The Student Room Group

Is Jeremy Corbyn a good leader of the Labour Party?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Davij038
I don't know what alternative paradigms you support but for the politically disengaged left/right is probably more understandable than

Internationally: Communitarian/ Cosmpolitan
Economically: Free Trade/ protectionist
Socially: Liberal/ Conservative
Militarily: Interventionist/ Libertarian

And of course there can be a mixture of views too...(This doesnt really represent me for example).

Think I'll make a thread on this"!


Oh no, I think it is fine to use the terms left and right wing. Just in some kind of context other than "Corbyn is bad because he is far left" or "Farage is bad because he is right wing" and so on.
Original post by LennyBicknel
Just wanna open a discussion here. I'll throw in my opinion to start off -

I believe that after the Miliband years, Labour definitely needed some TLC. It had become unelectable, untrustworthy, and simply out of touch with the concerns of the people. Was Corbyn the answer to these issues? Not really, in fact he's made them even worse.

Corbyn has repeatedly given statements and opinions which have only furthered harmed the Labour party, and have only further distanced the party from the opinions of the electorate; this is further worsened when considering that these views often don't align with the general consensus of the Labour party, which, alongside his very clumsy reshuffle of his Shadow Cabinet, only further adds to the disunity he has brought to the party.

Take his opinion on the Falkland Islands for example - 99.8% of the Falkland's population wished to stay with the UK in a recent referendum, yet he wants to 'power-share' the islands with Argentina? What? Has he no concern for what the actual citizens of the islands think? Then there's his views on Trident - I know nuclear weapons is a controversial issue, but to suggest that removing scrapping the warheads and merely having the submarines as a 'deterrent' is laughable from any angle of the argument.

But what do I know. What do you think?


Bang on the money pal.

And the way he sacked that guy for opposing the Stop The War Campaign's line that we are the cause of terrorism was nothing short of disgraceful. I actually cannot have a shred of respect for anybody who continues to support him after that sorry episode. Though to be fair id class anybody who continues to be affiliated with that toxic group (STWC) as either having gone full retard or to be in contempt of the British people. Or both.

Labour needs to disassociate itself from these positions if it is to have any hope of gaining power. If you think that positions such as those made by STWC after the Paris attacks and power sharing the Falklands with Argentina has wide appeal with the electorate then you're nothing short of deluded. I'd actually be embarrassed for you if you really thought that.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by F raja
He's anti-establishment so anyone whos pro establishment will hate him. There is a reason the media is carrying out a vicious campaign against him. Both him and bernie sanders are too radical for countries that thrive on capitalism. I dont see nothing wrong in about 80% of corbyns policies and I truly belive that England will only prosper under him. He is a leader of the people


You cannot call him a ''leader of the people" if his views do not represent the views of the general population. He appeals to a very small proportion of the population (i.e students) and the fact that the UK rejected Milliband mainly on the basis that he was too 'left wing' goes to show you that Jeremy Corbyn is not what the people want. The reason the media is carrying out a vicious campaign on him is because he's an idiot. The American media is also carrying out a vicious campaign on Trump - that doesn't mean it's because they feel threatened by him, it's because he too is an idiot. If you actually look at his policies properly and examine their implications, you would realise that there is something wrong with them. Things like 'getting rid of poverty' all sound great on paper, but you need to actually look at the whole picture...
No because he is at ends with his party. Few share his views. He only got voted in on the back of liberal students who want it all for free and for everything to be happy and coated with cotton candy. Corbyn has doomed the party in 2020, he needs to be struck out of the party
I'm not sure what the net effect of Corbyn's leadership will be. While there are those who are distancing themselves from the party, I know there are many old Labour supporters who were recently apathetic who now have resumed support for the party under his leadship.
Original post by EtherealNymph22
He's a breath of fresh air for British politics and he's doing something that is relatively rare- actually representing people's views. He understands the realities of many situations and is a big proponent of reducing inequality which is important not just for the poor but for all of us- the situation is unsustainable.

Even if he doesn't get elected, his legacy is that he's engaging more people with political issues and that is vital for democracy.

He also seems like the kind of guy with true morals and wouldn't take being elected as his work done for 5 years, and would work to honour his ideology and policies that got him there in the first place. The trouble with our current so called democracy is that yes, the Torys were voted in fair and square in May but the way they have acted in government to date would markedly reduce that majority if there was another election tomorrow.


