NEC votes that Corbyn is automatically included on the ballot

Labour’s National Executive Committee has voted 18-14 tonight that the current leader, Jeremy Corbyn should be automatically included on the ballot for the forthcoming leadership contest.

UPDATE: They’ve pulled up the drawbridge on taking any more opportunistic political migrants…

,

  • chrisjones2

    Great result. Another step on the road to oblivion for Labour.

    Main issue now is do the PLP break away and from a New Party now or wait for the result on the stuffed ballot and go then

  • Obelisk

    I am forced to agree with you. I like some of Corbyn’s ideas and I think that moving into a post neo-liberal world some of them have merit, but he is just hopelessly incompetent as a political leader.

    Oh and I’ll never forgive him for being absent without leave during the Brexit campaign.

  • hgreen

    I’m no legal genius but it was clear to me that there could have been no other result.

  • hgreen

    Oblivion, yet you comment within seconds of the result?

  • hgreen

    Sorry but the brexit campaign excuse is baloney. The plot has been planned for ages. The great SNP leader only got 2/3 of her supporters to vote remain as well.

    Regarding your first point. It’s up to the party to put forward a unity candidate that reflects the desires of Corbyns supporters. Instead they’ve put forward Eagle who supported two wars, tried to block chilcott and abstained on the welfare bill. The lady isn’t only not suitable to be leader she’s in the wrong party.

  • Obelisk

    We’ve been over this before. Sturgeon tried. She put the effort in. If she had only gotten 1/3 of her supporters to vote remain, I would still rate her effort because she put in the effort.

    David Cameron brought this disaster down upon us all with his boneheaded decision to risk his country’s future on a matter of party politics. He destroyed his legacy with that gamble, undoing his attempts to fix the economy and unravelling the union he ‘saved’ during indyref1. History will rightly excoriate him as one of the worst British Prime Ministers to have been in office. But, if you take his efforts during the Remain campaign in a vacuum divorced from his responsibility for triggering the whole thing, he tried. He tried very, very hard. He failed, and we will all pay the price for his arrogance and failure. But during the campaign he tried.

    Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand did not try. That man did not put the effort in to secure a Remain vote. He was not visible, he was not public. He seemed intent on ploughing his own little furrow, to do the bare minimum in support of remain without it seeming completely obvious he was probably leave at heart. If you look back at the campaign you can see numerous instances where Jeremy Corbyn could have done more by simply appearing to be doing something!

    He didn’t. You can say he did, but the very perception that he wasn’t doing enough in a situation like this is enough to confirm that he wasn’t doing enough.

    As for his opponent, yeah she is an uninspiring Milibandite. A Blairite without charisma and hamstrung by the same mistakes that destroyed the last Labour administration. She is not Labour’s savior.

    Hell, who knows if Labour even has a savior. They are going to have a civil war now that will either end with the party splitting OR Corbyn triumphant but his MPs abandoning him to his fate, leaving the British public to wield the knife on him in 2020.

    Still why can’t I shake the mental image of Jeremy Corbyn, emerging from his house on some sunny spring morning in 2020 to confront the waiting media to explain that ‘winning elections isn’t important’, that the loss of dozens of momentum backed candidates is ‘a bit of a blow’ but that despite the verdict of the British people he ‘intends to stay on, as he has a democratic mandate from several hundred thousand Labour members who voted him into office as leader of the Labour party. Twice!’
    And then he’ll end his impromptu press conference, explaining he has to be in London to address a protest regarding Tory austerity. Because that’s the only way you stop Tory austerity. And he shall grab his placard and off he will trot.

  • Redstar

    At the end of the day it was a mixture of confused cumudgeons, little Englanders , closet racists and Col blimp chavs who voted out- they are to blame. It’s daft to suggest anyone other than the Brexiteers are at fault

  • Obelisk

    He may not have won if he had tried.

    But if he had tried, he would have had honour in his failure.

    He did not try.

  • Obelisk

    So it’s a media conspiracy now he didn’t get the coverage. He COULD have worked with the official Remain campaign to help shape the message and maximise impact, but he did his own thing.

    Why the rush to defend this man?

    Why the inability to call him out on his clear and obvious failings?

    Why the desire to blame everyone else and accuse them of conspiracy when the truth is so much more prosaic.

