Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[kebabking]

"turned on him" would suggest they ever felt any differently.

Genuine Q: was there ever any real press coverage that was broadly favourable? Once he became Labour leader, at least?

I certainly recall - and mentioned it here - that the 'centerist tory' media, (Times, BBC political team etc..) had it as a theme that if you annonymised Corbyn domestic economic policy it had comfortable majority support, and even wide support from Tory voters. The problem was Corbyn himself, and his Foreign and Defence policies, which were unpopular whether annonymised or not.

So double edged sword - that the electorate liked many of the things he said (public ownership etc..), they just didn't like him.

I think a major mistake that many who had time for him make is that they seem to believe that for the electorate, Corbyn was this completely unknown character prior to his election as leader, and that it's only the press being hostile to him that made the electorate so unenthusiastic about him - that is, imv, massively delusional and self-serving. Anyone remotely interested in politics and over 30 at the time or so knew him of old, and had long made up their minds about him.

 

[The39thStep]

I certainly recall - and mentioned it here - that the 'centerist tory' media, (Times, BBC political team etc..) had it as a theme that if you annonymised Corbyn domestic economic policy it had comfortable majority support, and even wide support from Tory voters. The problem was Corbyn himself, and his Foreign and Defence policies, which were unpopular whether annonymised or not.

So double edged sword - that the electorate liked many of the things he said (public ownership etc..), they just didn't like him.

I think a major mistake that many who had time for him make is that they seem to believe that for the electorate, Corbyn was this completely unknown character prior to his election as leader, and that it's only the press being hostile to him that made the electorate so unenthusiastic about him - that is, imv, massively delusional and self-serving. Anyone remotely interested in politics and over 30 at the time or so knew him of old, and had long made up their minds about him.

I would agree that his or rather Labour's foreign policy wasn't as popular as their domestic policies, but let's be frank Corbyn was labelled in a concerted and sustained campaign as an IRA sympathiser, a Czeck spy, a Hamas supporter, and a flagship BBC programme broadcast an image of him against the background of Moscow's Red Square. At one husting a main question was would candidates press the nuclear attack button, videos of soldiers in the British Army using his image as target practice were circulated, and the day before the 2017 election one newspaper labelled Labour “apologists for terror”.

One could argue that this character assassination wasn't because of Labour's foreign policy but precisely because of their domestic policies.

 

[brogdale]

I would agree that his or rather Labour's foreign policy wasn't as popular as their domestic policies, but let's be frank Corbyn was labelled in a concerted and sustained campaign as an IRA sympathiser, a Czeck spy, a Hamas supporter, and a flagship BBC programme broadcast an image of him against the background of Moscow's Red Square. At one husting a main question was would candidates press the nuclear attack button, videos of soldiers in the British Army using his image as target practice were circulated, and the day before the 2017 election one newspaper labelled Labour “apologists for terror”.

One could argue that this character assassination wasn't because of Labour's foreign policy but precisely because of their domestic policies.

Nail on head.
Though, in the context of neoliberalism, I'm not even sure if it's worth attempting to separate domestic and foreign policy; the small threat that Corbyn-style social democracy posed to the neoliberal forms of accumulation was, I think, enough to seem him taken out by capital's media.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Fwiw I think the media tone did change during his time as leader. Obviously they were all broadly against him but earlier on some were prepared to acknowledge him as essentially well meaning and decent but in their view misguided but got more furiously opposed the longer he hung on. Certainly with the antisemitism stuff it moved from 'tolerating some wrong uns' to 'being an existential threat to Jews as an individual' as time went on. If anyone is seriously suggesting he could have had them onside if he had a different demeanor that's a bit ridiculous imo - I think it was his failure to get the massive beating they thought was coming in 2017 that really ramped things up not his being a bit grumpy on occasion.

 

[DotCommunist]

I remember the mail digging up milibands dad to smear him when the guy was offering the most minor stuff. That was mild compared to the full scale corbyn got post 17 with all the mentioned stuff but the silly bollocks too like the insufficiently deep bow at the cenotaph, the veterans stolen sandwiches and so on. Just 24/7 shit flinging.

 

[Karl Masks]

I remember the mail digging up milibands dad to smear him when the guy was offering the most minor stuff. That was mild compared to the full scale corbyn got post 17 with all the mentioned stuff but the silly bollocks too like the insufficiently deep bow at the cenotaph, the veterans stolen sandwiches and so on. Just 24/7 shit flinging.

Indeed, mild by comparison, and yet the bacon sandwich image persisted way longer than it should. So easy to clip people, visually or verbally, to paint them in a bad light.

 

[ska invita]

So double edged sword - that the electorate liked many of the things he said (public ownership etc..), they just didn't like him.

