The OFFICIAL Corbyn Coup thread

Scroll to see replies

What a preposterous comment. Corbynites who call Ed Miliband a Blairite are invariably completely incapable of telling us which policies are supposed to be Tory ones. It's simply the received wisdom in the Corbynite camp; anyone who is not Corbyn or a Corbynite is a Blairite, and they repeat it like sheep.

Ed Miliband's policies included increasing corporation tax, repealing the hedge fund tax cut, implementing a tax on banker bonuses, implementing a profit tax on the financial industry, splitting up the banks with a market share cap, creating a government bank to compete with the City of London in the small business loan market, splitting up the energy companies with a market share cap, freezing energy bills, conferring new rights on tenants and capping rent increases, repealing enactments that prevent local authorities from investing in new social housing, bringing the railways back into public ownership, repealing the bedroom tax, among many others.

I agree with this, however the trouble is Ed Miliband couldn't get anywhere near being elected. The mainstream media does support Blairism, and seemingly there is no room to move either way, towards the social conservatism/patriotism/lower immigration side, or to the economic left.

Reply 21

Thutmose-III

Original post by SaucissonSecCy

Clearly there is freedom to move either way because Miliband did it, as did the Tory Party. There are over 30 million voters in this country, what is the combined readership of the Sun, Daily Mail and the Telegraph? Five million?

No one is forced to read a newspaper the editorial line of which they reject. The media conspiracy theories get a bit tiresome.

And no, I don't want Corbyn as opposition leader no matter what his views on Europe (which were, in any case, utterly contrary to party policy). I will never vote for a man who supported the IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah, who despises this country's traditions and standing in the world, and who would let Israel be destroyed if he had his way. If Labour goes into the next election with him as leader I'll vote Conservative, and I know millions of other people feel the same way.

Reply 22

SaucissonSecCy

Original post by Thutmose-III

Fair enough but securing Brexit is most important to me, party politics is BS in comparison to the significance of it. I didn't mean print media, I meant Channel 4 and the Beeb being social and economic liberals and Blairites. The Tories shifted, to something similar to Blairism. Miliband moved to the left on economics but got derisory coverage and would never have gotten to be PM.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 23

viddy9

Original post by Thutmose-III

Yet another Corbynite fool defending the comparison of Israel to the Nazis and then affecting to be scandalised when the question of people comparing Israel to ISIS comes up.

:lol:

I knew you couldn't help yourself. You're so transparent

This is false. If Corbyn had said exactly the same thing but with Germans and the Nazis instead of Muslims and ISIS, I would still be pointing out that he wasn't comparing Israel to the Nazis, regardless of my views on freedom of expression (which mean that I think people should grow thicker skins).

I'm sure comparing Israel to ISIS would also be offensive to some people, but my views on such a comparison are exactly the same as my views on the comparison with the Nazis. If such a comparison were made, I would attack it on factual grounds, not on the grounds of "I'm offended".**

Because I would vote for Labour under Corbyn in a general election, I am, according to some people, therefore a Stalinist. This has the potential to cause offence, because Stalin was a person who killed 6-9 million people. But, I shrug it off and find people who make such comparisons amusing, and I try to break down barriers by telling them about some of the policies I support which the stereotypical Corbynite would disagree with.

By the way, I agree with you about Ed Miliband and, in my view, he reluctantly came to the view that Corbyn should go to try to heal the party, not because he disagrees with Corbyn's policies. He would have liked to be much more radical than he was, in my view, and there was a noticeable shift towards moderation around late 2013.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 24

Thutmose-III

Original post by SaucissonSecCy

Fair enough but securing Brexit is most important to me, party politics is BS in comparison to the significance of it.

The Conservative Party is going to secure Brexit, and the moderates in Labour do not intend to seek to overturn the referendum result. Even Blair has stated that is politically impossible.

I just meant Channel 4 and the Beeb.

Right-wingers claim the BBC has a left-wing bias, left-wingers claim the BBC has a right-wing bias. Everyone in politics hates the fact they're broadly pretty neutral and unbiased. Just look at the way shrieking Corbynista ****wits attack Laura Kuenssberg for asking perfectly justifiable questions.

Reply 25

Thutmose-III

Original post by viddy9

I'm sure comparing Israel to ISIS would also be offensive to some people, but my views on such a comparison are exactly the same as my views on the comparison with the Nazis. If such a comparison were made, I would attack it on factual grounds, not on the grounds of "I'm offended".**

Nice little strawman you've got going there. Posing as some kind of anti-PC, free speech defender. People criticise the comment because of what it reveals about Corbyn's judgment and his views of Israel, not out of some "I'm offended" pearl clutching.

