The Labour Party - Part 2

[banjodeano 31]

Keir Starmer has been accused of threatening freedom of expression with Tony Blair-style "control freakery" amid growing anger in Labour ranks at a ban on discussing the suspension of former party leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Left-wing members of Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC), fresh from a victory in last week's elections, staged a virtual walkout from a meeting on Tuesday morning, accusing the leadership of trying to “censor debate and ignore our processes”.

On Monday, the newly elected leader of the party’s youth wing said that officials from party head office had demanded the removal of a statement criticising Sir Keir's suspension of Mr Corbyn from the parliamentary party.

Jess Barnard, who won 71 per cent of the vote last week, said “unelected officials” had ordered the removal of a statement agreed by the Young Labour National Committee, criticising the leadership on the matter.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-suspend-whip-jeremy-corbyn-labour-nec-walkout-b1760936.html

[Anna B 1,414]

Starmer is turning into a disaster for the Labour party. 

[andyofborg 11]

6 hours ago, Anna B said:

Starmer is turning into a disaster for the Labour party. 

No he isn't , he's trying to  save it.  The electorate rejected your offering at the election. there is no evidence that they are changing their mind and constantly raking over this wont make it any more likely that they will change their minds. 

 

All you are doing is making a second Johnson term more likely. Anyway, why does Corbyn want the whip back?  It's not like he's got a good record of following the party line. Sitting as an independant MP is a more honest representation of reality than being a Labour MP. 

 

 

 

[sheffbag 230]

8 hours ago, Anna B said:

Starmer is turning into a disaster for the Labour party. 

How? there have been no elections since Starmer was made leader so what are you judging it on?

 

Please dont say that its because "members are leaving" because that's just not sustainable or valid. Labour had the highest membership in Europe remember and got absolutely trounced in the last election.  Losing a few of the JC fan club will not harm Labour at all especially if Starmers view appeals to more voters than the previous leaders standpoint did.

 

Like it or lump it, the aim of the party should be to get in power. It will NEVER do that again with a leader in the ilk of Kinnock, Foot or Corbyn. The last 46 years (50 by the time of the next scheduled election) have shown this. Only when the party is in power then it can actually do something to affect the country and try to steer it in a way that wants to. Until then it is nothing but a set of people waving pieces of paper around and asking questions which, frankly with the majority the Conservaties have, can be ignored.

 

If Starmer can bring back voters (such as myself who have voted Labour in the past) and win seats and eventually a general election then he will be judged a success. That is the measuring stick, not the membership of the party. 

 

So how is he a disaster?

 

[sheffbag 230]

15 hours ago, banjodeano said:

Keir Starmer has been accused of threatening freedom of expression with Tony Blair-style "control freakery" amid growing anger in Labour ranks at a ban on discussing the suspension of former party leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Left-wing members of Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC), fresh from a victory in last week's elections, staged a virtual walkout from a meeting on Tuesday morning, accusing the leadership of trying to “censor debate and ignore our processes”.

On Monday, the newly elected leader of the party’s youth wing said that officials from party head office had demanded the removal of a statement criticising Sir Keir's suspension of Mr Corbyn from the parliamentary party.

Jess Barnard, who won 71 per cent of the vote last week, said “unelected officials” had ordered the removal of a statement agreed by the Young Labour National Committee, criticising the leadership on the matter.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-suspend-whip-jeremy-corbyn-labour-nec-walkout-b1760936.html

Interesting how both quotes are from Momentum people - Laura Pidcock and Mish Rahman. You would expect them to criticise Starmer and defend anything to do with JC

[alchresearch 215]

11 hours ago, Anna B said:

Starmer is turning into a disaster for the Labour party. 

I've just completed a YouGov survey on Stamer.  It will be interesting to see the results in a few days.

 

Compared to previous opposition party leaders across all parties, I don't think he's doing too bad.

Edited November 25, 2020 by alchresearch

[the_bloke 17]

3 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Interesting how both quotes are from Momentum people - Laura Pidcock and Mish Rahman. You would expect them to criticise Starmer and defend anything to do with JC

Rahman used some strong words in his NEC campaign; 'Stay And Fight', 'Don't Walk Away' etc. The irony considering he walked out.

 

Edited November 25, 2020 by the_bloke

[Anna B 1,414]

7 hours ago, andyofborg said:

No he isn't , he's trying to  save it.  The electorate rejected your offering at the election. there is no evidence that they are changing their mind and constantly raking over this wont make it any more likely that they will change their minds. 

