found a fresh voice and could help Corbyn argue his policies.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Corbyn has won because lots of people want someone who, as they would see it, 'has never sold out'. They admire an inflexible commitment to dogma and doctrinal principles as the highest integrity, more important than the practical or personal parts of life.
My question is this. Why? Why is this regarded as admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it about this that some people find so inspirational?
Admirable or not, I don't think it applies to Mr Corbyn anyway. Mr Corbyn is accused of being too friendly with Hezbollah and the IRA and the defence to this is that peaceful solutions require dialogue with unpleasant people. This is not IMV an unreasonable defence but it is also a description of compromise.
FWIW I am very ambivalent about this result. He is the only one willing to provide a genuine alternative to Tory economics but he has taken strong lines on a lot of secondary issues that are likely to be red lines for voters.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Lack of experience is an argument to never let anyone new do anything. I think his age is against him adapting to a new role, because it seems to me that we become less flexible. I think Owen Jones' role as an advisor could be key. He seems to have found a fresh voice and could help Corbyn argue his policies.
I'm sorry, but I think a large number of people around the country will think those two are made for each other. Jones in particular is a first class example of the sort of person who falls into student politics, enjoys the shallow end, and never finds his way out into the real world at the end of his degree...
God knows I've no time for Alistair Campbell but his put-down to Jones on Twitter at the weekend (which was in response to Jones' showboating and not unprovoked) was withering perfection:
something along the lines of "come back and tell me how to win when you've won 3 elections"
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Presumably in his career he's had to take the Parliamentary oath to her majesty on quite a few occasions. If he could honestly swear loyalty to the legal head of state, swear to abide by the constitution that puts her in that position, even while wanting to change the constitution to replace her with an elected head of state then what's the problem?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead
I am
# 21
|
Posted
Possibly no problem, Possibly problem. It's for Jeremy Corbyn to say. But the PC is (technically) a group of personal advisers to the Monarch, which is a bit different to being an elected Member of Parliament. 'Sources close to' Corbyn suggested not long ago that he wouldn't take the Privy Council oath. Personally I suspect he will. As I said, 'interesting'.
--------------------
At times like this I find myself thinking, what would the Amish do?
Posts: 9123 | From: Near where I was before. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I've already said on a different thread that Jeremy Corbyn represents things I really detest in politicians.
Sorry if I skipped the context for this. I've read the Socialism thread but may have missed it. Would you mind going into a little more detail about what things he represents that you detest?
quote:
Corbyn has won because lots of people want someone who, as they would see it, 'has never sold out'. They admire an inflexible commitment to dogma and doctrinal principles as the highest integrity, more important than the practical or personal parts of life.
My question is this. Why? Why is this regarded as admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it about this that some people find so inspirational? It is very often the same people who would call those who apply the same approach to e.g. certain dead horses as bigots?
So why are they called bigots, but the political dogmatists get let off that accusation? I can't see the difference.
Do we have any evidence that he would be inflexible and dogmatic as a PM? Also I'm not convinced that's why Corbyn won. I think he's popular simply because people are desperate for an alternative to the right wing, and possibly they hope he will put an end to the unsuccessful austerity policy.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I've already said on a different thread that Jeremy Corbyn represents things I really detest in politicians.
Sorry if I skipped the context for this. I've read the Socialism thread but may have missed it. Would you mind going into a little more detail about what things he represents that you detest?
quote:
Corbyn has won because lots of people want someone who, as they would see it, 'has never sold out'. They admire an inflexible commitment to dogma and doctrinal principles as the highest integrity, more important than the practical or personal parts of life.
My question is this. Why? Why is this regarded as admirable in Jeremy Corbyn? What is it about this that some people find so inspirational? It is very often the same people who would call those who apply the same approach to e.g. certain dead horses as bigots?
So why are they called bigots, but the political dogmatists get let off that accusation? I can't see the difference.
Do we have any evidence that he would be inflexible and dogmatic as a PM? Also I'm not convinced that's why Corbyn won. I think he's popular simply because people are desperate for an alternative to the right wing, and possibly they hope he will put an end to the unsuccessful austerity policy.
To your second point, are they desperate though?
Over 400,000 people voted in the leadership contest, and he got just over 59% in the first ballot, so somewhere over 200,000.
