Turn on thread page Beta

Labour's Exteme Left Shadow Cabinet, no women in top jobs & appoints John McDonnell! watch

Announcements
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)



    How is it not progressive to encourage women into prominent positions for other women and young girls to look up to?
    Because that is not what feminism is doing to this country. It's ensuring women are placed in those position irregardless of qualifications. It's a joke. You should be arguing as to why a less qualified person was appointed, and not the fact that he is a man, but that's not how victimhood works
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Christ, I'd forgotten about that.

    Poor you. So happy my mp is so awesome. Already rallying behind Corbyn as she should as a shadow cabinet member.
    This is obviously an example of I scratch your back, you scratch mine. Corbyn will slowly unravel from his mask signifying a man of the people. Merit should be paramount but funny how his campaign chief John and his top backer Len are getting greater powers.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tim_123)
    Because that is not what feminism is doing to this country. It's ensuring women are placed in those position irregardless of qualifications. It's a joke. You should be arguing as to why a less qualified person was appointed, and not the fact that he is a man, but that's not how victimhood works
    As I have previously explained - Angela is far more qualified than John.

    Let's face it, you know nothing about politics or Labour, you are pureley here to argue against positive discrimination, which is clearly not even relevant in this situation if you know anything about the party and people involved.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stochasticking)
    I don't think he will actually go ahead and implement a capped wage. He predominantly wants to make sure there is no discrimination between gender pay and no abuse of workers.
    Well, they carried out some loony anti-business policies in the 70's and we ended up having to run to the IMF for a bailout.

    The socialists never learn.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hubbaeaster)
    I'm sick of these so-called feminists moaning about the fact that there's barely any woman. Whilst I don't like Corbyn very much, I'm sure he would have happilly given positions to people like Cooper, Reeves and so on had they not been arrogant *****es about the whole issue by refusing to serve in his cabinet.
    Obviously you yourself care greatly about equality.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gears265)
    This is obviously an example of I scratch your back, you scratch mine. Corbyn will slowly unravel from his mask signifying a man of the people. Merit should be paramount but funny how his campaign chief John and his top backer Len are getting greater powers.
    I don't know why but a tiny part of me expected better.

    I just feel like this is a complete death knell for the party.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    The top jobs going to men is a ****ing joke - a different kind of politics my arse.
    He promised the job to McDonnell ages ago. They are long time friends and that decision was made well before he was voted in. He can trust McDonnell, McDonnell and him go way back and he is also worthy of the job on merit, according to Corbyn. You may deem Eagle more qualified but that is your own opinion. Academic qualifications are not the only thing worthy of factoring in when making such a decision.

    (Original post by redferry)
    Man's a total hypocrite.
    No. He is being clever in appeasing the potential backstabbers in the party with respected roles. Its politics, not happy clappy gender equality club. Get some perspective.

    (Original post by redferry)
    Also Angela eagle is far more qualified than McDonnell to be shadow chancellor. Far far far far far more qualified.
    More qualified based on what? Her genitalia? Academia? So what? You think in the real world these are the only things that matter? Hell no and its quite obvious you've got limited experience in the real world working in business as you seem utterly delusional. Let me take a guess, white PhD student know it all preaching feminist diatribe in the hope some of that **** sticks?

    (Original post by Aj12)
    Perhaps, but McDonnell is an old friend and in politics that always makes you eminently more qualified for a position.
    This is exactly what happens. Sadly, these delusional idiots still think the world works completely on your academic record. Its a lot about who you know as opposed to what you know. That is the real world yet sadly they can't seem to grasp that. McDonnell got the job because he can be trusted by Corbyn and that is the most important thing here. Its no different to delegating responsibilities in a business, first and foremost you need someone you can trust.

    (Original post by Wattsy)
    The way I'm hearing it women were offered senior positions and declined them to take on different roles but the gutter media are of course, reaching for the sensationalist headline and the Corbyn-phobia continues.
    The reactionist emotional nonsense on here is ridiculous. People need to withdraw their heads from their academic ********s and enter the real world.

