Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The Green Party attitude to Corbyn…another mixed message…https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/rupert-read/what-would-corbyn-win-mean-for-greens
Quote:With the Green Party you will continue to get what it says on the tin, with Corbyn’s Labour you almost certainly won’t. He’s a decent, authentic bloke; but in the end he’s unlikely to actually succeed in doing very much more than pasting a new temporary label over the ‘New Labour’ tin. But there is a way in which he could potentially gain strength: by appealing beyond his party, to like-minded people in the Greens, Plaid and the SNP, to work together for some kind of cross-party rainbow progressive alliance.alanjjohnstone wrote:The Green Party attitude to Corbyn…another mixed message…You mean another mixed message from the Green Party or that they like us are sending out a mixed message?Actually, part of it is one of our messages:
Green Party member wrote:He’s a decent, authentic bloke; but in the end he’s unlikely to actually succeed in doing very much more than pasting a new temporary label over the ‘New Labour’ tin.The only difference is that we substitute "Marmite pot" for "tin".
I think like i thought with the CPGB, they realise Corbyn won't be able to carry many Labour members and that a civil war within them is likely…and they hope to pick up support from the Corbyn side of the competing factions. They hope he might be pushed left to defend himself…who knows, i don't and i'm guessing like the rest of them…he may compromise so much that everything stays the same….His shadow cabinet will be interesting to watch. It seems likely the predictions that the SNP will become the only "official" opposition being united and coherent may prove to be right if Labour fracture along left and right lines and turn on themselves instead of the Tories. I don't think we are in a position to pick up any of the jetsam and flotsam that will floating around as Labour bicker amongst themselves so we might as well concentrate in putting our own political tactics in target and forget Labour and Corbyn…We can't get any benefits or any advantage right now except to throw brickbats at them all.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Let us not overlook what our election candidate for Brighton said on the Andrew Neil programme…i'm paraphrasing but the jist was….we welcome the presence of those other parties that call themselves socialist because it brings the topic of what socialism is into the debate…That's not what he said, otherwise he'd have more criticism from some quarters than he got!And he certainly did not say (that was former member William Dunn in his letter in this month's Socialist Standard):
Quote:and by implication that means we very much welcome Corbyn's bid for the leadership of the Labour Party and it has already been pointed out, it has instigated political discussions once again on what is socialism.What he actually said textually was:
Quote:( …) to be honest, actually, I welcome the presence of a lot of these other parties . . . (…) This is because what they’re doing is that they may well be raising the right questions. And I think what’s very important for us to put on the agenda this time is that in actual fact there is an alternative to the way things are being run at the moment. And I think anybody who’s bringing that to people’s consciousness is doing a good job. I mean, we disagree with them as to how things should shape up in the longer term. We disagree with them as to whether a party should be leaderless and that people should be leading themselves.So, he was merely saying, rather, that the other parties were raising the right questions, about what was wrong with present-day society and needed dealing with, but not providing the right answer.He took the same approach in his review of Naomi Klein's book This Changes Everything: Capitalism v the Climate in the February Socialist Standard which ended:
Quote:In the current climate anyone who starts asking the right questions has to be congratulated.He is a member of Kent & Sussex branch, so I imagine their branch meetings have as lively discussions as we're having here.
Ummm…i did say paraphrase, jist and implication, relying on memory…In the context of the question, "these other parties" were those claiming to be socialist parties, as listed by Neil…not just any other political party raising general political questions…(i'll pass by the throwaway remark that we may have anarchistic elements in the Party… )And to be honest i don't think my interpretation of Howard's intended meaning is that far wrong nor my conclusion that regards Corbyn who has re-drafted the agenda of political debate and brought the prospect of socialism back to the table the election comments of Howard are also applicable . Again not much different from the analyses being presented by various members firstly on Piketty and then on Brand…although i do generalise a little bit. But i'm not a party lawyer who will dwell on the crossing of t and dotting of i …I do take on board your inference that the tone of Howard might differ from that of Gnome…isn't it positive that we are not all clones and can differ…and i certainly hope KSRB has lively discussions…If a branch is not then something is sadly amiss.
As I said Derek Wall has got the message and is following me and also retweeting my tweets to 29,000 followers. This is the tactic I am suggesting. Yes the tweet was "Migrants are our fellow workers" but it linked to this site and shows that we are not a bunch off hatefull tossers.
alanjjohnstone wrote:we might as well concentrate in putting our own political tactics in target and forget Labour and Corbyn…Comrades in NERB are addressing this issue and discussion on this thread is relevant. Problem is contacting every individual member.
ComradesFurther to post #309 which contains the text of the Private Eye piece [Page 9, 4th-17th Sept] the following reply was submitted from the Media Committee:Date of Issue: 3 September 2015SUBJECT: Reply to ‘HP Sauce’ Socialist Party item, Private Eye (No. 1400)No, we do not have ulterior motives. We stood against Jeremy Corbyn at the General Election when he wasn’t standing for Labour Leader on the same basis that we oppose him now: his policies rely on the continued existence of capitalism, and therefore the exploitation of the working class to make profits. We stand, as you rightly observed, for the abolition of the wages system all together.To that end, over the years, our members have donated money and time to the party. In 1951 we bought premises that now attract a considerable paper value (and which we have no plans to sell). We do not derive any income from our premises, and indeed they cost us money in taxation. In a property society we require funds and resources to make our case for the abolition of property society.p.s. Our pamphlets are freely available online at Pamphlets | The Socialist Party of Great Britain
robert.cox wrote:SUBJECT: Reply to ‘HP Sauce’ Socialist Party item, Private Eye (No. 1400)Is it not Marmite?
gnome wrote:We invariably don't go in for a mealy-mouthed, namby-pamby, wishy-washy, dyed-in-the-wool, softly, softly, catchee monkey approach so favoured by some contributors to this forum. We tell it as it is ahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3tWx251Hkw Pertinent to the debate, lol
'HP Sauce' is the name of the Private Eye column in which the item the Media Committee replied to appeared.
He blocked me on twitter after I called him out for being such an abusive prat. eta: The above is in reference to Derek Wall on twitter.
Tonight, Panorama are dedicating their show to Corbyn's revolution – for want of a better term.8.30pmhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06bg6ty
According to a trailer it's going to accuse him of supporting the killing of British soldiers in Iraq:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34179201i.e is part of a sustained media campaign against him (probably because of his anti-NATO stance). Here's another part:http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4545949.eceWe knew of course that his opponents would play dirty.
imposs1904 wrote:He blocked me on twitter after I called him out for being such an abusive prat. eta: The above is in reference to Derek Wall on twitter.He is still following me
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.