Now we know, thanks to the £3 members, that a lot of people (although still in the tens of thousands) joined Labour to vote for him - so entryists joined to make this happen (admittedly the other 2 categories of voter in the contest also voted for him clearly.
So, the best we can say with any certainty is that he's popular with Labour members new and old who are desperate for an alternative to the right wing.
Unfortunately those who voted for him are about 0.4% of the electorate (give or take).
Unless you're suggesting that many people voted Tory in May because Labour was insufficiently left wing?
If (and it's a big if) he makes it through to 2020, and getting my crystal ball out, I would suggest that he's going to pile up votes in seats that Labour weigh the vote in anyway, and get destroyed elsewhere.
I just look at the Nuneatons, Burton on Trents, Worcesters, Wyre Forests, (other Midland marginals are available) etc and think there's no way on earth that they're going to go for him.
The SNP will be doing their damnedest to destroy him north of the border (because the last thing they need is Labour resuscitating and outflanking them from the left). In fact, one of Sturgeon's more interesting comments over the weekend was that if he goes full-on Old Labour then that will be another argument for independence!
If he achieves a coalition of Labour, Green, and northern UKIP voters then he might make inroads such that someone else has got a chance in 2025, however.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Unless you're suggesting that many people voted Tory in May because Labour was insufficiently left wing?
Yes. Isn't that obvious?
People were frightened by the economic problems and by immigration, so they voted for the big stick party.
Labour presented themselves as the slightly smaller stick party. Why on earth would anyone have voted for them?
Labour needed, and still needs, to present alternative policies to the Conservatives and to do so unapologetically. Not 'yes, immigrants are nasty, but we'd better let a few in.' Not 'yes, paying benefits makes the country poor, but we have to make sure that disabled people have a minimal standard of living, so, yes we'd better pay some of them, just a little bit, whilst obviously trying to pressure them into work like the Tories rightly say.' Not, 'yes, we overspent and ran out of money, so the answer is to shrink the economy for a decade or two until the markets forgive us for being naughty, and we'd be nearly as good as doing that as the Tories.'
We need policies that are promoted with pride, because the Tory ones are wrong and stupid and unjust. We need an opposition that loudly and convincingly claims we'd all be much happier in a strong, confident and generous society.
[ 14. September 2015, 15:32: Message edited by: hatless ]
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Unless you're suggesting that many people voted Tory in May because Labour was insufficiently left wing?
The Tories got about a third to two fifths of the vote overall. So it's theoretically possible for Corbyn to win without picking up any Tory votes if he can gather a broad enough coalition.
I doubt anybody decided against voting Labour because they looked at Miliband's campaign and thought it's just too clear what Miliband stands for, and he's obviously not prepared to compromise his principles.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
We need policies that are promoted with pride, because the Tory ones are wrong and stupid and unjust.
Right to be clear then, the Tories just won because the British people, whilst aching with every bone in their body to vote for an acceptable left wing party, looked at the options and thought "you know what, it's the wrong and stupid and unjust one for me."
The Conservatives spent 1997 to 2005 arguing that the electorate had made a mistake, would see the error of their ways and come home and you know what? Eventually they had to go to where the people were.
I still think this represents a retreat away from the majority and into the comfort zone a la the Tories in 2001 (IDS even won with about the same percentage of the ballot by the way).
Incidentally, I know Labour wouldn't be expecting to win many rural seats, and also that opinions can be just as divided in rural areas as they are in cities, but if you're looking to pick a fight the appointment of a vegan vice president of the League Against Cruel Sports as the Shadow Defra secretary is a stroke of either genius or lunacy.... (I'm making no judgment either way about either veganism or hunting, but this is hardly "hello troubled waters, have some oil" let's be honest).
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Unless you're suggesting that many people voted Tory in May because Labour was insufficiently left wing?
The Tories got about a third to two fifths of the vote overall. So it's theoretically possible for Corbyn to win without picking up any Tory votes if he can gather a broad enough coalition.
Just about, although IIRC Tories + UKIP added up to over 50%. The really interesting question (among many interesting questions) is which way the northern UKIP vote goes now - does it go back to Labour?
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
The Conservatives spent 1997 to 2005 arguing that the electorate had made a mistake, would see the error of their ways and come home and you know what? Eventually they had to go to where the people were.
Did they? In what respect did the Tories move leftwards between Iain Duncan Smith and 2010?
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