    Nice chap, couldn’t organize a booze up in a brewery.

  • Jarl Ulfreksfjordr

    It would have been wrong for Corbyn not to have been on the ballot, despite the poorly worded party rule.

    Corbyn has the ability to bring real effective change. However to ensure that he is effective, to see Labour as a party capable to govern again he needs to be more ruthless and ditch those who seem unable to manage the party for him on the strategic level.

    To date he has been too keen to carry deadwood with him. Perhaps from a sense of misplaced loyalty to old friends.

    Politics is a hard game at leadership level. A very different environment than of a protest platform on the backbenchs.

  • jporter

    Corbyn’s hesitant position on Brexit actually reflected quite a large part of the electorate. I don’t think I’ve met anyone who voted remain who doesn’t also have a fair bit of criticism for the EU.
    There’s this common idea that somehow if Corbyn had been more pro-EU he could have swung more voters. I find it quite patronising and it completely misses the reason why so many voted leave – they’re sick of being dictated to by political elites.
    Corbyn is far from perfect, but it seems that people have been asking for years for a ‘different type of politics’ with more substance, less soundbites, more nuance, less spin, yet when a politician comes along who offers this, there is an almost hysterical reaction against him.
    Why did we need political parties to take a position on Brexit anyway? I’m perfectly capable of making up my own mind about it.
    For me, our obsession with ‘strong leaders’ seems like another symptom of our continuing infantilisation as citizens.
    Incredibly, a willingness to think for myself and not take a lead from my political overlords seems like an almost radical position these days.

  • hgreen

    I guess you’ve accepted msm perception of Corbyn and I’m not going to change your mind. The reason he may gave the impression of not trying was that he correctly refused to share a platform with the tories and obviously Blair later in the campaign. He correctly took a nuanced view of EU membership because it was never a simple binary choice.

    Blair, Brown and many of the PLP have more blame for brexit than Corbyn because they abandoned the working class to UKIP.

  • hgreen

    You’ve really got to laugh. Apparently Corbyn is unelectable yet he had control of Britexit in his hands.

  • hgreen

    See previous comment. You see him as unelectable yet had the ability to change the referendum result. You really need to get your logic sorted out.

  • jporter

    I don’t see any rush to declare him as beyond criticism, just calls for a more balanced and less hysterical view of the man.
    I believe the ‘conspiracy’ that he has much less media coverage than previous opposition leaders has been backed up by analysis.
    Any time I’ve seen him interviewed he comes across as quiet and considered, however when the media want a quick soundbite and so repeatedly translate this as weak, waffly and ineffectual, he’s going to have a problem.
    Part of that problem – the lack of media savvy – is his own, but not to acknowledge the media barrage against him is naivety.

  • Obelisk

    Not really, as stated I judge him by his capacity to influence Labour voters. As leader of the Labour party he should have been able to manage that.

    He didn’t on the necessary scale, and they tipped the result.

    Did I expound enough on the part where HE DIDN’T TRY?

  • Obelisk

    That’s it, someone has a view of Corbyn that’s at odds with those of his fans and suddenly they are basically brainwashed,

    Only his adoring fans seem to have an unadulterated view of what a political titan they have in Corbyn.

    If only everyone else wasn’t doing him down out of jealousy.

  • jporter

    He’s apparently uninspiring, yet has inspired hundreds of thousands of people to join the Labour party and at the same time an almost visceral reaction from critics.

  • jporter

    Are Labour voters simply sheep to be corralled to the party’s official view?
    You should have a look at the % remain vote in the constituencies of many of the MPs hailed as superior potential leaders.

  • Obelisk

    Well it’s a good thing he didn’t do that then. If he had, maybe at this very moment the Labour party could be in the throes of an existential crisis.

    They can certainly relax that they dodged that bullet.

  • hgreen

    That’s it. Anyone who supports Corbyn is an uncritical fool and an adoring fan.

    Do you not get it? We support what he stands for not who he is. Labour should put up someone else who reflects the views of the majority of the members. The problem is the PLP have basically been institutionalised.

  • Obelisk

    Well I like a lot of his positions too. I just think he is utterly incapable of carrying them out.

    I think he is so incapable of carrying them out that I believe he is
    a liability.