In 2017 he won the second biggest vote count for a Labour leader in many a decade, just a bit short of Blair's 97 landslide. So "electorate just didn't like him" is objectively not true.

 

[tommers]

I remember the mail digging up milibands dad to smear him when the guy was offering the most minor stuff. That was mild compared to the full scale corbyn got post 17 with all the mentioned stuff but the silly bollocks too like the insufficiently deep bow at the cenotaph, the veterans stolen sandwiches and so on. Just 24/7 shit flinging.

Remember the scruffy coat?

Meanwhile I see that Kier Starmer has been endorsed by somebody from the Bullingdon photo.

 

[Wilf]

I remember the mail digging up milibands dad to smear him when the guy was offering the most minor stuff. That was mild compared to the full scale corbyn got post 17 with all the mentioned stuff but the silly bollocks too like the insufficiently deep bow at the cenotaph, the veterans stolen sandwiches and so on. Just 24/7 shit flinging.

Ah yes, Red Ed's Dead Red Dad. If I remember it right, a teenage Ralph M had mused something in his diary about England deserving to lose the war, whereas he then went on to mount a campaign to get into the armed services, over riding his refugee status. And one of his main persecutors was the fucking Daily Mail. Hurrah for the...

 

[The39thStep]

Remember the scruffy coat?

Meanwhile I see that Kier Starmer has been endorsed by somebody from the Bullingdon photo.

I can remember the Tory press’s outrage at Michael Foots coat at the cenotaph.

I was at a meeting addressed by Tony Cliff where he remarked that in a choice between the politics of Michael Foot and the politics of Neil Kinnock for leader , Labour decided to elect the candidate with the better tailor .

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I can remember the Tory press’s outrage at Michael Foots coat at the cenotaph.

and conversely, the BBC using the previous years footage of that twat johnson the year he turned up looking more of a hung-over mess than usual

 

[DotCommunist]

I said at the time that the constatnt cenotaph baiting was a tedious attempt to revive the foots jacket bollocks. High on their own myths, watch them always try to get that 'shot through car window of outgoing PM looking gutted' to hark back to the thacher photo.

and conversely, the BBC using the previous years footage of that twat johnson the year he turned up looking more of a hung-over mess than usual

had forgotten this. Not even denied when complained about, attributed to a mistake in the software. Many such fortunate mistakes

 

[The39thStep]

Actually I can’t be bothered to Google so can someone have a look at Labours or Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour , Foreign Policy ? As I recall they wanted to do middle of the road stuff like stay in NATO, stop arms deals to the Saudis , review arms exports and would recognise Palestine rather than closing all US bases in the U.K. and forming a military alliance with North Korea.

 

[ska invita]

youve remembered wrongly, they wanted to hand over all top secret data to their czech handlers, allow russia to build a military base in windsor and of course give away the falklands

 

[hitmouse]

In passing, all the talk about Corbyn's lack of charisma has reminded me of probably my favourite bit of satire from that era: Why Jeremy Corbyn is a disgrace for choosing Glastonbury over Armed Forces Day

The bit about "If you ask me, Glastonbury is an easy gig for Corbyn. Anyone can engage a crowd of tens of thousands of young people in a political discussion at a music festival. Let’s move the goalposts and see how he’d do. How would he go down at the Conservative Party Conference, for example? Or in my house, where I hate him?" has always stuck in my head.

 

[ska invita]

as another aside on this topic of foreign policy, something that has stayed with me was the panic expressed that Corbyn would have full access to god knows what top secret information, and this caused what sounded like genuine fear, i think (IIRC) it was particularly explicit from the former MI6 boss Richard Dearlove, who said words to the effect of "it musn't be allowed to happen"...

...which is the ultimate tease as it does make me wonder what that information is and what a prime minister with a conscience/political values might be able to do with that information,

 

[Elpenor]

Was there not talk by the rent a gob retired general clique that the military would move against him if he was elected PM IIRC

 

[teqniq]

Was there not talk by the rent a gob retired general clique that the military would move against him if he was elected PM IIRC

Yup, there was. Arseholes to a man.

 

[rasputin]

Published on Politics Home on Saturday. Apologies if it has already been mentioned.

Former party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who sits as an independent MP but is still an ordinary Labour member, faces the prospect of being excluded altogether from Labour after accepting a donation from We Deserve Better, PoliticsHome understands.
Corbyn was suspended both as a member and a Labour MP in 2020 over his response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report on antisemitism in Labour. He was readmitted to the party the following month, after the matter was considered by Labour’s national executive committee (NEC), but he was not let back into the parliamentary party.

The ex-leader’s Labour membership is now in doubt, however, as it is understood that complaints have been submitted to the party about his acceptance of a donation from the recently established organisation ‘We Deserve Better’. The group, backed by commentator Owen Jones, is supporting individual “socialist candidates”, including the Green Party’s Carla Denyer against shadow cabinet member Thangam Debbonaire.

