Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Corbyn camp leaks "enemies list" Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Having an "enemies list" was a characteristic of the Nixon administration. It seems that those in Corbyn's office have put together just such a list and then leaked it. Some have speculated that this is designed to signal to the moderates that Corbyn has enough support in the PLP to be renominated in a leadership contest.

    The irony is that many of those identified on the list as "neutral but not hostile" are extremely hostile to Corbyn and believe he will lead the party to defeat and possibly destruction. In that way, the list clearly underplays just how many people in the PLP despise Corbyn and everything he stands for

    http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/03/...iends-and-foes
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I would add to that, it is interesting to see the mix of arrogance and anxiety in the Corbynista when they talk about a possible leadership challenge. They are clearly very worried about Dan Jarvis, but they also strut around quite arrogantly telling us how such a contest would be a walkover and so the moderate faction shouldn't even bother.

    But the assertion that the Corbynista overwhelmingly represent the membership is undermined by the recent elections in the Young Labour organisation for their seat on the National Executive Council. The Corbynista candidate, James Elliott, a privileged Oxford undergraduate with a history of anti-semitism, was defeated by Jasmin Beckett, a working-class young woman from Liverpool University who holds more moderate political views. Despite bullying from union officials (see below, a Unite officer demanding to see the voting slip of a delegate, despite it being a secret ballot), the Corbynista candidate lost by a narrow margin.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ction-one-vote

    If the Corbynista can't even win an internal election in a demographic they claim to overwhelmingly attract (young people), that puts their claims to have the loyalty of the vast majority of the party in question



    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The Tories have a list too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOx8q3eGq3g&app=desktop



    Not sure the list is genuine tbh, although it's probably what he thinks.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    The Tories have a list too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOx8q3eGq3g&app=desktop

    Not sure the list is genuine tbh, although it's probably what he thinks.
    From 1992? It's a bit remote, no?

    I find it slightly problematic when people point out Corbyn's baggage (like the money he took from the Iranian government, from property developers and from privatisaion merchants Capita) and the Corbynista respond along the lines of, "Well, all politicians do it".

    Doesn't that somewhat undermine the Corbynista claim that he is a sainted man, a deeply principled man, whose personal moral values cause him to stand out of the Westminster crowd?

    Upon closer inspection, Corbyn appears quite grubby and it seems dishonest that the Corbynista will justify and rationalise these actions rather than just admit upfront that he was wrong to act in that way. They can't have it both ways; that he is a living saint, but when he does immoral things that "Well, everyone does it"

    Not sure the list is genuine tbh, although it's probably what he thinks.
    I'm fairly convinced. It has been plausibly suggested that this leak is the work of McBride. It seems pretty ham-fisted, so that's McBride's fingerprints all over. And the journalist who published it would get massacred if it was a forgery
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    My link was tongue in cheek , I should have made that clear.

    But yeah, youre preaching to the converted. He should be ditched for being useless yet alone for his bizarre and dodgy views.


    I hope post referendum the PLP can put up a strong centre left candidate and finish him off.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'm certainly no Corbynista, but can I just say its perfectly normal practice for the whips to take note of MPs, how they vote and their views.

    The one good thing Corbyn has done though, is that he's absolutely opposed the Tory narrative from day one. He's refused to give any ground to the tories and he's made it easier for someone else to come in like Jarvis who can run on an anti-austerity platform.

    Now the mood in the country is turning against the tories, their narrative has been pierced for the first time in six years and the approval ratings of Osborne are shockingly low.

    Corbyn's not the man to win an election but I do think he's helped shift the narrative somewhat.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Why would you not have one? Some might have a more mental list but let's be honest anyone in politics is going to want to be very clear about the people trying to remove them from office or damage their policies.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    I would add to that, it is interesting to see the mix of arrogance and anxiety in the Corbynista when they talk about a possible leadership challenge. They are clearly very worried about Dan Jarvis, but they also strut around quite arrogantly telling us how such a contest would be a walkover and so the moderate faction shouldn't even bother.

    But the assertion that the Corbynista overwhelmingly represent the membership is undermined by the recent elections in the Young Labour organisation for their seat on the National Executive Council. The Corbynista candidate, James Elliott, a privileged Oxford undergraduate with a history of anti-semitism, was defeated by Jasmin Beckett, a working-class young woman from Liverpool University who holds more moderate political views. Despite bullying from union officials (see below, a Unite officer demanding to see the voting slip of a delegate, despite it being a secret ballot), the Corbynista candidate lost by a narrow margin.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ction-one-vote

    http://www.jasmin4nec.co.uk/

    I'm pretty sure that makes her a Trot.