In any case, I've seen you on here defending the comparison of Israel to the Nazis before. I've seen Corbynites consistently defend that comparison.

Because I would vote for Labour under Corbyn in a general election, I am, according to some people, therefore a Stalinist. This has the potential to cause offence, because Stalin was a person who killed 6-9 million people.

That makes almost no sense, you've stretched the analogy beyond breaking point so as to become cartoonish

Reply 26

SaucissonSecCy

Original post by Thutmose-III

The Conservative Party is going to secure Brexit, and the moderates in Labour do not intend to seek to overturn the referendum result. Even Blair has stated that is politically impossible.

Right-wingers claim the BBC has a left-wing bias, left-wingers claim the BBC has a right-wing bias. Everyone in politics hates the fact they're broadly pretty neutral and unbiased. Just look at the way shrieking Corbynista ****wits attack Laura Kuenssberg for asking perfectly justifiable questions.

I hope so, because Campbell, Lammy et al and the Lib Dems want to override it.
I'm quite surprised as someone wanting Brexit you find them unbiased. I thought the remain propaganda especially after the result was heavy.

Reply 27

Thutmose-III

Original post by SaucissonSecCy

I hope so, because Campbell, Lammy et al and the Lib Dems want to override it.

Lammy is probably a non-entity even to his own children. The Lib Dems are simply desperate and pathetic.

I'm quite surprised as someone wanting Brexit you find them unbiased. I thought the remain propaganda especially after the result was heavy.

I disagree. People are programmed to interpret anything with which they disagree as bias for the other side. But I've seen nothing to suggest there is a systemic BBC conspiracy to push the Remain side. The Guardian is certainly guilty of deliberately stoking up fears and trying to turn fears of falls in the market into self-fulfilling prophecies, but I've seen nothing comparable in broadcast media

Reply 28

viddy9

Original post by Thutmose-III

Nice little strawman you've got going there. Posing as some kind of anti-PC, free speech defender. People criticise the comment because of what it reveals about Corbyn's judgment and his views of Israel, not out of some "I'm offended" pearl clutching.

And, as I've demonstrated, those criticisms are invalid. You then proceeded to ignore that discussion and talk exclusively about offence. The Chief Rabbi also talked about offence.*

Original post by Thutmose-III

In any case, I've seen you on here defending the comparison of Israel to the Nazis before. I've seen Corbynites consistently defend that comparison.

Have I? This time and the last time this issue came up I've stated that such a comparison would be inaccurate and that Milosevic is a much better comparison. I don't recall ever having done so.**

Reply 29

anarchism101

Original post by Thutmose-III

The title of the specific thread on this topic in N&CA disagrees.

Reply 30

viffer

Original post by SaucissonSecCy

But a strong Labour opposition .

The stable door was unlocked and the horse's sphincter is but a mere speck in the distance

Reply 31

KimKallstrom

Original post by viddy9

Most people who support Corbyn just know that it will be used by people who can't understand basic logic as a political tool.

Then how much of a ****ing idiot must he be to have said it?

Reply 32

KimKallstrom

Original post by getfunky!

Ed Miliband chose to copy Tory policies for his manifesto,

.......

It's been released, there was no antisemitism from him, and to accuse others of antisemitism is deplorable.

Yeah I must have missed the parts in the Tory manifesto when they proposed things like rent control, caps on energy prices, abolishing of the bedroom tax and the introduction of the mansion tax. These are massively left-wing policies. Why do extremists insist on ignoring these things post-election? That's not even taking into account the fact that he'd **** off the "undeserved rich" seemingly every time he appeared on TV during the campaign.

As for the antisemitism charge, I don't think many people have accused Corbyn himself of this, but when one of the only things you've been known for prior to becoming leader (besides his defense of the IRA while they were killing people in terrorist attacks and being a proponent of the Venezuelan regime) is his friendships and close relationships with people who literally state that all Jews should die (like Sheikh Raed Salah who Corbyn shamelessly brown nosed) as well as an assortment of Holocaust deniers (like "my good friend" Ibrahim Hewitt) and other such creatures, then you can hardly blame people for concluding that - while not an antisemite himself - he clearly has no problem with antisemites. His shoddy handling of the antisemitism row in the Labour Party recently didn't help either of course.......

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 33

KimKallstrom

Original post by Thutmose-III

Lammy is probably a non-entity even to his own children.

Reply 34

DJKL

A focus on antisemitism misses the real story, the struggle for the heart of Labour.