Corbyn’s registered interests were updated this month to show that he accepted £5,000 from We Deserve Better on 12 April 2024 for “political activities”.

 

[Silas Loom]

Gotcha!

 

[The39thStep]

Gotcha!

Fan of Sun headlines ?

 

[Wilf]

Published on Politics Home on Saturday. Apologies if it has already been mentioned.

This is obviously complete shithousery from starmer but probably a sign that Corbyn is definitely standing as an independent as he must have known this was coming (that is, accepting money from an organisation who supports candidates other than Labour). Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of Labour candidates and MPs who have accepted money from orgs who have also supported non-Lab candidates.

 

[Silas Loom]

Fan of Sun headlines ?

It seemed apposite.

 

[The39thStep]

This is obviously complete shithousery from starmer but probably a sign that Corbyn is definitely standing as an independent as he must have known this was coming (that is, accepting money from an organisation who supports candidates other than Labour). Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of Labour candidates and MPs who have accepted money from orgs who have also supported non-Lab candidates.

And also private heath firms lobbying for NHS contracts, Israeli organisations etc etc .

 

[Wilf]

And also private heath firms lobbying for NHS contracts, Israeli organisations etc etc .

Bizarre thing is that these are not so much dirty secrets for Labour nowadays as badges of honour.

 

[Gramsci]

If Corbyn stands, I'd prefer that he wins, in that he would be standing against a candidate representing something awful (
starmer's Labour, the shabby treatment of Corbyn, Abbot and several others, the weaponisation of anti-semitism and plenty of other things). Same time, I struggle to see much that is positive in a Corbyn victory. His period in power was one of inept strategy, no sense that he might link the Labour Party to communities in struggle or anything other than reheated social democracy. His victory would just be as a minor thorn in starmer's side and, for that matter, a failure to even think about breaking with Parliamentary politics.

Edit: I thought Tony Benn was, generally, a fucking idiot. However, I did like his line about leaving Parliament to start doing politics (even if, from what I remember, it didn't amount to much). To be honest, I'd prefer it if Corby could come out with something similar.

Agree he's been treated appallingly.

I also think it's been vindictive.

I do think your a bit harsh on him though. He energised a whole load of young people. I'm not in party but always been involved in small way in local issues. With Corbyn a load of new younger people started to take interest. That's all gone now. It was a shot in the arm as dealing with a Labour council can grind one down. As well as the internal personal conflicts that go with community stuff.

With the demise of Corbyn and rise of Starmer they melted away. Some I believe put off more mainstream politics.

This really isn't good for a healthy democracy. Lesson I took from it is that "democracy" has it limits. Anyone like Corbyn isn't supposed to be part of democracy in any meaningful way.

See what happened to Jamie Driscoll. Decent candidate for a Mayor. Proven track record. But not the kind of person supposed to have a position of power .

To add the new young people really were not welcome by some of my jobs for life Labour Cllrs. The ones who think you ought to vote Labour and then shut up for four years.

 

[Gramsci]

Another two things I remember of Corbyn years.

Some of my acquaintances are small business people. Always regarded them as fairly liberal. Corbyn and they went red in face with rage at thought of him running country. Like overnight there would be communism.

Scratch the surface of a lot of people and they really are right wing. The friendly liberal side is for when the country is run by grownups.

Before last election used to read FT is office receptions. They did series of articles on Corbynomics. Surprisingly positive. Basically said it was European style social democracy. The radical bit was that they wanted to move country economics to standard European style economic intervention in economy etc in one term. Apart from that FT didn't really have a problem with it.

Basically capitalism wasn't under threat with Corbyn. And FT thought more direction / investment by state would be good thing.

So what exactly was the problem with Corbyn? FT rationally said there wasn't much of a problem.

Other posters here have posted up correctly the vicious way he was attacked.

 

[Wilf]

Agree he's been treated appallingly.

I also think it's been vindictive.

I do think your a bit harsh on him though. He energised a whole load of young people. I'm not in party but always been involved in small way in local issues. With Corbyn a load of new younger people started to take interest. That's all gone now. It was a shot in the arm as dealing with a Labour council can grind one down. As well as the internal personal conflicts that go with community stuff.

With the demise of Corbyn and rise of Starmer they melted away. Some I believe put off more mainstream politics.

This really isn't good for a healthy democracy. Lesson I took from it is that "democracy" has it limits. Anyone like Corbyn isn't supposed to be part of democracy in any meaningful way.

See what happened to Jamie Driscoll. Decent candidate for a Mayor. Proven track record. But not the kind of person supposed to have a position of power .

