Corbyn & Cabinet in the Media

[ViolentPanda]

Put it this way, fule. Sorting out the Labour leadership is not like the underpants gnomes:

1. Ditch Corbyn
2. ?
3. Electoral VICTORY!!!!1!

It would make sense for you to have some idea in which you saw your brave new Corbyn-free Labour party might head thereafter.

It's not hard; anyone would think you can't give a straight answer to a straight question.

All we need ask ourselves is:
"If Corbyn is defenestrated, what is the single most likely outcome of a new leadership election - one in which Corbyn will obviously not be allowed to stand - and in which political direction will it take us?"

The (more than) obvious answer is that given the PLP's way, we'd be looking at the sort of anodyne "neoliberalism with a garnish of social concern" that served Blair so well, but Brown and Miliband increasingly poorly.

You can't go forward by going backward. That "the maquis" either don't realise this, or choose to ignore it, merely points up their concern for personal power overriding the needs and wishes of their constituents.

 

[nino_savatte]

All we need ask ourselves is:
"If Corbyn is defenestrated, what is the single most likely outcome of a new leadership election - one in which Corbyn will obviously not be allowed to stand - and in which political direction will it take us?"

The (more than) obvious answer is that given the PLP's way, we'd be looking at the sort of anodyne "neoliberalism with a garnish of social concern" that served Blair so well, but Brown and Miliband increasingly poorly.

You can't go forward by going backward. That "the maquis" either don't realise this, or choose to ignore it, merely points up their concern for personal power overriding the needs and wishes of their constituents.

The Bitterites, as they shall henceforth be known, haven't quite fathomed any of this. The thousands of new members who have joined the party since Corbyn became leader are treated with the utmost contempt by these increasingly detached and delusional fools, who continue to believe that they are more 'electable' than Corbyn is... and this after they've lost two elections in a row on a platform of broadly Blairite-Brownite policies.

 

[killer b]

I think just calling them the right wing of the party suffices - calling them blairites just allows them to muddy the water. Or maybe the 4.5%?

 

[ViolentPanda]

We need a culture change. I suggest looking at:

• As a party, learn to debate reasonably, so we have disagreements not fights. Both left and right of the party seem convinced that organising is the way to shape the party, never persuasion.
• Recreate routes for working class people to get into politics. And by “working class” I mean manual workers and unskilled labourers who haven’t even gone to university.
• Give up on identity politics. We are not the arbiters of who is or is not sexist or racist. Positive discrimination makes us look utterly unconcerned with fair treatment of individuals.
• Don’t let any issue be a taboo. Immigration is the obvious issue, but we are becoming equally unable to articulate sensible thoughts on benefit spending too.
• Stop arguing over the record of the last Labour government. And in particular, don’t make future policy on the basis of continuing, or correcting, the policy of the last Labour government.
• Stop attacking the media whenever we are unable to get good coverage.

Your first point is a Labour right "talking point". It relies on a stereotype of conflict that rarely takes place at CLP, regional, national executive or PLP level. Most policy is a result of layer upon layer of compromise.

Your second point: You don't need routes, you need a way to ensure equality of outcome, so that - for example - a PPC is chosen on merit. That is all that has ever been needed.

Your third point: I'm not a fan of identity politics. I watched the shift to identity politics back in the '80s rock the broad left back on its' heels, and make it fracture into an infinity of single-interest groups. That said, a politics of identity can't be (and shouldn't be) ignored. We need to acknowledge that some people will always take more of a battering than others on the basis of their ethnicity, gender, sexuality or cultural affiliations. What we shouldn't do is give into the temptation to make politics solely about identity.

Your fourth point: No issue is taboo. This is another Labour right "talking point" masquerading as fair commentary - a device through which to neutralise any Labour left opinion about immigration. I've never, in more than 35 years of doing adult politics, met these mythical people who close down debate about subjects like immigration or welfare. The only people on the left that I'm aware of that do this are the Swappies.

Your fifth point: Unavoidable. Generals always fight the current war on the verities of the last war.

Your final point: Arrant arsery. The media should always be taken to task and held to account, especially when they are disseminating openly-false stories, and party-political propaganda.

 

[mk12]

These are important points. However, the moderates did shut up for the sake of Miliband, allowed him to believe he was leading a united party and the country to believe the same. They were wrong to do so. They should not be quiet about Corbyn being wrong.

'Not being quiet about Corbyn' will only serve to antagonise the overwhelming majority of Labour members (both new and old) who voted for Corbyn. It will also fail to win over voters who (judging by that report) seek a government led by a strong and united party. So, rather than saving the Labour party in the name of the electorate, you are actually contributing to the continuation of a Tory government.

