Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[killer b]

I have heard of meetings being very boring, members using procedural requests and the like to disrupt business, and waiting til your adversaries have left the meeting before pushing through unpopular motions - these tactics are not ones I've heard associated with the left though.

 

[two sheds]

One of the things abusers do is accuse the other party of exactly the same abuse that they're doing. It's quite successful because as an outsider (a Court Judge for example) you don't know which side is lying.

That actually looks a good checklist for when they try those tactics. Nice one Tom.

 

[19sixtysix]

Dulwich and West Norwood party backed Corbyn at meeting last night. The pendulum is swinging against the bliarites in lambeth.

 

[killer b]

didn't someone try to put together a list of active far-left groups and their numbers on here a couple of years ago?

 

[Plumdaff]

I have heard of meetings being very boring, members using procedural requests and the like to disrupt business, and waiting til your adversaries have left the meeting before pushing through unpopular motions - these tactics are not ones I've heard associated with the left though.

Locally quite a few reports of hostile receptions to new members at ward level (I'm fortunate my ward is pretty friendly, possibly because our councillors are pro Corbyn), and at CLP meetings there's been use of procedure in an attempt to prevent votes in support of Corbyn. The attempts failed.

 

[redsquirrel]

Party appealing decision.

Party officials are going to the court of appeal on Thursday in an attempt to reinstate a block imposed by Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) on 130,000 recruits getting the vote.

Falconer said the party was right to appeal against the high court ruling. “It’s for the NEC to decide what the rules are of any contest,” he told the programme.

 

[killer b]

the graun have a live blog up, if anyone if finding their morning too exciting.

Labour NEC challenges decision allowing new members to vote – live

 

[butchersapron]

Seems to me that the NEC is not contesting the breach of contract, but arguing they are allowed to do so.

 

[DotCommunist]

surely thats a bust argument? we are right because we say we are.

 

[eoin_k]

Meanwhile in the Corbyn Cinematic Universe, another tired 80s reboot in the offing. This time an 80s horror\comedy: Militant.

Leader of expelled leftwing group Militant expects readmission to Labour

Some images of Militant members trying to join Labour in disguise has been obtained

Spoiler

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/123/352840552_7a9a0a6ec7_z.jpg?zz=1

almost as dated as the stereotypes of Scousers that feed your feeble imagination

 

[butchersapron]

wtf - the BBC are showing it live.

 

[killer b]

Seems to me that the NEC is not contesting the breach of contract, but arguing they are allowed to do so.

yep - that's pretty much what Maugham was saying earlier in the week too.

 

[eoin_k]

Its the £25 supporters thing that marks them out as hypocritical scum. Have a cut-off point to prevent people joining just to get a vote seems fair enough, even if imposing one inconsistently and retrospectively is a bit dubious. But to then allow people a vote who become supporters after that point makes a mockery of any logical argument to legitamise such a policy.

 

[belboid]

surely thats a bust argument? we are right because we say we are.

If the rules say that the NEC are the only legitimate definers of those rules, it's fair game. Now they are apparently arguing about how one defines 'define'

 

[butchersapron]

If the rules say that the NEC are the only legitimate definers of those rules, it's fair game. Now they are apparently arguing about how one defines 'define'

Surely the beneficiaries of a breach of contract are not allowed to draw up internal rules saying they can breach contract whenever they like - that's what we have courts for isn't it? They're actually asking the judge to rule that they (the judge) are powerless in this case, despite the judge hearing the case precisely on the basis of having power, the power to define breach of contract.

Anyway, the judge seems to have just rejected a large part of the NEC's (rather oddly focused) argument about 6 months continuous membership by rejecting their contention that this had always existed just hadn't been applied by saying that past NEC decisions indicate that no such rule ever existed, not that it did but hadn't been applied.

 

[DotCommunist]

If the rules say that the NEC are the only legitimate definers of those rules, it's fair game. Now they are apparently arguing about how one defines 'define'

I've just tuned in to it on auntie and now they are arguing what another word means. Please send help or a drone strike. Either will do.