You sound like you're in a cult.
Original post by KimKallstrom
You sound like you're in a cult.


If my thinking sounds to you like I'm in a cult then you must be ignorant and blinkered, so I'll take that as a compliment.
Original post by KimKallstrom
You sound like you're in a cult.


What I thinks funny is that, other than having different political views the Corbynites sound exactly the same as the Farage-worshipers we had a while ago, where their political hero could do no wrong and every silly thing he did was a smear by the establishment etc etc.
Original post by Davij038
What I thinks funny is that, other than having different political views the Corbynites sound exactly the same as the Farage-worshipers we had a while ago, where their political hero could do no wrong and every silly thing he did was a smear by the establishment etc etc.


Absolutely. When my mum for example is going on about how great Corbyn is, it's exactly the same words being used as when my UKIP mate is talking about Farage and vice versa,

Repped.
Replacing a socially inept geek with a man who looks like he would headbutt you if you looked at him the 'wrong' way.

Seems logical.
Original post by stefano865
Replacing a socially inept geek with a man who looks like he would headbutt you if you looked at him the 'wrong' way.

Seems logical.


Uh corbyn doesn't look like that.

He looks like an elderly repressed maths teacher who rolled through the discounted section at Oxfam
Original post by KimKallstrom
Absolutely. When my mum for example is going on about how great Corbyn is, it's exactly the same words being used as when my UKIP mate is talking about Farage and vice versa,

Repped.


Or the people who lazily sit on the great centre ground and revel in how they knwo the earth be flat.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Davij038
the Corbynites sound exactly the same as the Farage-worshipers we had a while ago, where their political hero could do no wrong


To be fair, Farage is pretty much immortal in debates.
Original post by TheTechN1304
You cannot call him a ''leader of the people" if his views do not represent the views of the general population. He appeals to a very small proportion of the population (i.e students) and the fact that the UK rejected Milliband mainly on the basis that he was too 'left wing' goes to show you that Jeremy Corbyn is not what the people want. The reason the media is carrying out a vicious campaign on him is because he's an idiot. The American media is also carrying out a vicious campaign on Trump - that doesn't mean it's because they feel threatened by him, it's because he too is an idiot. If you actually look at his policies properly and examine their implications, you would realise that there is something wrong with them. Things like 'getting rid of poverty' all sound great on paper, but you need to actually look at the whole picture...


Summed it up well. Repped.

Man of the people............has policies most people do not support?
[video="youtube;v6nbZWfg8R8"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6nbZWfg8R8[/video]
Original post by Kvothe the arcane
I'm not sure what the net effect of Corbyn's leadership will be. While there are those who are distancing themselves from the party, I know there are many old Labour supporters who were recently apathetic who now have resumed support for the party under his leadship.


I'd suggest that when it came down to it, most of those old Labourites actually voted Labour last time and would vote Labour no matter who was the leader. These are the sorts of people who'd never vote Tory, after all.

Even if there was X number of these people who abstained last time or voted Green or whatever, I'd bet everything I owned, everything I will ever own and everything everyone else owned that X is significantly less than the amount who got turned off by his positions. At the ballot this is.
Original post by Davij038
Uh corbyn doesn't look like that.

He looks like an elderly repressed maths teacher who rolled through the discounted section at Oxfam



Yep you're right about the maths teacher thing. :tongue:

But I also see immense anger in those eyes. I can tell he would fight someone for the last box of Weetabix in Sainsbury's.
Original post by Joel 96
To be fair, Farage is pretty much immortal in debates.


Because he managed to beat Nick Clegg who is about as popular as Ebola ? Or because he just shouts abuse at the EU parliament?

Watch him squirm on Lbc: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyYoL9ngtE


You mean watch him get constantly interrupted?

Though I was speaking generally, I was also referring to his recent debate against Carwyn Jones on the EU referendum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRwkh9o5gk0
Original post by EtherealNymph22
People say Corbyn is back pedalling or inconsistent in his views. I think differently. His ideology and personal view on certain aspects e.g Trident and bombing Syria is clear- he’s a pacifist. However, he is now the leader of the opposition; he is no longer a left wing back bencher. With that position comes responsibility, to represent people, to represent the party as a whole. I think his flexibility and willingness to compromise is something we haven’t really seen before. And most importantly, it’s vital in a democracy.