By the way, I am sympathetic to some of your concerns. I just think your desire for internal civil war is potentially damaging for both the Labour party and the population at large.

 

[gosub]

'Not being quiet about Corbyn' will only serve to antagonise the overwhelming majority of Labour members (both new and old) who voted for Corbyn, and will also fail to win over voters who (judging by that report) seek a government led by a strong and united party. So, rather than saving the Labour party in the name of the electorate, you are actually contributing to the continuation of a Tory government.

By the way, I am sympathetic to some of your concerns. I just think your desire for internal civil war is potentially damaging for both the Labour party and the population at large.

Slowly but surely, Corbyn has taken control of Labour. So, what next? | Rafael Behr
Slowly the perspective of Labour MPs is shifting. They grasp that Corbyn has won and that much of his victory is irreversible. Even if he were ousted, the result of last summer’s culture war between a bloodless remnant of New Labour and clamour for something vastly different cannot be overturned. “We can’t keep throwing buckets of icy water over our members and telling them to snap out of it,” says one backbencher.

 

[laptop]

. There is no call for more left-wing measures because the polling company decided there wouldn't be.

Because those who commissioned the poll decided...

Some polls are designed to find out what people think.

Some are designed (E2A: and paid for) to make a point. The Fabian poll looks like the latter, yes?

 

[mk12]

Decent article, but this is particularly depressing (and true):

Instead, all sides are consumed by a slow-motion, introspective war of attrition for control of the agenda. It is the kind of combat that Corbyn and his allies know well, while their fidgety opponents are still adjusting to the pace. Those impatient for effective opposition need to reset their watches. Labour isn’t just out of synch with the country. It has landed in a different political time zone.

 

[killer b]

What would 'effective opposition' look like?

 

[mk12]

What would 'effective opposition' look like?

Clear, coherent and realistic alternatives to the current government's policies. Presented by a party that is relatively united around that programme.

 

[killer b]

How do you think such a unity might be achieved?

 

[Pickman's model]

How do you think such a unity might be achieved?

unite the party in opposition to MarkyMarrk

 

[belboid]

Clear, coherent and realistic alternatives to the current government's policies. Presented by a party that is relatively united around that programme.

the party is largely united around economics and 'home' policy, but split on international questions - which is why the tories et al are so keen to promote those international questions, Corbyn didn't decide when the UK should start bombing Syria, nor when Trident comes up for renewal, those issues are out of his control.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

I agree that the moderates need more than 'beyond Corbyn', partly because ditching him will either result in a terrible electoral result because it would need to be done bureaucratically, or result in him or his ilk being re-elected.

So the moderates need to hold the party together while Corbyn leads us to electoral oblivion, which even some of his supporters concede will happen, but claim it's not the most important thing.

There are conversations happening about this. It's the reason some very good people have accepted places in his shadow cabinet.

 

[MarkyMarrk]

The Bitterites

Poor.

 

[Pickman's model]

I agree that the moderates need more than 'beyond Corbyn', partly because ditching him will either result in a terrible electoral result because it would need to be done bureaucratically, or result in him or his ilk being re-elected.

So the moderates need to hold the party together while Corbyn leads us to electoral oblivion, which even some of his supporters concede will happen, but claim it's not the most important thing.

There are conversations happening about this. It's the reason some very good people have accepted places in his shadow cabinet.

very good people like...?

 

[DotCommunist]

or result in him or his ilk being re-elected.

you think the PLP would be mad enough to put a token labour left candidate up for the leadership race? They did that and the bastard only won. By a landslide unseen for decades of labour leadership. He was only supposed to be a token sop to the labour left, to 'widen the debate'. They didn't expect him to win.

 

[belboid]

Poor.

not as poor as your refusal to admit you can't read basic data, thus leading you into false claims such as polling evidence suggesting non-voters are to the right of voters, when the polls showed precisely the opposite.

 

[gosub]

you think the PLP would be mad enough to put a token labour left candidate up for the leadership race? They did that and the bastard only won. By a landslide unseen for decades of labour leadership. He was only supposed to be a token sop to the labour left, to 'widen the debate'. They didn't expect him to win.

I think some of them suspected as much, hence the ridicule and chastisement his nominees were getting from the beginning of the Leadership election.

They put a concerted effort in to stopping him getting enough nominations, and he still scrapped enough (just in time), I agree PLP wouldn't let that happen again. - Corbyn is there at least as long as it takes to redress the mechanisms that have marginalized his wing of the Labour party

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I agree that the moderates need more than 'beyond Corbyn', partly because ditching him will either result in a terrible electoral result because it would need to be done bureaucratically, or result in him or his ilk being re-elected..