    (Original post by redferry)
    Still doesn't explain why Angela wasn't offered chancellor.
    Because those jobs would have been offered to people like Liz Kendall but they decided they didn't want them. Corbyn cant force women to do the job just to hit a quota. And just because someone is qualified on paper, it doesn't make them right for a job. What utter nonsense.

    (Original post by redferry)
    A meaningless bone attempting to cover up the lack of women in top positions.
    People should get top positions on merit, not just academic merit, but whether the leader thinks they are right for the particular role in question. Please go and run a business and manage people before spouting complete and utter nonsense. In a business you hire and delegate to people you can trust to support that business with as much passion and conviction as you do. If you don't do that, your business is going down the pan. Corbyn has given the top job to McDonnell because he knows that when push comes to shove, McDonnell can be trusted more than the others to fight his corner as passionately as he would.

    (Original post by tim_123)
    It is NOT equality to employ someone based on their gender. If he decided not to choose a woman, it is because there were no women deemed qualified.
    People on here only think academic qualifications matter, not merit based on what they've done in the real world, a lot of what the people on here do not see because they're too busy creaming themselves to the Times Higher University League Tables. McDonnell got the job because (a) Corbyn can obviously trust him as they're long time friends and (b) He needs someone he can trust when its become common knowledge that there's a faction in the group who wish to work against his aims. Corbyn is playing the political game smart here yet the reactionist idiots are screaming because they're too thick to see past the blinkers.

    (Original post by redferry)
    As I have previously explained - Angela is far more qualified than John..
    News flash: People don't get hired just based on academic qualifications. In what other ways is Angela more qualified than John? You are putting far too much emphasis on academia and think that this alone makes her more suitable for the role, which is complete and utter nonsense, as any business person or person who has to hire and delegate will tell you. You are living in fantasy land.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L'Allegro)
    Again - I would have been very happy to see Eagle selected. I'm not - again! - trying to argue that she shouldn't have been. I think she's great.

    Because - again, I said this, please read my replies clearly - women can work against the interests of women. Black people can work against the interests of other black people. Gender is not the only factor at play: race, class, and ability/disability also come into it. A woman - again, not Eagle - who would vote against, say, benefits for single mothers, or paid maternity leave - is not progressive. Such a woman would be concerned solely with the progression of upper-and-middle class women.

    Electing Angela Eagle would have been a progressive move. It is simply not credible, however, to argue that Corbyn doesn't care about equality because of the number of women, or lack thereof, in his Shadow Cabinet.

    To make this absolutely clear: I'm also not arguing that Corbyn does beyond all doubt care about women. I am realistic and discerning, and I understand that Corbyn may well be just as unscrupulous and disingenous as other politicians. I am simply arguing that his actions over the last twenty-four hours are not a reason to jump to that conclusion.

    To conclude: I concede your argument that it doesn't seem like Corbyn has chosen the best candidate for the job. That upsets me, and concerns me.
    I never argued that any woman would be intrinsically better than a man. Just that a) Corbyn promised that there'd be equality in the cabinet and didn't deliver and b) Angela was far more qualified.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LockheedS.)
    Not just that, his economic policies are a throwback to 1960's Soviet Russia. In fact, they might even be more archaic.

    Corbyn wants a wage cap.

    That's right. No matter how hard you work, how successful your business - you will be capped at a certain rate.

    And then you'll get hit with a 60% tax bill :lol:

    Socialists making sure everyone is equally as poor :lol:

    Utter lunacy. 6th form politics.
    It's posts like your that make me regret posting on the TSR political forum. Full of hyperbole and ignorance. Only one of your points is anywhere near being correct but the rest are just laughable. If you want to have a reasoned and balanced debate try growing up a bit.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr JB)
    He promised the job to McDonnell ages ago. They are long time friends and that decision was made well before he was voted in. He can trust McDonnell, McDonnell and him go way back and he is also worthy of the job on merit, according to Corbyn. You may deem Eagle more qualified but that is your own opinion. Academic qualifications are not the only thing worthy of factoring in when making such a decision.


