homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Jeremy Corbyn out? (Page 34)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Jeremy Corbyn out?
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
By retaining a critical facility. Many of these accounts come from trustworthy people, the facts seem believable, and the facts haven't really been challenged by Corbyn's office.


How many cases are there which pass those three tests ?
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Here's what an unhappy PLP member might have said on record: "I have some concerns over Jeremy's policy positions and strategy in opposition. There is of course much more that unites us than divides us. Our job is to find a way of putting together - and communicating clearly - a positive, persuasive alternative to Tory rule. I will listen carefully to the views of my CLP and wider electorate on how this can best be done. No further comment".

Since you're alluding to Jo Cox, what did you think of the criticisms she made on record in the Guardian? And what if anything did Corbyn do about them?

--------------------
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
leftfieldlover
Shipmate
# 13467

 - Posted      Profile for leftfieldlover         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sadly, if Corbyn is re-elected/confirmed as Leader, I will return my Labour Membership Card and seriously consider joining the LibDems. I have already joined the Women's Equality Party - but that's another story. If Owen Smith is elected Leader, I will give him a year to make a decent and responsible mark on the role. Having never heard of Mr Smith prior to the Corbyn shenanigans, I pray that all would be well.

[ 05. September 2016, 14:15: Message edited by: leftfieldlover ]

Posts: 164 | From: oxford | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
By retaining a critical facility. Many of these accounts come from trustworthy people, the facts seem believable, and the facts haven't really been challenged by Corbyn's office.

The same argument about crying wolf has been made about climate change science, the health risks of smoking and many other babies mixed up with varying degrees of bathwater. But one can't give a guy a by on every accusation because they were falsely accused elsewhere.

I don't find that very helpful. I only know two MPs personally, and they are both total wallies, although not dishonest. They are half-believable when they are drunk, I suppose. Do I generalize from that to people I have never met?

The facts seem believable? Well, sure, it's believable that somebody threw a brick through Eagle's office window, but it has been disputed, so who should I believe?

Your third criterion is barmy. Corbyn is supposed to deny every negative story about him? Please.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

--------------------
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
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

Why is it hyper-skepticism? Just to say, 'the story is believable' seems a bit vague to me. Lots of things are believable.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

Attributing impure methods to the likes of Hillary Benn is simply a case of extrapolating from past behaviour.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Here's what an unhappy PLP member might have said on record: "I have some concerns over Jeremy's policy positions and strategy in opposition. There is of course much more that unites us than divides us. Our job is to find a way of putting together - and communicating clearly - a positive, persuasive alternative to Tory rule. I will listen carefully to the views of my CLP and wider electorate on how this can best be done. No further comment".

Since you're alluding to Jo Cox, what did you think of the criticisms she made on record in the Guardian? And what if anything did Corbyn do about them?
Jo Cox never crossed my mind as I was typing that. Perhaps you could point me to what you had in mind?
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Why is it hyper-skepticism? Just to say, 'the story is believable' seems a bit vague to me. Lots of things are believable.

So presumably you don't believe things that scientists have said on climate change, that reporters have said about human rights abuses or that Labour politicians say about anything. Or if you do find some things that some of these groups have said believable how is it that you do that?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
By retaining a critical facility. Many of these accounts come from trustworthy people, the facts seem believable, and the facts haven't really been challenged by Corbyn's office.

quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
How many cases are there which pass those three tests ?

The shadow DEFRA minister passes this for me. The Thangam "miscommunication" about whether she was a minister or not looks clear cut. And the economics advisers who found it impossible to deliver any advice have serious points.

As to whether his office is supposed to issue denials or not - I would have thought that was the least one could do in terms of media management if shadow ministers are resigning and painting inaccurate pictures of the circumstances.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
"There is of course much more that unites us than divides us.".

Since you're alluding to Jo Cox, what did you think of the criticisms she made on record in the Guardian? And what if anything did Corbyn do about them?
Jo Cox never crossed my mind as I was typing that. Perhaps you could point me to what you had in mind?
I've left the bit from Jo Cox. Has it become a cliche this quickly?

The piece I was thinking of. And earlier.