 

[19force8]

Loving this

The six month freeze date was to only allow members who had a proven commitment to the party to vote in elections.

The £25 fee for voting was to give people another way they could show their commitment to the party.

All said without even a smirk.

Priceless!

 

[DotCommunist]

words has been repeated enough to lose all meaning now

 

[belboid]

Surely the beneficiaries of a breach of contract are not allowed to draw up internal rules saying they can breach contract whenever they like - that's what we have courts for isn't it? They're actually asking the judge to rule that they (the judge) are powerless in this case, despite the judge hearing the case precisely on the basis of having power, the power to define breach of contract

The judge is judging whether they can judge, simples. Next up is how it's illegal to use a legal name.

 

[belboid]

“I’m trying to have my cake and eat it,” Sheldon admits

Genius

 

[DotCommunist]

reprimandish diss there

 

[DotCommunist]

'i don't mean to waste your time'

'you do'

if my ears a right today. lolz

 

[brogdale]

You've got to say that, even by the standards of party politics, historians are surely got to look back on this episode with more than a little amusement. The party of the people begging the (bourgeois) courts to allow it not to let its own members vote in a party election.

 

[DotCommunist]

You've got to say that, even by the standards of party politics, historians are surely got to look back on this episode with more than a little amusement. The party of the people begging the (bourgeois) courts to allow it not to let its own members vote in a party election.

I pity the futture politics student who has to read this transcrip (probably on his 2060 nueral lace) because theres only been two funny bits and a couple of good bits.

 

[brogdale]

I pity the futture politics student who has to read this transcrip (probably on his 2060 nueral lace) because theres only been two funny bits and a couple of good bits.

Neural lance, eh?

 

[gosub]

you can't fit the last 3 months of politics into one syllabus

 

[ViolentPanda]

I had understood that the UK version of the PWSC was specifically aligned to Beveridge's"five giants on the road to reconstruction", and that Thatcher pioneered neoliberalism in the UK. Fair enough if that was happening worldwide - similar things were happening in the USA, and I'd assumed it had been exported to elsewhere because of them.

That's a horribly simplistic, compressed and historically-inaccurate representation of what actually happened.

The post-war Social Contract was capital agreeing to certain conditions for fear of social unrest -and therefore affected profits. While Beveridge's "five giants" were used as political material, a quick analysis shows that none of them have been conquered, and that from '45-onward, most of what has happened has been the amelioration of the most egregious social harms caused by capitalism, not the curing of them. They can't be cured because that too would undermine capitalist logic.

As for neoliberalism, it wasn't pioneered in the UK, and it wasn't pioneered by Thatcher. It wasn't even really pioneered in Chile, although that's the first site where it was seen in it's full -murderous - effect. What Thatcher - or more realistically,Sir Keith Joseph and Allen Walters - pioneered in the UK was a form of monetarism, which is often a concomitant of neoliberalism.

 

[eoin_k]

I like how the Guardian homepage now has a piece above the link to the livefeed by Jess 'The Knife' Phillips objecting to three men being nominated as mayorial candidates.

 

[Beermoth]

Btw - this nonsense that Watson took from Crick claming this is how Corbyn supporters are being told to operate:










...does not appear in the recently republished edition of Militant - the one with Watson's comments on the cover. I wonder if that is because it was Crick's tendentious and hostile summing up of something he didn't understand rather than a factually correct document - and as such not really re-publishable? Maybe Watson knowa why it wasn't included - was it on grounds of inaccuracy? After all it still included Watson accepting money from Derek Hatton.

Nah, Watson got it off the Progress website.

Militant’s modus operandi | Progress | News and debate from the progressive community

 

[butchersapron]

Nah, Watson got it off the Progress website.

Militant’s modus operandi | Progress | News and debate from the progressive community

Ta - the guardian got it completely wrong again. Why did i take their word for it? And the Huffington Post. And Momentum themselves. How odd of the usually very busy Crick not to correct any of these - and others - mistakes.