    No. He is being clever in appeasing the potential backstabbers in the party with respected roles. Its politics, not happy clappy gender equality club. Get some perspective.


    More qualified based on what? Her genitalia? Academia? So what? You think in the real world these are the only things that matter? Hell no and its quite obvious you've got limited experience in the real world working in business as you seem utterly delusional. Let me take a guess, white PhD student know it all preaching feminist diatribe in the hope some of that **** sticks?


    This is exactly what happens. Sadly, these delusional idiots still think the world works completely on your academic record. Its a lot about who you know as opposed to what you know. That is the real world yet sadly they can't seem to grasp that. McDonnell got the job because he can be trusted by Corbyn and that is the most important thing here. Its no different to delegating responsibilities in a business, first and foremost you need someone you can trust.


    The reactionist emotional nonsense on here is ridiculous. People need to withdraw their heads from their academic ********s and enter the real world.



    Because those jobs would have been offered to people like Liz Kendall but they decided they didn't want them. Corbyn cant force women to do the job just to hit a quota. And just because someone is qualified on paper, it doesn't make them right for a job. What utter nonsense.



    People should get top positions on merit, not just academic merit, but whether the leader thinks they are right for the particular role in question. Please go and run a business and manage people before spouting complete and utter nonsense. In a business you hire and delegate to people you can trust to support that business with as much passion and conviction as you do. If you don't do that, your business is going down the pan. Corbyn has given the top job to McDonnell because he knows that when push comes to shove, McDonnell can be trusted more than the others to fight his corner as passionately as he would.



    People on here only think academic qualifications matter, not merit based on what they've done in the real world, a lot of what the people on here do not see because they're too busy creaming themselves to the Times Higher University League Tables. McDonnell got the job because (a) Corbyn can obviously trust him as they're long time friends and (b) He needs someone he can trust when its become common knowledge that there's a faction in the group who wish to work against his aims. Corbyn is playing the political game smart here yet the reactionist idiots are screaming because they're too thick to see past the blinkers.



    News flash: People don't get hired just based on academic qualifications. In what other ways is Angela more qualified than John? You are putting far too much emphasis on academia and think that this alone makes her more suitable for the role, which is complete and utter nonsense, as any business person or person who has to hire and delegate will tell you. You are living in fantasy land.
    It's not opinion it is fact. And it's not pureley based on academics either - Angela worked for many years in the treasury and in a number of other economics research jobs.

    Why would you offer those jobs to Liz when she is completely unqualified to do them? Now that would have really been stupid. Hilary was always going to be kept on, they've been in discussions for months.

    John's appointment is nepotism, pure and simple.
    Cornyn could have made a shrewd decision and chosen Angela - someone highly regarded and well liked on both sides of the party. By choosing John it sends a clear message on what route he is taking the party down, and it is not one of unity and shrewd judgement. Oh and it shows he values rewarding his friends over sensible decisions. He could easily have put John in Angela's role.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    I never argued that any woman would be intrinsically better than a man. Just that a) Corbyn promised that there'd be equality in the cabinet and didn't deliver and b) Angela was far more qualified.
    Sure. Both of which I accept completely. I was responding mostly to other people (and what seemed to be your implication) that any woman is better than a man as far as bringing about equality goes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    I never argued that any woman would be intrinsically better than a man. Just that a) Corbyn promised that there'd be equality in the cabinet and didn't deliver and b) Angela was far more qualified.
    a) People like Liz Kendall refused to work with Corbyn
    b) More qualified based on what? Not only academic qualifications matter.

    McDonnell was far more qualified overall. Life is more than academic qualifications

    1) He is from the same school of thought as Corbyn
    2) He can be trusted to not backstab Corbyn - well, more so than the others
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    I point you to my above post.