--------------------
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
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Something clearly went wrong with lines of communication, re- the defra minister. Fair comment.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Why is it hyper-skepticism? Just to say, 'the story is believable' seems a bit vague to me. Lots of things are believable.

So presumably you don't believe things that scientists have said on climate change, that reporters have said about human rights abuses or that Labour politicians say about anything. Or if you do find some things that some of these groups have said believable how is it that you do that?

I'm not sure what you mean now by 'believable'. For example, it's believable that humans don't cause climate change, but empirical research over quite a number of years has made this seem unlikely. I would say that I came to this view quite slowly, and with a lot of reading, and conversations with other people.

The other examples seem very vague to me. If a reporter said that there were human rights abuses in the US, I would be a bit surprised, but I would read it, and think about it. Obviously then, one has to compare such a claim with other material, other writers, and so on.

I'm not sure how this is relevant in any case. I started talking about crying wolf. Maybe all the negative stories about Corbyn are true, maybe some of them, but it has become a morass of material, with bricks through windows, offices broken into, anti-Semitism, terrorist sympathies, traingate, and so on. If you feel clear about all this, my compliments.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
"There is of course much more that unites us than divides us.".

Since you're alluding to Jo Cox, what did you think of the criticisms she made on record in the Guardian? And what if anything did Corbyn do about them?
Jo Cox never crossed my mind as I was typing that. Perhaps you could point me to what you had in mind?
I've left the bit from Jo Cox. Has it become a cliche this quickly?

The piece I was thinking of. And earlier.

'The piece I was thinking of' article immediately seeks to lump all the blame for any of the party's problems on the new leader. I don't buy it. the 'And earlier' piece seems to be a rare outbreak of common sense/ long-view thinking ...
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I would say that I came to this view quite slowly, and with a lot of reading, and conversations with other people.

Well my compliments to you in turn if you have an ability to assess the primary data. Personally I don't have that faculty and I've therefore had to take judgements on who seems more likely to be representing an orthodox scientific approach which involves a fair degree of trust being place in some people and not in others.


quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
If a reporter said that there were human rights abuses in the US, I would be a bit surprised, but I would read it, and think about it. Obviously then, one has to compare such a claim with other material, other writers, and so on.

I'm not sure how this is relevant in any case.

It sounds exactly like it to me. I spent a while coming to the view and read quite carefully various accounts, and compared them with other writers. But I wouldn't lump in the ex-ministers' accounts with the headlines in the Sun. I find it unlikely that an array of ex-labour ministers (or shadow ministers) are all part of the smear campaign. Especially the ex-DEFRA minister.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

I find it unlikely that an array of ex-labour ministers (or shadow ministers) are all part of the smear campaign. Especially the ex-DEFRA minister. [/QB]
Agreed. But there has been more going on than that. It is something like the collective panic of a dying breed.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
And yet this hyper-scepticism seems only to work in one direction ... you are perfectly happy to attribute all sorts of impure motives to the PLP on flimsy evidence.

Why is it hyper-skepticism? Just to say, 'the story is believable' seems a bit vague to me. Lots of things are believable.
My point is that earlier in the thread you were perfectly happy to say things like 'Smith is obviously a patsy' without any supporting evidence at all. Why this sudden insistence on academic rigour?

--------------------
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
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
But to post a fuller answer to your question, I would say that negative stories about Mr Corbyn are believable if they fall into any of the following categories:

1. Mr Corbyn himself has explicitly acknowledged them, e.g. demanding that the UK trigger Article 50 immediately without consulting the Shadow Cabinet.

2. They otherwise come straight from the mouth of Mr Corbyn, e.g. suggesting you could build Trident subs without the missiles, the comments he made about medical research, the speech with the words Israel and Islamic State in them.

3. They generally don't appear to be in doubt by anyone, e.g. that Mr Corbyn went on holiday in the crucial part of the referendum campaign.

4. They
a.) come from natural allies of Mr Corbyn, either inside or outside the party, e.g. the Shadow Agriculture minister, Professor Wren-Lewis, David Blanchflower, regarding whom there is no reason to assume bad faith; and
b.) aren't in contradiction to other known facts.