    If we use the overton window to decide what is left/centrist/right then a quick Google of her places her well to the left of the New Labour view (which never really went away) which thoroughly rejects labour grass routes collectivism like unions in favour of strict central control via committee at the top based around focus groups.

    This person you are describing as centre left is pictured in a People's Assembly anti austerity march in that link for God's sake. Those sort of stances are what is getting Corbyn described as far left and Old Labour. Yet you think this is some how a victory for the "moderate" wing (which normally means the post Blairite faction) of the party? This looks like victory for the left wing to me. There is a big difference between rejecting left wing labour and thinking Corbyn is not up to the job of the politics game and/or has dodgy views on foreign policy. The two are not mutually exclusive.

    If Corbyn's election as leader has shifted the overton window for Labour so that this Jasmin looks centrist then Corbyn becoming leader may well have turned out to be a good move for anyone who wants a powerful competent left wing in labour to rise again. Or he may have resigned any left wing politics into the scrap heap. I'm hoping for the former :-/
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    ChaoticButterfly


    I liked the youtube clip, Self is a bit of a tit but I quite liked that interview and I do think we need PR for the reasons he outlined.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    If Corbyn's election as leader has shifted the overton window for Labour so that this Jasmin looks centrist then Corbyn becoming leader may well have turned out to be a good move for anyone who wants a powerful competent left wing in labour to rise again.
    Errr, no. She is the standard-bearer of the moderate faction in Young Labour, and she was elected on their ticket. That is a fact. If you're unaware of it, perhaps you're not well-informed enough about Labour politics to be commenting?

    The reason for your confusion is the hard left spend so long shrieking hysterically about how all Blairites are right-wing traitors, that when they actually look at their politics and work out what they support, they think these moderates must be left-wingers because obviously only the hard left support cause X.Y,Z.

    The arrogance of the Corbynista is astonishing, these are the same morons who blather on about how apparently right-wing Ed Miliband was supposed to be. Ironic given his announced policies were actually substantially more radical than what John McDonnell has announced

    You've cited a picture of her holding up a sign which says a picket line is not a crime, something which every single member of the Labour Party would agree with. It comes across as slightly masturbatory and confused that you'd be so pleased with yourself for finding it
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    Errr, no. She is the standard-bearer of the moderate faction in Young Labour, and she was elected on their ticket. That is a fact. If you're unaware of it, perhaps you're not well-informed enough about Labour politics to be commenting?
    Moderate if that means the post Blairites are the right wing of Labour. In that, case yes, I agree. But bog standard social democrat positions have been labelled extreme as of late. Corbyn on the economy is standard social democrat. You have even just said that Miliband was more left wing than Corbyn, yet Corbyn is a left wing extreme?

    The New Labour ideology makes a big deal of distancing labour from grass routes collective organisations like unions or protest movements like People's Assembly. She is affiliating herself with an organisation that is explicitly against austerity. That organisation is considered very left wing by mainstream media and political pundits. Show me the New Labour people who adopt a hard visible stance of anti austerity. Corbyn is anti austerity and it is treated as a left wing position. That is all I am saying.

    Like I said. Call her a moderate. I'm glad. It means the overton window is shifting. I'll call her a moderate as well. I don;t care whether something gets called left wing, right wing, blairite, corbynite. In this post and the post you quoted I gave actual reasons why I think she if more "left wing" than the previous labour leadership regimes. You have given no reasons whatsoever ever other than just name calling and using empty rhetoric that is not given in any context and their is no justification for what left wing, blairite or right wing actually means. I have. What facts have you actually given for anything?

    I can;t work out if you are accusing me of being an arrogant corbynista. From what I can see of this girl I like her, so we must be on the same page to some extent. I haven't said anything overtly negative about the New Labour either. Just what they stand for. I also linked to her website which is where I am getting all this from, you know, to try and be factual?

    I don;t know what masturbatory means... But I'll say you are coming off as a bit of a tit as response to that
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Moderate if that means the post Blairites are the right wing of Labour. In that, case yes, I agree. But bog standard social democrat positions have been labelled extreme as of late. Corbyn on the economy is standard social democrat. You have even just said that Miliband was more left wing than Corbyn, yet Corbyn is a left wing extreme?
    It's not his economic positions that people have a problem with. In fact, Corbyn is pretty bland on the economy, and barely has anything to say on the subject that is different to Miliband. It's basically a continuation of Miliband, just with less substance.