    He is such a liability that the only reason I can think of for Theresa May not calling an election right now is that she is worried about giving either UKIP or the SNP a boost. Because it’s a completely open goal for the Tories.

    Supporting Corbyn is a deriliction of duty on the part of the left, not because he believes the wrong things but because he is completely incapable of implementing his principles and is therefore leaving us to the mercy of the Tories by default.

  • Sherdy

    It shows how confident Angela the Eagle is in her bid to oust Jeremy Corbyn when she was afraid even to face him in the ballot!

  • jporter

    In the howling absence of a credible alternative, there’s no option but to support him. Who do you have in mind?

  • Reader

    Ernekid: …repeat of what happened with the Scottish referendum where people realised that there was no real difference between labour and the Tories…
    Because if Corbyn shared a platform with Tories that would be ever so much worse than sharing a platform with Hamas…
    And on what planet would potential Labour voters fail to distinguish between Corbyn and Cameron?

  • hgreen

    You are asking for a heart transplant before you’ve found a doner.

  • Katyusha

    He COULD have worked with the official Remain campaign to help shape the message and maximise impact, but he did his own thing.

    The official Remain campaign was a disaster. Corbyn was wise to distance himself from it. All of the over-the-top warnings of economic armageddon and unequivocal support for the EU turned a lot of people off. Corbyn’s measured, reasonable stance was a lot closer to the feelings of the public on this issue. Not his fault that the media were looking for soundbites and hyperbole rather than reasoned, logical arguments, but it says a lot about our politics that exposure is now measured by time on the air rather than time on the ground.

  • jporter

    So the PLP, dissatisfied with Corbyn, which is of course their right to express, have…finally….got to the point where they should have been weeks ago, a democratic leadership challenge according to party rules.
    I keep hearing that Corbyn is a liability, that the party are stuffed with him in charge…I keep hearing it, ad nauseam, yet it is empty waffle without an obviously superior alternative, someone who can appeal to the leave-voting disaffected in Labour heartlands and also the wider electorate looking for a social democratic genuine alternative to the Tories.
    So – and I’m not being sarcastic here – this is their big chance, to put forward that candidate that fulfils all those requirements they have been listing that Corbyn doesn’t. If Corbyn had resigned, the real big hitter would surely have come out to play – who?
    If this person really meets the requirements, then surely they should be able to convince the membership, win a head to head debate against Corbyn easily, otherwise, how will they ever convince the electorate?
    I mean, the very central argument, the core, of the complaint against Corbyn is that he is unelectable, unconvincing, unappealing. So by definition any superior candidate should be able to be more electable, more convincing, more appealing, to anyone – right?
    Nobody really believes Angela Eagle is that candidate, so, seriously, who is it?

  • Declan Doyle

    Excellent stuff. Democracy wins again and Corbyn gets a second chance to prove his mettle.

  • Theelk11

    He is an idealogue not a politician. Principles are more important to him and his than any attempt to win power which would mean compromise. I despise him for what he is trying to do. He can’t even look like a leader see frankie boyle in the grauniad today.
    This is all fine for a socialist worker, pathetic as a leader of the opposition at Westminster he needs to go immediately, tonight has been deeply depressing if you truly care about beating the tories

  • Theelk11

    No he didn’t.. 10 appearances in six weeks a campaign does not make.. He was a leaver in his ideologically fixed little heart .
    He has not got the intellectual flexibility to see the greater good. He is politically small and selfish and has been for 30 years

  • terence patrick hewett

    Alice’s Adventures in Underlandi is a cautionary Realist novel written by the English author and mathematician Ludwig C Dodge under the pseudonym Carol Lewis. It is generally considered to be the pinnacle of the literary Purification Movement which typically offsets virtuous working-class Victorian society against their dim-witted, upper middle class counterparts through a series of unsavoury and unhygienic encounters and in the process exposing their ungodly ways.

    Lewis’ tale, which has set the blueprint for the genre; tells the timeless tale of a young girl named Alice who by a horrific accident of fate wakes up in an abandoned wine-bar in Islington; a macabre world populated by grotesque, anthropomorphic creatures of ambivalent sexuality. The remainder of the novel recounts the heroine’s courageous attempts to escape this metrosexual hell-hole without being talked to, touched, or breathed upon by any of its hideous inhabitants.

