.

Jedi the one one making headlines is Starmer and the only one creating division is Starmer. All these attacks on the left and grassroot level members is one sided and if it is so damaging then you should criticise him not people for pointing out the damage he is doing

I'm actually at the point where I can't work out of he's just taking the p!ss now

This was him at the weekend. He really needs to stop laughing when he is being dishonest or doing thing's to wind Labour voters up


Exiled - It's simple not true to say Starmer is the only one creating division.
There is a left wing twitter feed that sends out a daily offensive against Starmer.
Many of those who support momentum confront Starmer's agenda at every possible moment.

Personally think its all part of politics but don't think it is right to blame one person for the division.

On this one - Starmer has made a decision.
The Division will come from those who disagree with him.
 
Two things interesting about the logic that document sets out:

1) no mention of antisemitism. So all the times the Labour right insisted that Corbyn could/would regain the whip if only he'd alologise profusely enough have been proven wrong.
2) the assertion that a person just standing as a candidate damages Labour's election hopes is so vague and unprovable, I wonder if this will eventually be used as a precedence for blocking other candidates. If Corbyn damages Labours brand, what about McDonnell? Abbott? Long-Bailey? Begum? Burgon? Dawn Butler? Andy McDonald? Zarah Sultana?

Hopefully Corbyn decides to retire from parliament rather than stand as an independent. I don't see any good outcomes from that. Would prefer him to focus on his Peace and Justice think tank.
 
And just bin any and all notions of "solidarity"? Let the right-wing press continually get away with it so we can never have nice things?

As mentioned above - it's coming from the same place as the Labour leadership calculating that not supporting striking workers will win more votes than it loses.
It is coming from that place, I agree and it's a strategy that i believe will prove successful.

It may not sit comfortably with the traditionalists, and even less so the hard left, but just like Blair's Labour it needs to be an offering that appeals to the floating voters.

When was the last time we had a hard left Labour government?
 
It is coming from that place, I agree and it's a strategy that i believe will prove successful.

It may not sit comfortably with the traditionalists, and even less so the hard left, but just like Blair's Labour it needs to be an offering that appeals to the floating voters.

When was the last time we had a hard left Labour government?
Using the current metric for ‘hard left’ we would have to look back to 1990 as far as New Labour is concerned they carried on the Thatcherite model moving towards third way politics as we see today in America. Tony Blair laid the foundations from 1997 to 2010

It’s a sad situation where MPs, hedge fund managers and newspaper owners get to dictate the political landscape of this country.
 
Two things interesting about the logic that document sets out:

1) no mention of antisemitism. So all the times the Labour right insisted that Corbyn could/would regain the whip if only he'd alologise profusely enough have been proven wrong.
2) the assertion that a person just standing as a candidate damages Labour's election hopes is so vague and unprovable, I wonder if this will eventually be used as a precedence for blocking other candidates. If Corbyn damages Labours brand, what about McDonnell? Abbott? Long-Bailey? Begum? Burgon? Dawn Butler? Andy McDonald? Zarah Sultana?

Hopefully Corbyn decides to retire from parliament rather than stand as an independent. I don't see any good outcomes from that. Would prefer him to focus on his Peace and Justice think tank.
Why would he retire?
 
Using the current metric for ‘hard left’ we would have to look back to 1990 as far as New Labour is concerned they carried on the Thatcherite model moving towards third way politics as we see today in America. Tony Blair laid the foundations from 1997 to 2010

It’s a sad situation where MPs, hedge fund managers and newspaper owners get to dictate the political landscape of this country.
I've learnt that the pro Starmer/current party and pro Corbyn/2015-2020 party are not going to agree on this - or anything to do with politics
Tories need to be defeated electorally for the country's sake
 
I've learnt that the pro Starmer/current party and pro Corbyn/2015-2020 party are not going to agree on this - or anything to do with politics
Tories need to be defeated electorally for the country's sake
Leave/Remain.. Labour/Tory.. Left/Right and now Starmer/Corbyn

Divide, Divide, Divide.. Tories need to be defeated should not take away all other positions and points of view. Most folks, average folks, normal general population will not see Starmer and co an attractive competent alternative to what we already have.