    It's his positions on sympathising with terrorists, turning a blind eye to murderous anti-semites, abolishing the nuclear deterrent and aligning himself with this country's adversaries that place him on the hard left. I think you well known that it is those positions that make him an extremist, so it is bizarre that Corbynista keep harking back to economic policy when he's labelled hard left, rather than discussing the real substantive issues of disagreement that have created the backlash against him.

    The New Labour ideology makes a big deal of distancing labour from grass routes collective organisations like unions
    Nope. New Labour did nothing of the sort, it had pretty good relations with the three big affiliated beasts of the TU movement (GMB, UNISON and Unite). The hard left, prior to the Corbyn ascendancy, has had very little in the way of serious engagement or success with the trade union movement. Leftist extremists like TUSC and the SWP have affected to be linked in with the movement's grassroots, but the reality was they mostly just talked to themselves, held cliquey little meetings and passed endless, futile resolutions that nobody paid any attention to

    It's typical, by the way, that you assume that if someone opposes Corbyn they must be New Labourites. In fact, they span all wings of the party, from the trade union old Labour right to the Progress New Labour faction to the Millibandite soft left to the co-op left. But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised; the Momentum folk tend to start shrieking "Red Tory Blairite scum" whenever someone expresses doubts about the dear leader

    Corbyn is anti austerity
    Define austerity. Quids says you will struggle. Corbynista invariably identify themselves as anti-austerity and then start stumbling over their words when asked to define precisely what it is they oppose

    In any case, McDonnell pledged himself to Osborne's fiscal charter so the Corbynite opposition to "austerity" can't be that deeply held

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...thin-our-means

    Like I said. Call her a moderate. I'm glad. It means the overton window is shifting.
    Corbynista have to resort to saying Corbyn's contribution is "shifting the debate" because they know he can't plausibly be said to have made any actual difference in the real world of politics. Corbyn's economic policy is little different from Miliband's, so nothing has been shifted there.

    And in those areas where there is a real and substantive difference like sympathising with terrorists, abolishing the nuclear deterrent etc Corbyn has made absolutely no difference whatsoever. Those positions are just as reviled by the substantial majority of the voting population as they always have been. The Trident main gate decision will go ahead and will pass through the Commons without any issue, so Corbyn's insistence on making a big parade of his opposition to it and fighting his own party and trade unions is more about political masturbation and self-congratulation than actually making any kind of difference in the real world

    You have accepted that Corbyn is little different from Milliband on the economic side, and I doubt you will seriously try to assert that Corbyn's positions on terrorism and the deterrent are making any headway, so what difference is Corbyn actually making except to render the Labour Party completely unelectable?

    On that score, Jasmin Beckett stands with the moderate faction of the party. She stands with those of us who, because we genuinely are democratic socialists and social democrats and want to see our ideas carried into government, believe that Corbyn has to be toppled. And no matter how many pictures you cite (of her holding up a placard all wings of the party would agree with), it doesn't change the fact that she stood as the standard bearer of the faction which is opposed to Corbyn and his acolytes and that people who hold those views are the ones who elected her. The Corbynista desperately tried to win that election, and didn't.

    I don;t know what masturbatory means.
    I can dumb down my prose style if it will aid your comprehension
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see how they can say they leaked it, the census was already available to the public in the office of national statistics.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    It's not his economic positions that people have a problem with. In fact, Corbyn is pretty bland on the economy, and barely has anything to say on the subject that is different to Miliband. It's basically a continuation of Miliband, just with less substance.

    It's his positions on sympathising with terrorists, turning a blind eye to murderous anti-semites, abolishing the nuclear deterrent and aligning himself with this country's adversaries that place him on the hard left. I think you well known that it is those positions that make him an extremist, so it is bizarre that Corbynista keep harking back to economic policy when he's labelled hard left, rather than discussing the real substantive issues of disagreement that have created the backlash against him.