    Alice was written in 1879, the year metrosexual men were granted the same civil rights as the other great apes. Outraged by this development, Lewis resolved to write a work of fiction to show the creatures as they really were and began a tour of what he called “Britannia Inferior” in order to carry out research for this lofty task.

    Part of the author’s travels included sailing up the river Thames to Westminster in a boat accompanied by three young girls whom he described as “friends of the family” The locals took a liking to the girls, especially little Alice;

    As Lewis recalls:

    Alice being the silly and carefree child she is, thought it would be a good idea to dangerously engage one of these creatures in banter: imagine her shock when one of them yelled back telling her to “keep her hand on her ha’penny” She was shocked and confused and I was naturally appalled. However it was a moment of inspiration and the idea of the novel was born.

    Following this incident the author created the fictitious world of Underland; taking inspiration from his nightmare travels through Hampstead and Clapham Common. He began writing that very night and had already decided to dedicate the book to the real-life Alice who had
    died of shock on the way home.

    Characters:

    Alice:

    A precocious young girl who tires of her loving working class family life in Clacton and follows a white ferret through a tunnel to another world, only to realise she was better off where she started. Alice finds Underland a nonsensical place and cannot understand its inhabitants’ seemingly made-up language; or their love of guacamole.

    The White Ferret:

    Malodorous and flea-ridden, the Ferret carries a smartphone at all times. Alice was initially under the impressionthat the ferret could talk but soon remembered that not even the locals are capable of verbal communication never mind the animals. Whatever the case, the White Ferret was apparently late for a very important date. What this “date” was for is never discussed, although Alice hopes that it will involve some kind of treatment for rabies.

    The Mad Harriet:

    Alice stumbles upon The Mad Harriet having a tea party which upsets Alice greatly as it is not officiallytea time according to GMT. This matters not however because when the Harriet hands her the supposed “tea” it turns out to be an advertisement for some sort of information exchange. The Harriet is truly mad and imagines her guests to be a dormouse and a March Hare when in fact they are the mangled cadavers of two members from Fathers 4 Justice.

    The Cheshire Man:

    The Cheshire Man is one of the most iconic characters from the novel. He appears before Alice clutching a Rosaryn and the only visible part of him is his pearly grin. Alice remarks at this point that she’s seen a man without a smile, but never a smile without a man and speculates that he must be very rich indeed to be able to afford such a smile. He replies with an engaging laugh “charity, my dear, begins at home: after all, everything is fair in love and war” They later share the memorable
    exchange:

    Alice: “I loathe this place.
    Everything here is so phony”

    Cheshire Man: “Why yes,
    everyone here is
    phony”

    Alice: “Well I’m not”

    Cheshire Man: “But of course
    you are or why else would you be here”

    Critical Reception:

    Although the novel has gained legendary status; in recent years the book has come under some scrutiny for its unsubtle anti-middle class leanings. Several detractors have pointed out that the novel unfairly portrays people from the upper middle class as stupid, lazy, ugly, inbred and destined to be parasites throughout their lives. It is generally accepted today that if any of them could read they would be deeply offended by it.

    “All good people agree,
    And all good people say,
    All nice people, like Us, are We
    And every one else is They”

    Do you really think we are that fecking stupid? Hold on to yr goolis fast: you be about to be parted from them

  • Declan Doyle

    Thanks man and no offense intended here but, are you OK?

  • terence patrick hewett

    We are about to gut and fillet a fish: no-one is All Krorect: except Popeye:

    If you try hard enough you can believe six impossible thngs before breakfast:

  • Pasty

    The Labour MP’s need to eat lots of humble pie. Having blamed Corbyn for the defeat of the EU Referendum they then try to challenge the leader but don’t want him to have the right to stand and rebuke their challenge. They tried to remove the man voted as leader by 250,000 votes by voting 172 to 40 to remove him. A fine piece of Democracy at work there, straight from North Korea.

  • Pasty

    Hilary Benn has sent his second out to start the fight so she can wound Corbyn and then in 2 years time after a mid term election defeat he can come forward on his trusty white horse to save the day. Angela Eagle will fall to the wrath of the Party and be deselected for being the traitor with the dagger who failed and caused more damage to the party then anyone could imagine.

  • hgreen

    Ok suggest someone better.

  • hgreen

    Ha ha ha ha. Hamas are you serious? After what Labour did to Iraq?