To add the new young people really were not welcome by some of my jobs for life Labour Cllrs. The ones who think you ought to vote Labour and then shut up for four years.

At one level, yes, it's unfair to criticise what has been the most left wing moment in Labour's upper echelons for a long time. And yes, I'm sure quite a few of those people who were energised went on to actually do something. However, it's labourism and labourist ways of thinking that are the problem. Hundreds of thousands actually joined - just think, hundreds of thousands - and what was the outcome? Really very little and arguably something that worked to the detriment of the anti cuts movement (in a group I was involved in quite a few peeled off to Labour meetings, though I'd concede the relationship between attending Labour meetings and other forms of activism varied a lot). Yes, of course, there were internal battles to fight and the disappointment of defeat to Johnson and that to his dull alter ego, Starmer. But still, the Momentum related labour left membership surge must be one of the least self sustaining forms of activism in recent years. My point isn't just that all that actual mass membership was largely just turning up to dreary internal meetings, it's that the project couldn't imagine working outside the realms of labourism. Whether that be community organising and running Labour movement solidarity foodbanks or organising around local housing issues and the rest, that just wasn't what 'the party' was about. Had something been established beyond the walls of Labourism, the left might have retained a base in the party and would be more able to resist the filthy starmer, but more to the point, they might have actually been doing class politics.

 

[Gramsci]

At one level, yes, it's unfair to criticise what has been the most left wing moment in Labour's upper echelons for a long time. And yes, I'm sure quite a few of those people who were energised went on to actually do something. However, it's labourism and labourist ways of thinking that are the problem. Hundreds of thousands actually joined - just think, hundreds of thousands - and what was the outcome? Really very little and arguably something that worked to the detriment of the anti cuts movement (in a group I was involved in quite a few peeled off to Labour meetings, though I'd concede the relationship between attending Labour meetings and other forms of activism varied a lot). Yes, of course, there were internal battles to fight and the disappointment of defeat to Johnson and that to his dull alter ego, Starmer. But still, the Momentum related labour left membership surge must be one of the least self sustaining forms of activism in recent years. My point isn't just that all that actual mass membership was largely just turning up to dreary internal meetings, it's that the project couldn't imagine working outside the realms of labourism. Whether that be community organising and running Labour movement solidarity foodbanks or organising around local housing issues and the rest, that just wasn't what 'the party' was about. Had something been established beyond the walls of Labourism, the left might have retained a base in the party and would be more able to resist the filthy starmer, but more to the point, they might have actually been doing class politics.

Couple people I knew rejoined the party and due to limited spare time dropped the local stuff.

I didn't have a problem with that. They were getting somewhere.

TBF "labourism" isn't imo unpopular. Most people I work with don't have time or inclination to spend spare time campaigning. But that doesn't mean they don't want a Labour party to stick up for them

And they aren't stupid. Surprising comments by some I work with on how Starmer comes across as not believing in anything much.

 

[Wilf]

Couple people I knew rejoined the party and due to limited spare time dropped the local stuff.

I didn't have a problem with that. They were getting somewhere.

TBF "labourism" isn't imo unpopular. Most people I work with don't have time or inclination to spend spare time campaigning. But that doesn't mean they don't want a Labour party to stick up for them

And they aren't stupid. Surprising comments by some I work with on how Starmer comes across as not believing in anything much.

Suppose I was meaning Labourism in the sense of the belief that people unproblematically join unions for their material interests and vote Labour for their politics, avoiding work outside of the party structure and building things in communities. Hadn't seen this article before 2 minutes ago, but It provides a critique of Labourism at the point of one of it's worst defeats (which was, from my perspective, a complete inability to work with the trends that led to Brexit).

The only way Labour can win is by ditching ‘Labourism’ | Jeremy Gilbert

The next leader must take an imaginative leap that Corbyn didn’t – and accept the need for progressive coalitions, says academic Jeremy Gilbert

www.theguardian.com

For what it's worth, I certainly don't go with the conclusions, alliances with the greens, liberals and the like - and 'Mad' Paul is mentioned. But I had the stuff below in mind. To be honest, I'm not sure if I ever knew about the Community Organising Unit, but the fact at least 10s of those hundreds of thousands didn't end up doing it speaks volumes.

Corbynism, for all of its “social movement” rhetoric, never went beyond the limits of this Labourist ideology, although Corbyn and John McDonnell would have liked it to. Despite welcome innovations such as the creation of the community organising unit, what Corbyn’s Labour never developed was the capacity to campaign, year round, in communities and on the streets, with a clear sense of what it was campaigning for (other than just a Labour government), and who it was campaigning against (other than just the Conservative party). So outside of election campaigns, in communities up and down the country, the lies and propaganda of the rightwing press went unanswered.