    Also Angela eagle is far more qualified than McDonnell to be shadow chancellor. Far far far far far more qualified.
    Angela Eagle is an openly lesbian MP. Was this the reason why she was overlooked, even though her Oxford degree + work experience should have made her no 1 choice for the job? Not very leftist if this is the underlying reason..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The media is projecting again.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Christ, I'd forgotten about that.

    Poor you. So happy my mp is so awesome. Already rallying behind Corbyn as she should as a shadow cabinet member.
    Don't forget the time he got successfully sued for libel for what he came out with in an election campaign. And people call Tories/the media dishonest for what they say about Corbyn. This guy literally got sued and had to pay out.

    Dat dere fresh and honest bright new day.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr JB)
    a) People like Liz Kendall refused to work with Corbyn
    b) More qualified based on what? Not only academic qualifications matter.

    McDonnell was far more qualified overall. Life is more than academic qualifications

    1) He is from the same school of thought as Corbyn
    2) He can be trusted to not backstab Corbyn - well, more so than the others
    Please do explain as to how he is qualified to be shadow chancellor? The two reasons given do not qualify him for that role in any way - just so you know.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    It's not opinion it is fact. And it's not pureley based on academics either - Angela worked for many years in the treasury and in a number of other economics research jobs.

    Why would you offer those jobs to Liz when she is completely unqualified to do them? Now that would have really been stupid. Hilary was always going to be kept on, they've been in discussions for months.

    John's appointment is nepotism, pure and simple.

    Cornyn could have made a shrewd decision and chosen Angela - someone highly regarded and well liked on both sides of the party. By choosing John it sends a clear message on what route he is taking the party down, and it is not one of unity and shrewd judgement. Oh and it shows he values rewarding his friends over sensible decisions. He could easily have put John in Angela's role.
    No. It is your opinion you are trying to pass off as fact. Again, he doesn't think she is right for that particular role and in fact has given her two other important roles. However, McDonnell quite clearly got the job in question because he can (a) be trusted - the most important thing in any business and (b) he is from the same school of thought as Corbyn himself so will passionately convey the new message of the party.

    Keep crying all you like. Its not going to change anything. Those of us with perspective and understanding of the real world realise that there is more to appointing someone than academic credentials or even experience in a position. You continue to shout out nepotism but obviously you have little understanding of the real world because if you did, you'd realise that in the vast majority of cases its who you know as well as what you know that gets you the top jobs. Its always been that way, will always be that way and you need to accept it.

    Go and set up your own business and see the world for what it is before preaching ridiculous diatribe in an obvious attempt to push your feminist viewpoints. No, simply put, it is only your opinion that Angela is more qualified just as its my own opinion that I'd have hired McDonnell for the position because overall he is far more suitable for the role. Not everyone in this world thinks as you do, your opinion is not fact, so withdraw your head from your arse.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mak48)
    Angela Eagle is an openly lesbian MP. Was this the reason why she was overlooked, even though her Oxford degree + work experience should have made her no 1 choice for the job? Not very leftist if this is the underlying reason..
    I think he probably was just too busy giving his best friend what he wanted to care how qualified Angela was, I don't think there's much evidence out there that he's a homophobe.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Please do explain as to how he is qualified to be shadow chancellor? The two reasons given do not qualify him for that role in any way - just so you know.
    Yes they do. Trust when managing people is far more important than anything else. Like I said, you've clearly never run a business or have had to delegate responsibilities to numerous people as otherwise you'd be aware of this. These personal skills and management skills are what separate leaders from followers.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Don't forget the time he got successfully sued for libel for what he came out with in an election campaign. And people call Tories/the media dishonest for what they say about Corbyn. This guy literally got sued and had to pay out.

    Dat dere fresh and honest bright new day.
    The worst thing is that people don't care, Corbyn could literally get rid of all moderate mps and people will still defend him til the cows come home.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 23, 2015
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.