This appears to be a rerun of the fight within the party in the late 1970s through into the 1980s, and for those who do not remember those times, John Golding's book, "Hammer of the Left;The Batttle for the soul of Labour Party " is possibly a must read.

Whilst the technology is different the method is straight out of the 1980s playbook. The more moderate part of Labour would be well advised to study the tactics deployed against Militant, because Momentum appears (to an outsider) to have the same modus of operation.

A clear demonstration that history repeats itself and a good read.

Reply 35

Thutmose-III

Original post by KimKallstrom

Well said. I'd say Miliband's flagship (and not well reported or known) policy for the financial industry, in which British banks would be split up by imposing a market share cap for each bank (so they would have to split into multiple competing entities to remain under the cap) is massively left-wing, and in fact it's more radically left-wing than any previous financial industry proposal by any Labour government.

He had dozens of strongly left-wing policies; as you say, repealing the bedroom tax and caps on energy prices, the mansion tax, creation of a government bank to compete in the small business loan market, increase in corporation tax, repealing the hedge fund tax cut, imposing a tax on banker bonuses *and* on bank profits, bringing railways back into public ownership, repealing enactments that prevent local authorities from investing in social housing.... this was a very substantial left-wing policy slate that he took to the election.

Unfortunately Corbynites were largely disengaged, politically, prior to the 2015 election and typically aren't very strong on policy detail so they simply don't know about this. It also suits their purposes to assert that every Labour leader after Foot and before Corbyn was a "Red Tory Blairite".

while not an antisemite himself - he clearly has no problem with antisemites. His shoddy handling of the antisemitism row in the Labour Party recently didn't help either of course.......

My own view is that he is a constructive (in the legal sense of the word... construed, implied, inferred) anti-semite. If I were a politician who spent a lot of time around homophobes, meeting with them, praising them, befriending them, defending them in public. claiming they'd never said anything homophobic to me, then it could be reasonably concluded that I really don't care about homophobia that much and that it's something that doesn't intrude at all on my view of a person. That in itself would suggest a certain underlying homophobia.

In fact, the left is criticising Stephen Crabb as a homophobe on precisely that basis.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 36

KimKallstrom

Original post by DJKL

Sounds interesting. I'll give it a read, cheers :smile:

Reply 37

Thutmose-III

Original post by DJKL

I'll check it out, you're the second person to recommend the book to me.

When the moderates take back control of the party we should commence mass purges of Corbynites. They've threatened us with that and threatened MPs with deselection. Upon control of the party being restored to sane people, every administrative and procedural tactic should be utilised to push them out of the party and outright ban any Momentum members from being Labour Party members. Ring leaders like Jon Lansman, Seumas Milne and Andrew whatshisface should be banned for life

It should be made clear to them that they are not welcome, that the Labour Party is not for them, and if they're so damn convinced that the population will flock to a hard left banner then they should set up a party which, if what they say is true, will be wildly popular.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 38

RF_PineMarten

Original post by Thutmose-III

The fact it was planned shows that these plotters have, unlike Corbyn, a bit of spunk and competence about them

As for competence, they have thrown everything at Corbyn very quickly and he's still standing despite it being pre planned. And they decided to do all this right at the time the country needs a unified opposition party, instead of attacking the Conservatives and holding them to account which is what they should be doing. This plot does not prove competence at all, it just proves opportunism and self interest.

I don't really know what to think about this whole situation, and I would never vote for Corbyn myself. But I am not going to support a coup attemp that was pre planned and managed by a PR firm linked to Blairite politicians. It's hard to see that coup attempt in a positive light.

Reply 39

viddy9

Original post by RF_PineMarten

This plot does not prove competence at all, it just proves opportunism and self interest.

Another sign that this wasn't well planned is that they didn't really factor in the backlash from the membership. If the PLP had went about it in a less aggressive fashion, they might have got somewhere. As this article by the excellent Ewen MacAskill about Angela Eagle's constituency shows, there's some sympathy for the PLP's viewpoint, but the article repeatedly states that this is outweighed by how the PLP has acted.

I too have some sympathy for the PLP's viewpoint, as I said in my previous post, and the latest development in which the party keeps to Corbyn's policy platform in exchange for Corbyn stepping down sounds reasonable. Trouble is, the membership will have a hard time believing the PLP.

In my view, Labour MPs were still far too emotional about the result of the EU referendum to have taken a step of this magnitude. Their emotions are understandable given that a key plank of Labour's foreign policy has just been destroyed, but they should have known better.