    Nope. New Labour did nothing of the sort, it had pretty good relations with the three big affiliated beasts of the TU movement (GMB, UNISON and Unite). The hard left, prior to the Corbyn ascendancy, has had very little in the way of serious engagement or success with the trade union movement. Leftist extremists like TUSC and the SWP have affected to be linked in with the movement's grassroots, but the reality was they mostly just talked to themselves, held cliquey little meetings and passed endless, futile resolutions that nobody paid any attention to

    It's typical, by the way, that you assume that if someone opposes Corbyn they must be New Labourites. In fact, they span all wings of the party, from the trade union old Labour right to the Progress New Labour faction to the Millibandite soft left to the co-op left. But I suppose I shouldn't be surprised; the Momentum folk tend to start shrieking "Red Tory Blairite scum" whenever someone expresses doubts about the dear leader



    Define austerity. Quids says you will struggle. Corbynista invariably identify themselves as anti-austerity and then start stumbling over their words when asked to define precisely what it is they oppose



    Corbynista have to resort to saying Corbyn's contribution is "shifting the debate" because they know he can't plausibly be said to have made any actual difference in the real world of politics. Corbyn's economic policy is little different from Miliband's, so nothing has been shifted there.

    And in those areas where there is a real and substantive difference like sympathising with terrorists, abolishing the nuclear deterrent etc Corbyn has made absolutely no difference whatsoever. Those positions are just as reviled by the substantial majority of the voting population as they always have been. The Trident main gate decision will go ahead and will pass through the Commons without any issue, so Corbyn's insistence on making a big parade of his opposition to it and fighting his own party and trade unions is more about political masturbation and self-congratulation than actually making any kind of difference in the real world

    You have accepted that Corbyn is little different from Milliband on the economic side, and I doubt you will seriously try to assert that Corbyn's positions on terrorism and the deterrent are making any headway, so what difference is Corbyn actually making except to render the Labour Party completely unelectable?

    On that score, Jasmin Beckett stands with the moderate faction of the party. She stands with those of us who, because we genuinely are democratic socialists and social democrats and want to see our ideas carried into government, believe that Corbyn has to be toppled. And no matter how many pictures you cite (of her holding up a placard all wings of the party would agree with), it doesn't change the fact that she stood as the standard bearer of the faction which is opposed to Corbyn and his acolytes and that people who hold those views are the ones who elected her. The Corbynista desperately tried to win that election, and didn't.



    I can dumb down my prose style if it will aid your comprehension
    I know you don't like him, I don't want him as leader either but I think his absolute opposition to Tory austerity and policies has been welcome and something for the next leader to build upon. He was strong on tax credits, strong on opposition to junior doctors and on Tory politics generally.

    He won't be leader for much longer anyway.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I know you don't like him, I don't want him as leader either but I think his absolute opposition to Tory austerity and policies has been welcome
    It's not that absolute, though, is it? He allowed McDonnell to pledge them to Osborne's fiscal compact

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...thin-our-means

    Also, austerity as a term when used by the left is infinitely elastic and basically means whatever they want it to mean. Whenever I ask a leftist how they actually define austerity, they're completely unable to define it in a way that's actually consistent and logical.

    Austerity is generally defined as a set of government policies designed to reduce budget deficits and improve a government's fiscal position. John McDonnell has said he is also committed to reducing the deficit by cutting spending along with some investment (but the substantive fact there is that he says he will cut.. which is what the British left calls "austerity"). As I said, claiming opposition to "austerity" often does feel like quite a superficial stance, infinitely elastic in what it actually means. It's more a slogan (at least in the way the British left uses it) than a serious assertion of a public policy position

    and something for the next leader to build upon.
    I suppose I don't really see it that way. A few weeks after Corbyn is gone, I don't think anyone will be caring about what positions he took or what he said. I just don't see that Corbyn has created any momentum (no pun intended), or any political programme on which the next leader can build.

    Simply adopting positions from week to week on what he is opposed to is not really a substantive political programme, it's entirely transitory and its long-term effect is nil

    Given McDonnell's position on cutting spending, it's not at all clear how their policy is different from Miliband's, so I reject the Corbynite position that somehow Corbyn has brought something new to the table or that suddenly the Tories are being "opposed" in ways they weren't under the previous leader (and I find this whole Corbynite mindset that they are "opposing" the Tories now a bit puerile, given it makes no difference in the real world. What makes a difference is building a coherent political programme which you present to the British people at a general election, on which you are elected and which you put into effect in government)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    X
    Just to develop that idea a bit... part of the reason I find this Corbynite obsession with their perception of "opposing" the Tories (by which they mean publicly saying they disagree) bizarre. Corbynites say to me that there was basically no difference between Labour and the Tories before Corbyn.