  • Granni Trixie

    How can you assert that he is effective when he has not gained the respect of the majority of colleges he is supposed to work with? Or that he is being an “effective”
    Leader at this particular moment (a) in challenging the Tories (b) that the TU have undue influence over him.
    You cannot write off the majority of the PLP as “dead wood”. In challenging their leader they are anything but.

  • Roger

    That he wouldn’t share a platform with Tories for Remain is enough. He should go for that alone.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    I remember all this “nice chap” stuff with Michael Foot, who while he was a most able leader in practice for anyone who was in the know, was immediately marked by the media as an incompetent Worzel Gummidge. I wonder why…….

    The attacks on Jeremy are not about his competence, but about his politics. Surely you remember Thatcher’s gleeful comment that Tony Blair was her greatest achievement? You could say much the same about the party line Blair’s premiership encouraged. The Labour Party has been completely rebranded by Blair, etc, to work primarily for international financial interests rather than for the good of community who elect it, and hey, come on now, who actually owns the media? With a choice of Tweedledum (Conservative) and Tweedledee (Labour) is it any wonder that the rank and file of Labour are trying to bring some serious differentiation back into politics?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    So….the definition of a politician is a person without principals who simply wants to be elected to have a hand in the management of political patronage?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    While not an Brexiteer myself, I find this contempt for actual popular choice (direct Democracy for once) repellent! It is the mass of project fear misinformation which marked the campaign you should blame rather than to pillory the community itself for not doing your will!

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Granni, it was clear from the outset that his colleagues were unwilling to even begin to make fist of working with Jeremy. They have been persuaded over the Blair years that only by shadowing Conservative policy to privilege commercial interests can they ever be elected, and it is the concern that if Labour even began to develop strong policies of their own that contradict this their careers would be at an end that is driving this, rather the any problem with Jeremy’s effectiveness. You must remember Thatcher’s comment that Tony Blair was her greatest achievement, and to this you could add the current crop of Labour MPs who have come to maturity under Blair. Without at least a modicum of support from the parliamentary party no one can even begin to act effectively.

    I think the Jarl was suggesting that the close leftist colleagues were the “dead wood” rather than the general body of Labour MPs.

  • chrisjones2

    Its written in the stars …..Corbyn wins party splits …..Corbyn loses party splits

  • chrisjones2

    Yes…..I do think though that the UK Needs a Labour party to hold the Government to account. My beef is that they are useless at it even without the Great Leader

  • chrisjones2

    Look …many joined and supported him to achieve this result

  • chrisjones2

    …and if they dont we will throw bricks through their windows

    They have had to suspend local meetings because of the threats of violence to MPs and people who hold different views.

    Labour – the REALLY nasty party

  • chrisjones2

    Hmm happy to share platforms with terrorists from across the world ….not happy to share with democratic local politicians in uk

    Sums the man up

  • Granni Trixie

    Thanks Seann – I see what you mean (in your final sentence) and which colours my own response. I also accept your point indicating that a big heave from the Left was required to correct Blairism. That said, I suppose from the start I had a bias against Corbyn leading that push given his misunderstandings about the NI conflict. Also, When working I was a member of various TUs. In my ignorance however I did not appreciate how deeply Labour was in hock to TU movement. I thought TU were focused on wages and conditions of workers etc not having a key role in party politics.

  • jporter

    Likewise, any truly effective alternative, as a potential PM with the leadership and ability to convince Tory swing voters, should be able to gain the respect of the membership and defeat Corbyn, given the widespread belief that he is utterly ineffectual and sets such a low bar?
    If that doesn’t happen, what does that say about the PLP and their abilities? and is it possible all those commenters about Corbyn were, just a bit, over the top?

  • Reader

    hgreen: Ha ha ha ha. Hamas are you serious? After what Labour did to Iraq?
    What has Hamas got to do with Iraq?
    Anyway, my point was – what guiding principles allow you to share a platform with Hamas for a publicity stunt, but prevent you from sharing a platform with Conservatives to try to keep the UK in the EU?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    I’m no friend of any block voting lobby, Granni, left or right, and a great supporter of the kind one person one vote system which has brought Corbyn in as leader of labour. My own experience of the ACTT was perfectly benign, but I am not without an awareness of how myopic other unions can be in influencing government. The problem for me is atht while their influence is pretty evident for those willing to look, the influence of big international companies is far more covert. For one thing I’m worried about Owen Smith’s earlier role as Head of Policy and Government relations in Pfizer Global Pharmaceuticals’ UK communications team.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10817853/Revealed-Ed-Milibands-Pfizer-insider-in-the-shadow-Cabinet.html

    Any one time lobbyist becoming a party leader starts ringing all my concern bells. The relationship of many of those in power with the multinationals is far, far too comfortable for my liking.