5. They are confirmed by multiple sources across the political spectrum, e.g. the inability of Mr Milne to get the press office in order.

6. No plausible interpretation of the known facts puts Mr Corbyn in a good light, e.g. this episode (still unaddressed by the way). I think a lot of the IRA coverage falls into this category too.

The negative coverage that falls outside these categories may be true as well, but even if it isn't, enough does fall within those categories to make me pretty convinced of Mr Corbyn's incompetence.

--------------------
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
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
'The piece I was thinking of' article immediately seeks to lump all the blame for any of the party's problems on the new leader. I don't buy it.

'The piece I was thinking of' article immediately says:
quote:
Of course it would be wrong to view these results simply through the prism of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
It then goes on to make a number of specific points. Has Jeremy Corbyn done anything to address them, beyond saying 'I don't buy it'?

--------------------
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
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
[qb] 'The piece I was thinking of' article immediately seeks to lump all the blame for any of the party's problems on the new leader. I don't buy it.

'The piece I was thinking of' article immediately says:
quote:
Of course it would be wrong to view these results simply through the prism of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Indeed - but it then went on to do exactly that !
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
But to post a fuller answer to your question, I would say that negative stories about Mr Corbyn are believable if they fall into any of the following categories:

1. Mr Corbyn himself has explicitly acknowledged them, e.g. demanding that the UK trigger Article 50 immediately without consulting the Shadow Cabinet.

2. They otherwise come straight from the mouth of Mr Corbyn, e.g. suggesting you could build Trident subs without the missiles, the comments he made about medical research, the speech with the words Israel and Islamic State in them.

3. They generally don't appear to be in doubt by anyone, e.g. that Mr Corbyn went on holiday in the crucial part of the referendum campaign.

4. They
a.) come from natural allies of Mr Corbyn, either inside or outside the party, e.g. the Shadow Agriculture minister, Professor Wren-Lewis, David Blanchflower, regarding whom there is no reason to assume bad faith; and
b.) aren't in contradiction to other known facts.

5. They are confirmed by multiple sources across the political spectrum, e.g. the inability of Mr Milne to get the press office in order.

6. No plausible interpretation of the known facts puts Mr Corbyn in a good light, e.g. this episode (still unaddressed by the way). I think a lot of the IRA coverage falls into this category too.

The negative coverage that falls outside these categories may be true as well, but even if it isn't, enough does fall within those categories to make me pretty convinced of Mr Corbyn's incompetence.

Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Some on the Left assert that 9/11 was an inside job. If I conclude that the Bush administration was not behind 9/11 does it logically follow that all criticism of the Bush administration is false? Would it have been fair to lump Republican senator Chuck Hagel in with the Truthers simply because he was also critical of George W. Bush?

Look, I don't have a dog in this fight. As a conservative American, I'm as impartial and disinterested observer of internecine Labour Party conflict as one can possibly be. Since reading Ship of Fools, I've noticed two narratives accepted as gospel by those on the British Left. By left I mean the real left damn it.

One holds that the Tories are evil and their policies are killing people. Furthermore, the conservatives given free reign will turn the UK into a Randian dystopia that makes Pinochet's Chile look like Tito's Yugoslavia. Now, as it stands, the Tories will have power at least until 2010. Running Corbyn in 2020 will likely give them another five years. This means at least 15 years of destructive Tory rule. But wait, there is more. Why assume that the Labour leader of 2025 won't be to the right of Tony Blair?

The second narrative holds that Blairites are all Red Tories and really no better than David Cameron who actually flirted with the term Red Tory. Keep in mind that there is a middle ground between Labour and Conservative and that being the Liberal-Democrats. All three parties are essentially the same. Who cares if a Tory or Blairite PM actually runs the government? The more important thing is to purify the Labour Party and make it a true social democratic (or dare we even hope...socialist) alternative to the various shades of neoliberalist currently on offer.

The question becomes which narrative you believe more. If you believe the first, then Corbyn is an absolute disaster who must be removed before he can do irreparable harm to the cause. A Blairite in power will save more lives than Corbyn as leader of the opposition.