Corbyn isn't a pacifist. He believed the IRA terror campaign and Hamas' actions against Israel were necessary. He's that stereotypical socialist who simply blames everything on the West.
The main problem with Corbyn's 'compromises' is that they are half-assed and solve nothing.

Original post by EtherealNymph22

He has demonstrated his passion and intention to represent people by leaving the Syrian war vote unwhipped. He knew that would open him to criticism when Benn et al opposed him in the HoC and the Torys could all have a big laugh. But for something so important as a vote to literally bomb a country not whipping it is extremely brave and important. On the contrary, the conservatives whipped their vote and as a result only 2% of their MPs voted against. Does that accurately represent the views of Britain?


More like he didn't want the embarrassment of wholesale shadow cabinet resignations. Tory dissent against bombing was confined to the back benches. Labour dissent against Corbyn was right in his cabinet and there were a few high profile Labour MPs who would have defied a whip.
And no, we're not 'literally' bombing a country. That's a grossly misleading statement to the point of being false.
We're literally launching precision air strikes against a terror group we're already at war with. We're not carpet bombing civilian areas.

Original post by EtherealNymph22

Of course, there can’t be a referendum on absolutely everything and the conservatives have been democratically elected. But I think that comes with a responsibility which I haven’t seen assumed very often by a political figure until Corbyn. It’s a responsibility to always be thinking about the people you represent instead of unrelentingly pursuing ones ideologies. There has to be compromise. The tory manifesto was clear- but David Cameron also specifically said, in a live debate, that he wouldn’t be cutting child tax credits which spoke to people that maybe don't usually vote conservative. Post-election did he stick to that? No. Did the conservatives again whip the vote to get it through? Yes.

And their lack of representation and understanding in that issue is the reason why the House of Lords unprecedently revoked it- which is quite embarrassing but it proves how out of touch the conservative leadership are with the people. But did the media and the BBC dwell on it and spin it in the same fashion as they do every time Corbyn doesn’t kneel or does something with decent intentions? Of course not. It focused on the angle that the House of Lords who were not elected overturned this. And somehow they (Cameron, Osborne) escape unscathed apart from a temporary ego dent.


No, the Lords struck down the tax credits bill solely to humiliate the government. If they understood the issue, they'd realise that tax credits have been shown to be harmful to social mobility (if you pay people to be poor they'll remain poor), and John McDonnell himself branded them a subsidy on bad businesses a few years ago. No surprise though when the chance came to score some political points suddenly tax credits are vital.

Original post by EtherealNymph22

The difference with Corbyn is he in touch with how things work on the ground, on the front line, in people’s lives. You only have to look at what the Torys are doing to the NHS demoralising an entire workforce in the name of shoddy statistics that were published in order for them to do what they want to do. And with the way it’s going, the NHS will be privatised. Good news for the rich who can afford private. Bad news for the poor.


What a load of nonsense. Corbyn isn't in touch with anything. He thinks the whole country is an extension of his poverty-stricken hell hole London constituency. Corbyn doen't have a clue about contemporary British life outside of an inner city.
The left have been proclaiming the Tories want to dismantle the NHS since time the 1950s. And surprise surprise, it's still here.
And how do you explain the shambles of the Labour-run Welsh NHS?

Original post by EtherealNymph22

And this is the problem, and something Corbyn is really pushing and talking about at the moment- the problem of inequality. It’s not just a some people are rich and others are poor. Inequality is a real issue and is recognised as the greatest social threat of our times.

In these times, it is really important that politics is thinking and is flexible. And that’s what Corbyn is. He thinks. He compromises. He’s willing to actually attempt to make what is currently a pseudo-democracy a real democracy. The conservatives don’t think enough because they can afford not to and they also don’t know what it’s like to really struggle. But when the county as a whole can’t afford the super rich it won’t be Jeremy Corbyn who’s back-pedalling it will be Cameron and Osborne.

I don’t necessarily agree with his personal views on everything but I agree with his brand and ethos of how politics should be.


Corbyn hasn't done anything remotely in the slightest to justify this hero worship he gets. He hasn't shown integrity or principle, and this willingness to compromise you talk of is simply him constantly failing to win party or union support.

Quick Reply