    While I think Jeremy and some of his friends are clearly very naïve about aspects of our particular political situation here (and find myself in full agreement with you about any softness on violence) I’m still pretty disgusted at the anti-Corbyn block action by his MPs in a situation where he is clearly the choice of the broad party. I’m also most sceptical about the genuine objectivity of the media presentation of Jeremy (as I’ve said below in my comments on Michael Foot, with whom I had some contact through friends). But then I’m probably a sucker for anyone who actually seems to believe in something for a change that is socially positive beyond simply furthering their political career ………

  • RWP

    I thought he would have appeared much stronger if he had made the whole “automatic ballot” thing an irrelevance by simply getting the 51 nominations. He had 40 MPs back him (though a few later reneged on that, and most MEPs signed a letter asking him to go. But add most of the 40, the few remaining MEPs and you’re at, say, 45…so only 5-6 MPs more needed to nominate him in the name of party democracy. Lisa Nandy for one said she would do so. If he had taken that route, it would not have looked like he was hiding behind incumbency.

  • Jarl Ulfreksfjordr

    I see that your misunderstanding (my fault I fear) of my point has been cleared up.

    I did not “assert” that JC (useful initials to have perhaps) was being effective, I said he had the ‘ability’ to be.

    By that I mean he brings a ‘vision’ (a much derided concept, perhaps in light of Blair’s seeming messiah complex) of real Labour values to the Party and country.

    As has already been clarified the ‘deadwood’ I was referring to, perhaps a tad unkindly, was some of his close supporters who have no experience of managing the Party in support of the leader, and are not making much of a job of it.

    I suspect that the Corbynistas have been left to sink or swim by the Party machine, a body that is happy to see Corbyn fail.

    I don’t think you can blame Corbyn, beyond him surrounding himself with poor advice, for the PLP’s attitude. They have been too light-(Conservative) blue for too long to welcome a Corbyn shakeup.

    It appears to me that they distain the Party membership, an attitude that mirrors Labour’s abandonment of the working class. Something that played into the Brexit referendum debacle.

    JC won the leadership fairly, the Party should have rallied behind him. Of course some would never have settled in Corbyn Labour and would have moved on, or been moved on.

    Corbyn has the opportunity to revitalise the Labour Party. If he fails the UK will indeed see a perpetual Conservative government, although at times it may be branded under the ‘Labour’ label.

  • Granni Trixie

    Seaan – would you agree that a political party (ideally) seeks ways of gaining power so that it can effect change, guided by its vision. If it loses sight of that and seeks power for the sake of it or in the interests of its own elites it may as well go home.

    So, To return again to present situation – why is taking power from Tories not the task in hand ? From the outside it looks like its leader is giving the Tories a free run.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    As I’ve mentioned elsewhere on the thread, Granni, Thatcher quipped that Tony Blair was her greatest achievement! Certainly taking power from the Conservative party is a good idea, but if those Labour MPs who replace them are similar careerists working to further the interests of the multi-nationals and other private interests I cannot see any benefit myself. When I spent some time staying on the Portabello Road during the Christmas just after the October election of 1964, many walls were dabbed with “Which Twin’s the Tory”! Unless there are truly meaningful policies differentiating the parties I simply cannot see that brand loyalty to Labour is enough in itself.

  • Teddybear

    It is impossible and impractical for a party leader not to have the support of at least the majority of his or her parliamentary party.

    This logically implies that it is party MPs who should only vote on the new leader.

    Membership is not reflective of society. MPs meet all kinds of different people in their weekly surgeries and this advises them on the realities of real people.

    Party members however as Cameron once said, are swivelled eyed loons unfortunately.

    Let’s look at the kind of people who support and cheer Corbyn. They are crusties, losers, deadbeats, dropouts, environmentalists and other forms of malcontents. Hardly the most aspirational body of people.