 

All you are doing is making a second Johnson term more likely. Anyway, why does Corbyn want the whip back?  It's not like he's got a good record of following the party line. Sitting as an independant MP is a more honest representation of reality than being a Labour MP. 

 

 

 

If people want a right wing Labour party they might as well vote Conservative, or Lib Dem, and their wishes will be represented, just as they will under Starmer who is right wing through and through.

 

But Labour is supposed to be a socialist party on the left, representing the wishes of the working class. (At the very least thats the workers who are on less than the median wage of £27K.) and those wanting more equality and egalitarianism. And that is a lot of people.

 

At the moment they are disenfranchised with no one to represent them. that can't be right. Especially at a time of low wages, poor employment rights, falling living standards, food banks and rising unemployment.

 

So far Starmer has managed to lose upwards of 50,000 Labour party members. 

[Arnold_Lane 0]

16 minutes ago, Anna B said:

If people want a right wing Labour party they might as well vote Conservative, or Lib Dem, and their wishes will be represented, just as they will under Starmer who is right wing through and through.

 

But Labour is supposed to be a socialist party on the left, representing the wishes of the working class. (At the very least thats the workers who are on less than the median wage of £27K.) and those wanting more equality and egalitarianism. And that is a lot of people.

 

At the moment they are disenfranchised with no one to represent them. that can't be right. Especially at a time of low wages, poor employment rights, falling living standards, food banks and rising unemployment.

 

So far Starmer has managed to lose upwards of 50,000 Labour party members. 

You keep missing the point that others are making;  Labour do not win general elections when they go too far to the left.  

 

You are telling people who want a more right-wing Labour party to vote Lib Dem or Tory.  Instead, if you want a more left-wing Labour party why don't you vote SWP?

 

I'm sure Starmer does not care if he loses 50,000 Corbynistas.  He would probably prefer them all to leave.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Arnold_Lane

[sheffbag 230]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

If people want a right wing Labour party they might as well vote Conservative, or Lib Dem, and their wishes will be represented, just as they will under Starmer who is right wing through and through.

 

But Labour is supposed to be a socialist party on the left, representing the wishes of the working class. (At the very least thats the workers who are on less than the median wage of £27K.) and those wanting more equality and egalitarianism. And that is a lot of people.

 

At the moment they are disenfranchised with no one to represent them. that can't be right. Especially at a time of low wages, poor employment rights, falling living standards, food banks and rising unemployment.

 

So far Starmer has managed to lose upwards of 50,000 Labour party members. 

If it is meant to be representing the wishes of the working class why did Tories win seats in working class areas with JC as its socialist based leader? Or would it be that the working class areas are the ones more likely to have voted leave and your beloved socialist leader Jc didn’t represent their wishes ?
lost 50k members means diddly squat. They still have 3 times party membership than conservatives yet still failed to win an election or even lose by a close amount 

 

genuine question Anna, if Corbyn and a few of his closest allies decided to do a. Gang of Four and form a new socialist based party, would you vote for them if they had a candidate in your area and sacrifice a labour vote or would you vote Labour with a view to winning the seat and maybe helping them close the gap or even maybe, just maybe, win an election

Edited November 25, 2020 by sheffbag

[alchresearch 215]

Labour have been losing members for years.

 

The only reason there was a massive spike was because of everyone clamouring to pay £3 to vote for Corbyn - even Tories were doing it.

 

 

One the membership expired and people had to pay full price, they didn't bother.

 

Quote

Jeremy Corbyn has been credited with growing the membership numbers, with the previous high reported at 564,000 in December 2017.

 

But Corbyn's failure to tackle anti-Semitism and bitter Brexit divisions were blamed for a drop in numbers to under 480,000 shortly after the European elections.

‘More people have joined Labour than left’ under Keir Starmer, NEC says

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/brexit-news/keir-starmer-labour-membership-88370

[melthebell 864]

On 19/11/2020 at 20:57, banjodeano said:

but they are the wrong type of jews Anna

 

On 20/11/2020 at 10:27, Pettytom said:

Can you say a bit more? 
 

For example, if they are the “wrong type of Jews”, what is the “right” kind?

Funnily enough the "wrong" type of jew has just been posted on youtube.

 

Edited November 26, 2020 by melthebell