He’s too weak, he’s untrustworthy he has no ideas. PRO CORBYN was just pro Labour, CORBYNITE! was just folks wanting democratic socialism, a mixed economy.. we had publically owned trains and corporation tax at 30% under Thatcher. Now this is seen as some sort of culty extreme position to take.

The right people in the right jobs all working together to support pragmatic policies for the betterment of the British population.. we’re so far away from that right now.

Win at all costs.. even if we don’t win?
 
Leave/Remain.. Labour/Tory.. Left/Right and now Starmer/Corbyn

Divide, Divide, Divide.. Tories need to be defeated should not take away all other positions and points of view. Most folks, average folks, normal general population will not see Starmer and co an attractive competent alternative to what we already have.

He’s too weak, he’s untrustworthy he has no ideas. PRO CORBYN was just pro Labour, CORBYNITE! was just folks wanting democratic socialism, a mixed economy.. we had publically owned trains and corporation tax at 30% under Thatcher. Now this is seen as some sort of culty extreme position to take.

The right people in the right jobs all working together to support pragmatic policies for the betterment of the British population.. we’re so far away from that right now.

Win at all costs.. even if we don’t win?
As you will understand I disagree with plenty of that - but will just agree to disagree
 
1679938461143.png
Unless there is an effective, honest, sincere, opposition which provides hope, inspiration and belief for ordinary people - there is no opposition.
Thats why Starmer and the State he represents - the imperialists best friend - is opening the door to the far right to fill the vacuum.
Desperate people turn to those whose rhetoric sounds like the psalm of salvation.
The evils of racism and nationalism, wrapped in the union flag - is the refuge of the scoundrel.
Starmerism is the ideological twin of neo-liberalism.
He was, is and always will be, the establishment`s man.
The Labour Party has almost always been the obstacle to change for the working class.
Save from 1945, the Labour Party has hitherto been the iron fist of the wealthy, in a velvet glove.
What we have in front of us, laid bare, is the political emperor without its flags, or its suit, or weasel words.
The current Labour leadership is placing its knee on the neck, of any hope which ordinary people had of making positive change for the better.
 
As you will understand I disagree with plenty of that - but will just agree to disagree
It’s ok to disagree, it’s fine, I have no problem with it. You have you point of view, your position and point of view which won’t be changed by anything I have to say and likewise with myself. We’re not polar opposites and I’m sure we have more in common than otherwise.
 
Cancelled my membership several years ago. Starmer is my MP and I will be voting Green in the GE. If Corbyn stands as an independent he will win his seat by a mile, as he is incredibly popular in his constituency and that’s because he is a fantastic MP. By the way there is a large Jewish population in Islington and they will vote for him too as they know he is no antisemite.
 
Using the current metric for ‘hard left’ we would have to look back to 1990 as far as New Labour is concerned they carried on the Thatcherite model moving towards third way politics as we see today in America. Tony Blair laid the foundations from 1997 to 2010

It’s a sad situation where MPs, hedge fund managers and newspaper owners get to dictate the political landscape of this country.
I agree, it is sad, very sad indeed, but that's the reality of the landscape Labour are operating in.

And I'm not sure it's ever been that different really. The establishment has always acted with unwavering self-interest, its only the methods used that have evolved.

And Blair only succeeded because he got into bed with Murdoch. Was he wrong to do so? It was critical in winning the election and from there that Labour government was very succesful for a long period of time. It was a pragmatic decision I think.
 
You'd need to define "success" and "hard left" for any meaningful comment.

We've never had a "hard left" Labour government because Labour has never been a vehicle for the "hard left".
Success is a Labour government, rather than a Conservative one - I would have that that was self-evident?

Of course we've never hard left government, it was a rhetorical question really.

The more moderate and centrist Labour policy is, the more chance it has of winning enough votes.
 
Success is a Labour government, rather than a Conservative one - I would have that that was self-evident?

Of course we've never hard left government, it was a rhetorical question really.

The more moderate and centrist Labour policy is, the more chance it has of winning enough votes.
Exactly NOTHING else matters
 
Back
Top