On the other hand, if you believe the second, then you accept that May won't be Thatcher and that the right has already done as much damage as they can do. Corbyn will bring Labour to the left. He will play Moses to a future Social Democratic (or dare we hope Socialist) Joshua. Let those Blairite MP's get with the program or bugger off (did I use that term correctly) to the Lib Dems.

This is soul searching time for Labour. I mean the real Left wing members of Labour damn it. Which of your narratives do you truly believe and which is hyperbole?

I feel your pain. My faction of American Conservatism has the same problem with Trump. I know it hurts you to admit that Corbyn is your Trump. He isn't your Sanders. Your Sanders would be a Thatcherite.

--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Some on the Left assert that 9/11 was an inside job.

So do some on the Right.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't think that there are just two narratives - if you like, there are many sub-narratives. For example, I don't see Blair (or Blairites) as the same as Cameron. Hence, the question 'who cares if a Tory or a Blairite runs the government?' is not germane to my stance, (I would vote for a Blairite). Of course, some people may argue that. I don't see Corbyn as Moses, anyway, you get my drift. He's not the messiah, he's just ...

I think many people's political position is more complex and delicate than that. Of course, there are some pretty black and white positions around.

[ 06. September 2016, 17:22: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

I don't think everyone who opposes Corbyn is part of that. But even with these underhand measures it seems very unlikely that Corbyn will be removed.

There is a sufficiently large and fixed bedrock of support for him that won't be moved no matter what evidence of managerial disarray emerges.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

I don't think everyone who opposes Corbyn is part of that. But even with these underhand measures it seems very unlikely that Corbyn will be removed.

There is a sufficiently large and fixed bedrock of support for him that won't be moved no matter what evidence of managerial disarray emerges.

Doesn't the knowledge of that make all the plotting even more needlessly destructive ??
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529

 - Posted      Profile for Pottage   Email Pottage   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

I don't think everyone who opposes Corbyn is part of that. But even with these underhand measures it seems very unlikely that Corbyn will be removed.

There is a sufficiently large and fixed bedrock of support for him that won't be moved no matter what evidence of managerial disarray emerges.

Doesn't the knowledge of that make all the plotting even more needlessly destructive ??
Not everyone who is critical of Corbyn is "plotting". Some - many, it seems to me - are just critical of some of his political positions and/or of his profoundly obvious unsuitability for leadership. In principle, anyone who did not have the best interests of the Labour party at heart ought to be endorsing him with as much enthusiasm as the most devoted Corbynista.

On the face of it a lot of the people who oppose Jeremy Corbyn do so because they believe he is damaging the prospects of there being a Labour government and entrenching the likelihood of a Conservative one, and in the meantime leaving that Conservative government effectively unchecked by a meaningful parliamentary opposition.

Do you believe that they should say nothing just because such a lot of Labour members support Corbyn so unconditionally that he seems highly likely to win the leadership election?

Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I don't think that there are just two narratives - if you like, there are many sub-narratives. For example, I don't see Blair (or Blairites) as the same as Cameron. Hence, the question 'who cares if a Tory or a Blairite runs the government?' is not germane to my stance, (I would vote for a Blairite). Of course, some people may argue that. I don't see Corbyn as Moses, anyway, you get my drift. He's not the messiah, he's just ...

I think many people's political position is more complex and delicate than that. Of course, there are some pretty black and white positions around.

Then why not just admit that Corbyn as leader was a mistake, replace him, and unite the party in opposition against the oppressive and murderous Tory regime?

--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's quite possible to disagree with the government and prefer a government which is more in keeping with one's ethical principles without holding that they are homicidal maniacs.

I presume that you don't think that President Obama or the next President Clinton are in the business of imposing a Communist Dictatorship which will force free born Americans to wake at dawn in order to work for the government as abortionists or fluoride dispensers?

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

Why the need for supporters of Corbyn to smear Labour MPs (individually and as a group)?

--------------------
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
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I don't think that there are just two narratives - if you like, there are many sub-narratives. For example, I don't see Blair (or Blairites) as the same as Cameron. Hence, the question 'who cares if a Tory or a Blairite runs the government?' is not germane to my stance, (I would vote for a Blairite). Of course, some people may argue that. I don't see Corbyn as Moses, anyway, you get my drift. He's not the messiah, he's just ...