Aren't you the one showing contempt for the electorate here? In this case, the electorate that elected Corbyn by a huge margin just a few months ago?

Or were they the wrong sort of electorate? Labour clearly has the wrong sort of members.

 

[gosub]

Aren't you the one showing contempt for the electorate here? In this case, the electorate that elected Corbyn by a huge margin just a few months ago?

Or were they the wrong sort of electorate? Labour clearly has the wrong sort of members.

different electorates. The Labour party is not the UK electoral roll

 

[littlebabyjesus]

different electorates. The Labour party is not the UK electoral roll

Yes, but the election was for the labour party leader, not for the national government. That's kind of the point. MM seems to be basing a lot of what he says on the premise that those he calls 'Corbynistas' have contempt for the electorate.

 

[gosub]

Yes, but the election was for the labour party leader, not for the national government. That's kind of the point. MM seems to be basing a lot of what he says on the premise that those he calls 'Corbynistas' have contempt for the electorate.

The language may be OTT, but I think the Corbynistas priority IS a battle for the soul of the Labour party, (at the very least ensuring their wing doesn't get marginalized for another 20 years again) rather than winning over the wider electorate. The Blairites don't have souls, and as they demonstrated from the leadership election, think that is less important than winning power, beyond respecting that the electorate have to put an X in a box (unless they can be persuaded to postal vote) I'm not sure they aren't equally contemptuous.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think just calling them the right wing of the party suffices - calling them blairites just allows them to muddy the water. Or maybe the 4.5%?

As with the Labour right throughout the party's history, they refuse to acknowledge that position on the political spectrum. Instead they invent all sorts of positions that elide that fact. They're "pragmatists", they follow "the third way", they're "moderates" and they're "reasonable". They're even "sensible" and "common-sense".
It's amazing how many labels can be deployed by right-wingers intent on avoiding admitting that they're right-wing.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Because those who commissioned the poll decided...

Some polls are designed to find out what people think.

Some are designed (E2A: and paid for) to make a point. The Fabian poll looks like the latter, yes?

The Fabians have always had a penchant for "managing" democracy, the top-down prescriptorial wankbags.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I agree that the moderates need more than 'beyond Corbyn', partly because ditching him will either result in a terrible electoral result because it would need to be done bureaucratically, or result in him or his ilk being re-elected.

So the moderates need to hold the party together while Corbyn leads us to electoral oblivion, which even some of his supporters concede will happen, but claim it's not the most important thing.

Please give substance to the above claims.

There are conversations happening about this. It's the reason some very good people have accepted places in his shadow cabinet.

So there's a clique bedding down so that they're in place when things go to shit? Nice, and rather revealing of an unhealthy contempt for the electorate.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Poor.

..but accurate given any textual analysis of the outpourings of the likes of "the resistance". They're bitter children, angry at having been deprived of power, and blind to the fact of their own behaviour causing that deprivation.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think some of them suspected as much, hence the ridicule and chastisement his nominees were getting from the beginning of the Leadership election.

They put a concerted effort in to stopping him getting enough nominations, and he still scrapped enough (just in time), I agree PLP wouldn't let that happen again. - Corbyn is there at least as long as it takes to redress the mechanisms that have marginalized his wing of the Labour party

Which is why I'm interested in the project to re-empower the constituency parties. Do that and it really does become a matter for the wider membership, and not the PLP.

 

[DotCommunist]

I think some of them suspected as much, hence the ridicule and chastisement his nominees were getting from the beginning of the Leadership election.

They put a concerted effort in to stopping him getting enough nominations, and he still scrapped enough (just in time), I agree PLP wouldn't let that happen again. - Corbyn is there at least as long as it takes to redress the mechanisms that have marginalized his wing of the Labour party

Months later, one leading figure in a rival campaign could barely control their rage: “To have [the close of nominations] at 12 o’clock on a Monday – we must have been on fucking crack cocaine. You can’t get to anyone, so people were wandering in after a weekend of spending time with their bloody constituency secretary or their leftwing wife, they just fucking wander off the train and hadn’t even had a cup of tea in the tea room by 12 o’clock on a Monday. They go straight down to the PLP office and do something stupid. The people that are around on a Monday morning are the London lot – and for fuck’s sake, it’s the home of the left, it’s all the fucking mayoral candidates and deputy leader candidates.”

LOL

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Wow. That's a triumph of prejudices.