    One example I'd counter with is the bedroom tax; Miliband's policy was to repeal it, and if Labour had got into government, that would have made a real difference in the lives of real people. It seems faintly offensive for Corbynites to say essentially that they prefer Labour in opposition under Corbyn with his "true" opposition to the Tories as opposed to Labour under Miliband in government making a real difference, putting Labour policies into practice.

    It is by getting into government, reversing Tory decisions and implementing Labour policies that you "oppose" the Tories. Simply adopting a stance week to week is not real opposition, and it's incredibly frustrating that Corbynites seem to mistake the most superficial appearance of opposition for actual political change
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    Just to develop that idea a bit... part of the reason I find this Corbynite obsession with their perception of "opposing" the Tories (by which they mean publicly saying they disagree) bizarre. Corbynites say to me that there was basically no difference between Labour and the Tories before Corbyn.

    One example I'd counter with is the bedroom tax; Miliband's policy was to repeal it, and if Labour had got into government, that would have made a real difference in the lives of real people. It seems faintly offensive for Corbynites to say essentially that they prefer Labour in opposition under Corbyn with his "true" opposition to the Tories as opposed to Labour under Miliband in government making a real difference, putting Labour policies into practice.

    It is by getting into government, reversing Tory decisions and implementing Labour policies that you "oppose" the Tories. Simply adopting a stance week to week is not real opposition, and it's incredibly frustrating that Corbynites seem to mistake the most superficial appearance of opposition for actual political change
    I agree with that. You don't change the country from the opposition bench.
    My main issue with corbyn is his lack of tact, ignoring all his views, you need to have a plan for winning which he doesn't. Someone like Mandelson behind the scenes may be a necessary evil. For all his faults he knew how to win an election.

    I'd say austerity, in the context it's used means cutting spending and a smaller state. Even if that's not technically what it means.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I agree with that. You don't change the country from the opposition bench.
    My main issue with corbyn is his lack of tact, ignoring all his views, you need to have a plan for winning which he doesn't. Someone like Mandelson behind the scenes may be a necessary evil. For all his faults he knew how to win an election.
    I completely agree with you there. Even leaving aside his views, there seems to be a real lack of focus, that they're just being blown about by events and dealing with situations as they arise rather than coming up with a programme and a plan and then acting in ways that further that plan (he's been leader for six months now, they've had time to develop something like that)

    I can't see any evidence of serious policy development going on in the leaders office, and great politicians understand that good policy and good politics go hand in hand. A government's policy objectives and political programme have to be the same thing, ultimately the electorate will reward good policy.

    When speaking to Corbynites, many of them seem to pin their hopes on a serious recession or simply hoping the Tories fall over by themselves. I don't think that's a serious way to think about politics, it seems tribal and futile. Why would you wait hoping events will screw your opponents rather than developing a credible, interesting, radical policy programme that can appeal to many different types of voters and which could carry us into government and be the basis of our programme in government? It's so passive and unambitious, it's so small in scope and mindset

    Anyway I'm off to the pub, Before I go I thought I'd link this youtube video you might appreciate. It's a video of the 1993 election victory speech of the Australian Labour Prime Minister Paul Keating. He really was an astonishing man with an incredible talent for explaining economic policy in a way that was relatable to ordinary people, not speaking down to them but conveying it in a way that seemed like common sense. And he really was of the philosophy that good policy is good politics.

    I thought I'd link this because I think it shows how a Labour leader can come across as having an optimistic vision, the way he speaks you can tell how ambitious he is for the country, how he envisions its future.

    Watch from about 2:40 for about five minutes or so I think you'll get what I'm talking about.

    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BeastOfSyracuse)
    Having an "enemies list" was a characteristic of the Nixon administration.
    Nixon's list was significant in large part because it revealed the extent of his paranoia, including several people who he simply disliked but who posed little threat to him. Whereas your comment seems to suggest that Corbyn has the opposite problem, underestimating the extent of hostility.

    In other words, you're trying to hit him with two essentially contradictory attacks.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Nixon's list was significant in large part because it revealed the extent of his paranoia, including several people who he simply disliked but who posed little threat to him. Whereas your comment seems to suggest that Corbyn has the opposite problem, underestimating the extent of hostility.

    In other words, you're trying to hit him with two essentially contradictory attacks.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well he also moaned about Corbyn being to left wing and then praised Miliband for being further to the left than Corbyn. :facepalm:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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: March 27, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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