I think many people's political position is more complex and delicate than that. Of course, there are some pretty black and white positions around.

Then why not just admit that Corbyn as leader was a mistake, replace him, and unite the party in opposition against the oppressive and murderous Tory regime?
Yes - there was an honest, upfront way of doing this - by one of the disgruntled MPs putting themselves up as an alternative candidate from day one.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

I don't think everyone who opposes Corbyn is part of that. But even with these underhand measures it seems very unlikely that Corbyn will be removed.

There is a sufficiently large and fixed bedrock of support for him that won't be moved no matter what evidence of managerial disarray emerges.

Doesn't the knowledge of that make all the plotting even more needlessly destructive ??
Not everyone who is critical of Corbyn is "plotting". ...

Do you believe that they should say nothing just because such a lot of Labour members support Corbyn so unconditionally that he seems highly likely to win the leadership election?

There is much they could have said. As it has turned out, nothing would have been better than what they actually said - for themselves as well as for Corbyn and Co.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
It's quite possible to disagree with the government and prefer a government which is more in keeping with one's ethical principles without holding that they are homicidal maniacs.

I presume that you don't think that President Obama or the next President Clinton are in the business of imposing a Communist Dictatorship which will force free born Americans to wake at dawn in order to work for the government as abortionists or fluoride dispensers?

Sure, it is. However, I've seen numerous people on Ship of Fools claim that Conservative cuts to benefits were killing people. Then you have support for Trident equals support for mass murder. My point is one's continued support for Corbyn should rest on which narrative you believe to be closer to the truth.

For the record, I have no clue which narrative is true. On one hand, Theresa May doesn't seem particularly extreme even by UK standards much less by US standards. On the other hand, after reading the policy positions of Liz Kendall, I can't see how her views are dramatically different from Mays. I admit to having only a cursory knowledge of either person.

As to US politics, conservatives were very much in the same boat as Corbyn supporters. Did they believe a vote for a moderate establishment Republican who would supposedly have the best chance of beating the Democrats be better than losing with a candidate who agreed with them? Up until this election cycle, the answer was yes. This year the answer became no. Trump versus Cruz proved just how unpopular the Republican establishment truly was.

--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

Why the need for supporters of Corbyn to smear Labour MPs (individually and as a group)?
Which instances of this did you have in mind?
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Yes - there was an honest, upfront way of doing this - by one of the disgruntled MPs putting themselves up as an alternative candidate from day one.

Owen Smith did put himself up, didn't he? You are that upset about the order of things? The plan is to stick with Corbyn to punish the vast majority of your MPs who don't support him? To what end exactly? Pacify the new members of Labour who like Corbyn? Why that makes no sense has already been explained. Unless the new labour party members represent new labour voters in constituencies not currently represented by Labour and are numerous enough to offset the number of people lost to other parties because of disgust with Corbyn, then it doesn't really matter how adept Corbyn is at whipping up the new Labour members.

--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Yes - there was an honest, upfront way of doing this - by one of the disgruntled MPs putting themselves up as an alternative candidate from day one.

Owen Smith did put himself up, didn't he? You are that upset about the order of things?
Yes. That is what many of those on Corbyn's side are upset about. As I said much earlier on, I didn't even vote for him as a lesser-preference last time. I have voted for him this time.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

Well if you grant me my conclusion - namely that Mr Corbyn is unfit to lead a party of government - then however you answer that question, your options are Mr Smith or the Tories.

If you think the smears are coming from a minority of Labour MPs, then punishing the majority by consigning them to electoral oblivion under Mr Corbyn is cutting off your nose to spite your face, as well as being a 'whole school in detention' kind of reaction.

If you think the smears are coming from all or nearly all the Labour MPs, then why even vote Labour? All you're saying is that nobody in the party - neither its leader nor its MPs - is fit to lead a party of government.

--------------------
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
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankly My Dear:
Suppose I grant you the truth of all the above. Why then the need for smears and non-constitutional shenanigans on top ????