    Poor old Labour. Blair was their life support system. Underneath Blair, Labour was just a twitching corpse. It’s only coming apparent now

  • Redstar

    Direct democracy as you call it elected Hitler- ironically favourable to many of these confused bigots.

    Let’s call a spade a spade, confusion xenophobia and downright intolerance ( partly due to jingoistic seniors) accounts for a sizeable proportion of the Brexiteers.

    Let’s not have any nonsense that most of them sat down and weighed up,the pros and cons- I love the quote from the guy interviewed in Stoke as to why he voted Brexit – ” we don’t want anymore Muslims ” was his reply

    Says it all. If they get fed up in England there’s a ready made home for this flotsom in the PUL bonfire/ fleg community

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Good, so translated you don’t believe that people can become mature enough to govern themselves, given the opportunity, but I do. You are afraid that anything but oligarchy is going to result in chaos, the theme of anti-democratic thinkers past and present. All the recent event proves is that the people have become debauched by the kind of media manipulation representative systems require to manage their flocks, which is only going to be compounded by expecting the professionals to carry the responsibility for running our lives, oh, in the interests of the multinationals and international finance usually. You mention Hitler! I’d have thought he’d have been much happier with a subservient community habituated to simply endorsing the policies of their betters rather than a politically mature and responsible community trained by the experience of actually governing themselves with regular direct democracy. We’re both in interesting company in our views, but I think I’ll stick with Gianroberto Casaleggio and Emma Goldman myself, the airs clearer.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    But Chris, you apparently joined Labour to vote for Jeremy…………he’s there in part because of you!

  • chrisjones2

    Read above…….. it was a strategic choice and so far it has worked beyond my wildest dreams

  • chrisjones2

    Larry the Cat is free?

  • chrisjones2

    Shallow unthinking racist stereotyping of the majority of the UK Voters

  • chrisjones2

    Again. Shallow unthinking racist stereotyping of the majority of the UK Voters

  • kensei

    The PLP can’t be divorced from it’s membership either, and Labour has got routinely used to ignoring it. Blair created the corpse by parachuting in candidates and losing connection with the party. You can’t do that forever.

    There has to be a role for radical politics. Atlee’s policies were radical. Do were Thatcher’s, at the time. Mostly, that sort of politics fails. But if people win under the rules they deserve the right to try.

  • Teddybear

    I disagree. In fact does a party really need a membership at all? A structure yes for those wishing to build careers in politics but ordinary people just paying a few quid and sitting back sniping from sidelines?

    I don’t think so

    Back to my point, how practical is it for a leader not being supported in parliament by his party?

    As for Attlee, he laid the foundations for welfarism and something for nothing and State As Mother

  • Tim Gingell

    So you’re a man with zero principles – why should anybody listen to anything you say?

  • hgreen

    I guess you’d know about racist stereotyping with your recent comments on Eastern Europeans and criminal activity.

  • chrisjones2

    In the same way there is a role for men who walk up and down inside tube stations in London talking to themselves or spend hours on here keening for a lost chance of an Irish Republic

  • Theelk11

    Aach seaan!
    principles are great but in our context we would all be eating flags if we stuck to them.
    He has some good ideas but the delivery is so pathetic…….

  • Theelk11

    Anyone who understands that a rigid belief system unchanged in 30 odd years is not a manifesto that resonates with the modern world.
    Someone who does not have an increasingly thuggish street movement suppressing dissent. This is why labour is screwed I can’t see anyone In a position to stop this.
    The tories have managed the succession with brilliance..

  • hgreen

    So you can’t. Thanks. Clearly you are basing your opinion on something you haven’t a clue about.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    He’s certainly has a different delivery to what the media has been asking us to see as ‘good” over the past forty years.

    have you seen the Adam Curtis documentary series, “The Century of the Self”? The entire point is that Corbyn purposely does not fit the Edward Bernays “type” of politician, is actually seemingly trying to break it.

    Part 4 will explain just why you are having such problems with Jeremy as a “manager”, something I have less problems with as I’ve seen similar leadership skills work far better than the “survival of the fittest” methodology of the Thatcher Revolution. But then I’m a essentially Kropotkin and “Mutual Aid” man myself.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Chris, some consistency please! You regularly lambast SF for its dishonesty. What you yourself are doing in joining Labour is not so much the “strategic choice” you claim as a form of “political perjury” by any standard:

    “Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation……..whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding”.

    The whole point of joining a political party is in support of its work. The dishonesty evident in any other motive is a further debauching of our already very iffy political life, something you are very quick to condemn others for across range of your postings over some years now. Such “Trojan Horse” tactics as you boast of here are, as you so rightly say about, for example, SF, unacceptable practice rather than “smart” moves. There are numerous instances of your fuming at such dishonest practice:

    “So what do you think of all these corrupt claims then Robin? Fake charities, fake companies, fake claims for mileage from MLAs who didnt drive,

    Is there anything that SF won’t lie about?”

    Just one of your postings, from a 24th Nov 2014 “Trojan Horse” thread, many similar postings of yours out there! Self condemned!

  • Theelk11

    Never said I could, I am just pointing out reasons why corbyn has utterly no chance of being prime minister. If you think he can look in a mirror for a definition of cluelessness.
    I don’t know who could solve this, a split is probably inevitable

  • Theelk11

    Hi seaan
    nearly four hours of homework!! (Not really, I have previously watched the first two episodes but had not seen the last ones)
    Do you really believe corbyn is living up to those aspirations?
    There is of course an alternative to bernays but I don’t believe Jeremy and his thugs are it. Their actions betray them.
    He is simply not up to presenting that level of argument to a population conditioned to be opposed to it from birth, I doubt any living soul is.
    As for kropoptkin style leadership where have you seen it work?
    Please forgive my pragmatism, thank you for the link

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Hi Theek11, you must be the only person who has actually taken me up on the link and watched it!!! Interesting, eh? And when one remembers the very close involvement of the “Notting Hill Set” with Matthew Freud’s PR machine, the linkage Adam makes becomes quite precise. And certainly becomes no less worrying for the transparent governance of us all in the light of Matthew’s father Clement Freud seemingly having pulled in enough elite favour over a lifetime from earlier groups of our masters to have kept his sexually abusive private life almost entirely private. How much else are we not seeing when a culture of the targeted marketing of selected political issues directs our attention onto carefully chosen themes (such as this constructed impression of Corbyn’s incompetence) and calls us all away from the commercial (and other) secrets of those in power and certainly from any other interpretation of any wider political picture?

    The all important thing is seeking out the alternative to Bernays and this crassly manipulative political marketing. I’m inclined to see the current uproar against Jeremy as the evident outcome of his not playing the Bernays games everyone else is now entirely addicted to. As Zig 70 says over on another thread: ” The elites have spent their whole lives training to be media friendly plastic, with a self interest that is inherently right wing and now attack the guy that has been thrust in to represent that angst [the popular reaction to this]. Corbyn is a symptom not the answer but he is the closest thing I see to an honest man in Westminster.” Similarly I’m not so much suggesting Jeremy as a total panacea for everything as recognising the fact that his massive popular support shows the desire in a significant group for a shift away from the current norm of a cynical manipulation of the electorate by those less interested in working in their electorate’s interest as in working for the interests of the 1% and its hangers on.

    As for Kropotkin type “leadership” my own experiences as a producer in media clearly showed me that only co-operative work practices and mutual respect for those I’d employed to make films actually produce anything of value. It’s actually the only thing that does “work” if you are trying to get any work done rather than simply muddling through the work by threat and inducement. The Thatcher revolution has thrown up a pale simulacra of the culture of Stalinist Russia, where you shot the fellow found sleeping in the big pile of tyres, and applied the same principal of threat to everyone else “pour encourager les autres” Admiral Byng style. Now we have a bullied and rather cowed workforce, a lot of sly managers, and “cream off” directors, toped by the 1%. Not a recipe for anyone anywhere actually having a life! With such a shallow, meaningless life trajectory on offer our masters really need the Bernays techniques to persuade everyone we’re having a wonderful time in spite of the reality of our selling our every waking hour to pay off all that private and public debt. It’s the simple fact that Jeremy and those in our community articulating their angst through him seem to realise that there are actually “other ways” that makes them so problematic to the Bernays fans.

Join us for the Slugger End of Year Review Show, Wed 14th Dec 2016
Get your tickets