Well if you grant me my conclusion - namely that Mr Corbyn is unfit to lead a party of government - then however you answer that question, your options are Mr Smith or the Tories.


As indicated in post above, in a different set of circumstances, I might have supported Smith. This is a message vote from the membership to the PLP : 'That was not the way we want you to do things'.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah, I understand now. When Ms May sweeps to power in 2020 with the largest post-war Conservative majority, you'll be able to say: 'Never mind - think how much worse things would have been if Owen Smith had been able to violate my interpretation of the Labour Party constitution.'

--------------------
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
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't believe that Smith could do any better than Corbyn.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Which comes back to: If you think Mr Corbyn isn't up to the job, and Mr Smith isn't up to the job, and the Labour party haven't found anyone better, then why even vote Labour?

--------------------
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
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644

 - Posted      Profile for Beeswax Altar   Email Beeswax Altar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What separates the Blairites from the Lib-Dems?

--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan

Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
hatless

Shipmate
# 3365

 - Posted      Profile for hatless   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
With the Lib Dems gone and Labour suffering, diversity will grow within the Conservative Party. That's where the tousle between left and right will happen for now, there and as usual in the general social discourse.

And that's not too bad. Things will still move in the leftwards direction they've tended to for the past few centuries, just a bit more slowly.

But what we need is some new thinking about restructuring the economy and society in a way that can meet the challenges of computers, globalisation and climate change. We need a movement to articulate the needs of the majority, of the young and the poor. That's not going to come from Etonians and millionaires.

--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form

Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Which comes back to: If you think Mr Corbyn isn't up to the job, and Mr Smith isn't up to the job, and the Labour party haven't found anyone better, then why even vote Labour?

I cannot vote Tory, after all the hateful things they have done. If another party had a better chance of toppling the Tory in my constituency, then I would vote for that other party. My constituency is a Tory-Labour marginal.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.

As it happens I think Mr Smith would do better than Mr Corbyn. At least he can work with his colleagues.

--------------------
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
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It doesn't matter who's running the Labour party. May CANNOT lose in 2020, she should retire before 2025. Her successor will then lose to Sadiq Khan. Jeremy is a FINE opposition leader with John McDonnell as a FINE shadow chancellor. They should retire after losing in 2020 when Sadiq MUST be elected leader.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Are those opinions more factual in block capitals?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.

If one comes to the conclusion that a parliamentary party is useless and craven but the best thing about it is a leader who is failing to demonstrate any managerial ability and cannot lead the party... well then aside from pausing to give the party a good kicking by inflicting him on them until the next general election it would seem the best thing to do would be to move on. Either in despair or in hope, depending on disposition.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.

If one comes to the conclusion that a parliamentary party is useless and craven but the best thing about it is a leader who is failing to demonstrate any managerial ability and cannot lead the party... well then aside from pausing to give the party a good kicking by inflicting him on them until the next general election it would seem the best thing to do would be to move on. Either in despair or in hope, depending on disposition.
That's what happened in Scotland, isn't it? For various reasons, feeling taken for granted, seeing Labour in bed with Cameron, seeing Labour as right-wing, there was a shift to the SNP.

But this isn't possible in England. I suppose some shift to UKIP, but this seems hopeless.

I see Corbyn as the last best hope for Labour. If it's Smith as leader, fair enough.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Frankly My Dear
Shipmate
# 18072

 - Posted      Profile for Frankly My Dear   Email Frankly My Dear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Well, Ok. What I'm getting at is that trashing the PLP isn't an argument in favour of Mr Corbyn, it's just an argument against Labour.

If one comes to the conclusion that a parliamentary party is useless and craven but the best thing about it is a leader who is failing to demonstrate any managerial ability and cannot lead the party... well then aside from pausing to give the party a good kicking by inflicting him on them until the next general election it would seem the best thing to do would be to move on. Either in despair or in hope, depending on disposition.
The bulk of the PLP may yet see sense, or at least switch on to how the wind has changed; and Corbyn and those close to him may yet sharpen up their act, managerially speaking. I'm hopeful on both counts.
Posts: 108 | From: Telford, Shropshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools