Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[teqniq]

Corbyn needs to stop talking to people at demonstrations and start putting his point across to voters directly.

And some actual points would be useful! Like how to get some higher pay etc.

what.

 

[oryx]

Corbyn needs to stop talking to people at demonstrations and start putting his point across to voters directly.

And some actual points would be useful! Like how to get some higher pay etc.

I partly agree with you - I don't think he needs to stop speaking at rallies; while this is largely preaching to the converted it means the party's views on the NHS, social care, welfare benefits etc. crisis get media attention which is important.

As I've said in this thread previously, Labour are missing out on open goals with the NHS and re-nationalisation of the railways, and do need to put out firmer and more strident views.

 

[teqniq]

I partly agree with you - I don't think he needs to stop speaking at rallies; while this is largely preaching to the converted it means the party's views on the NHS, social care, welfare benefits etc. crisis get media attention which is important.

Perhaps it may have escaped your attention but the NHS protest/march received zero coverage in the MSM so he is not going to reach anybody that way and the rest of the time they have the knives out for him anyway.

As I've said in this thread previously, Labour are missing out on open goals with the NHS and re-nationalisation of the railways, and do need to put out firmer and more strident views.

Well good luck with all of that but please bear in mind that a substantial amount of the PLP is essentially on the neoliberal bandwagon and subsequently it'd be like turkeys voting for christmas.

 

[stethoscope]

Much of the Labour PLP is pretty much invested in the same privatisation/sell-off/keeping public spending down ideology as the Tories, so it's simply not an open goal to be missed.

Frankly, if working class people can't trust even Labour councils to be on their side when it comes down to the basic necessity of keeping an affordable roof over their head, why the fuck should they listen to their 'promises' on anything else?

For some of those I've been active with the last little while - fighting against losing their homes by two-faced Labour councils who are busy kicking them out of their homes to then refurbish them to sell off or 'regenerating' them as private flats (invariably to their mates), frankly the thought of Labour in power means sweet fuck all to them.

 

[oryx]

Perhaps it may have escaped your attention but the NHS protest/march received zero coverage in the MSM so he is not going to reach anybody that way and the rest of the time they have the knives out for him anyway.

It did receive a lot of coverage. It was covered by the BBC and the Evening Standard, which is hardly the same as two paragraphs and a photo in the Morning Star.

I would agree with you about the media having knives out for Corbyn, though, which is problematic.

Re your other point, the right wing in the PLP are not those in charge at the moment. Look how Owen Smith really tried to veer to the left when he made the leadership challenge. Hopefully the right of the party is fucked. They have had two attempts at the leadership when Corbyn won, or three if you buy into the 'Red Ed' narrative (which I don't, although I used my union vote to vote for him as he was the most 'left' at the time, as did the majority).

 

[oryx]

Much of the Labour PLP is pretty much invested in the same privatisation/sell-off/keeping public spending down ideology as the Tories, so it's simply not an open goal to be missed.

Frankly, if working class people can't trust even Labour councils to be on their side when it comes down to the basic necessity of keeping an affordable roof over their head, why the fuck should they listen to their 'promises' on anything else?

For some of those I've been active with the last little while - fighting against losing their homes by two-faced Labour councils who are busy kicking them out of their homes to then refurbish them to sell off or 'regenerating' them as private flats (invariably to their mates), frankly the thought of Labour in power means sweet fuck all to them.

You make an absolutely valid point and as someone who works in housing and supports the Labour Party, but does not support the type of situation exemplified by Cressingham Gardens, it is hard for me to come up with any answer except to say that grassroots members and supporters who believe in the rights of tenants and do not support the marketization of 'social' housing should be massively opposing this - and many are.

ETA - the current system of funding for social housing, favouring home ownership and the oxymoronic affordable rent, is a huge problem, although it shouldn't let councils like Lambeth off the hook.

 

[stethoscope]

Sadly @oryx, the right/'progress' wing of the PLP are very much in charge. Corbyn/McDonnell being opposition leader/chancellor doesn't change that fact. I would have thought that the way that PLP has consistently undermined Corbyn for two years now, repeatedly forced him to retreat from his more 'socialist' pledges, and generally helped (through the media/press too) to reinforce the sense that he's unfit to be elected, was clearly observable.

 

[teqniq]

It did receive a lot of coverage. It was covered by the BBC and the Evening Standard, which is hardly the same as two paragraphs and a photo in the Morning Star.

I would agree with you about the media having knives out for Corbyn, though, which is problematic.

Re your other point, the right wing in the PLP are not those in charge at the moment. Look how Owen Smith really tried to veer to the left when he made the leadership challenge. Hopefully the right of the party is fucked. They have had two attempts at the leadership when Corbyn won, or three if you buy into the 'Red Ed' narrative (which I don't, although I used my union vote to vote for him as he was the most 'left' at the time, as did the majority).

Ok apologies I don't look at the BBC website much and I don't have a telly so would have missed that, nor do I live in London so the Standard is not a publication I would want to look at. However I can't find any coverage on the graun and indy websites, places that you might expect to see some, well you might unless you realised that the last time there was a substantial demo concerning the NHS in London neither publication ran any stories. I had to come on here to see pics.

Re your other point, I hope you don't mind if I borrow that... the PLP is FUBAR imo. I voted for Corbyn in the second election with my union affiliated vote only because I could, not in any expectation that it would actually change anything.

 

[B.I.G]

Thing is, people want higher wages but they baulk at the actions necessary to get them. What can he say, ''Join or form a trades union, and demand better terms and conditions!''

That's the truth, but who the fuck wants to hear it?

He could propose that he would legislate. Higher minimum wage. Better conditions. Self-employment when working for only one business made illegal.

 

[B.I.G]

what.

Great facepalming banter

 

[mojo pixy]

Higher minimum wage lol. That old sticking plaster.

In any case he's already spoken in favour of a Maximum Wage .. but still nothing about regularising unions again and legally obliging employers and contractors to negotiate with them.

I have to wonder why that is.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Whilst PFI might have been originally founded by the Tories in 92, the reality is that PFI expanded hugely as a core policy throughout the Labour years. Right now, Labour councils are using PFI schemes despite their dreadful failings still to 'regenerate' areas - resulting in the overall loss of social housing and publicly owned services.

Tory government and central cuts is part of that, but only part, and its become a convenient 'apportion of blame' by Labour now whilst its own councillors are as invested in privatisation as the Tories.

In short to your question, I don't actually feel the NHS is any safer any more in the hands of Labour as it stands than the Tories. Only when 'left' people start to accept what's happening with the NHS, with public services, with decimation of housing to private sell-offs to their developer mates, and actually stop colluding with this utter delusion that getting Labour back into power will actually change anything any different to the Tories, can a true pro-working class and left/socialist alternative ever be founded.

Mention the sweeping deep-bow-and-scrape to neoliberalism that the Labour Party did from 1994 onward, and most left-liberals chunter on about the "minimum wage", and "spending on health and education". They don't mention how much of that health and education "spending" was actually highly-expensive "off the books" borrowing, or how the "minimum wage" has remained unofficially "pegged" at about 70% of a "living wage". They don't mention the subservience to "the City" or the fact that Labour refused to re-regulate financial institutions, or that Labour introduced such delights as the "Benefits Integrity Project" (precursor to every "benefits reform" in the next 20 years) or tuition fees.

A right-centrist Labour Party, such as the "moderates"/Maquis want, will just be more of the same fawning and grovelling before power, with a better PR spin on the oppression of any group in which they sense a weakness. A party of Rachel Reeves-alikes that Mandy and Tony would approve of, will shit all over the poor and disabled, because that's who they go for in order to send messages about what good little neolibs they are.

 

[B.I.G]

Higher minimum wage lol. That old sticking plaster.

In any case he's already spoken in favour of a Maximum Wage .. but still nothing about regularising unions again and legally obliging employers and contractors to negotiate with them.

I have to wonder why that is.

The maximum wage stuff was crap. Footballers earning less. Tenders restricted to companies that implement it.

He already earns more than most in the UK. But he wants to cap other's wages. Tax people more for fucks sake.

 

[B.I.G]

Higher minimum wage lol. That old sticking plaster.

In any case he's already spoken in favour of a Maximum Wage .. but still nothing about regularising unions again and legally obliging employers and contractors to negotiate with them.

I have to wonder why that is.

If he pushes unions the tories will just do away with the legislation asap when they get into power.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I mean, FFS, Miliband was still much very much pursuing austerity as a core policy and defending Labour PFI into 2015. Corbyn's challengers in two leadership elections have also been cut from the same 'progress'/'New Labour' mold of the 'centre-right' of Labour which just means more Tory-lite. So, to those who think replacing Corbyn will help, who's this magical fresh faced new left-winger ready to step in? They don't exist in the PLP.

"Austerity with a kinder face" was a thing, wasn't it? Ameliorationist bullshit to gull the liberals.

 

[oryx]

Sadly @oryx, the right/'progress' wing of the PLP are very much in charge. Corbyn/McDonnell being opposition leader/chancellor doesn't change that fact. I would have thought that the way that PLP has consistently undermined Corbyn for two years now, repeatedly forced him to retreat from his more 'socialist' pledges, and generally helped (through the media/press too) to reinforce the sense that he's unfit to be elected, was clearly observable.

I dunno, steth, I dunno. I see the right wing as fucked/on the run. Maybe I am being hopelessly optimistic. There's their utterly pathetic, chaotic and widely derided leadership coup last year and there's Owen Smith pretending to be more left wing than he is. If there was another leadership contest tomorrow my guess is that Corbyn would win it with a reduced majority, unless someone left, fresh and new like Lewis or Long Bailey stood.

The right of the party are also worried about deselection.

Labour are a sandwich at the moment, with the PLP being the meat between a more left leadership and membership!

I think the Labour right have had to tone it down recently because they do not have a feasible alternative for whom the membership would vote.

 

[mojo pixy]

If he pushes unions the tories will just do away with the legislation asap when they get into power.

So the main thing that the Working Class can actually do to improve their (our) situation, they (we) will never be able to actually do. That seems to be what you're saying here.

*edited for inclusivity

 

[B.I.G]

So the main thing that the Working Class can actually do to improve their situation, they will never be able to actually do. That seems to be what you're saying here.

Not while its politically acceptable to put them down. If Theresa May outlawed unions would she stil win the next election. Probably.

 

[ViolentPanda]

jesus suffering fuck, all the time I've put in on campaigns against the cuts and you think I'm willing to write people off to them? This is the last post I'm going to try to explain it, that is really insulting thing to say to me.

So what you are saying is that if I say change can come quickly, I'm like the trots in the 70s, delusional. But if I say change is going to take time I'm a callous evil bastard who wants the tories to fuck people over? I'm fucked either way in your eyes which aside from the insult means there's no point in discussing this with you, not least because you constantly miss or avoid responding to my main point.

Those who rely on public services very much care about whether policies are neo-liberal or social democratic because the former means fucked public services and the latter means supported public services. Whether someone knows what those terms mean is neither here nor there, you know what they mean so we can use them in this discussion. If you want, then every single post of mine I can insert 3-5 paragraphs instead of 2 words but that'd be a bit shit for conversation wouldn't it?

So once more before I answer the other things you've said.
If you want to campaign for a labour party whatever the policies, and those policies are neo-liberal and not social democratic, when that labour party actively pursures austerity (as it would under milliband and anyone else further right of corbyn), then you cement the need for cuts not just in the minds of the public but also for the politicians. This pushes social democratic policies towards the radical, unthinkable end of the overton window, it means you make it harder to get those policies. You need to show how seeking to elect a government that will fuck us a little bit less gets us towards a point where we are not being fucked. Because I can't see how that happens which means that what you are proposing stops social democracy from happening. I'm not looking for any definition from the far left, what I'm talking about is pretty much what that wikipedia article says, except for the bit about peaceful transition to socialism which can be but imo isn't necessarily part of social democratic position, and I definitely categorise the third way as a neo-liberal position. It's not a far left position by any means, except of course that it gets painted like that by those on the right because that makes it appear to be radical, unthinkable. Every time you talk about it like that you cement that even more than a tory doing it would, and push social democracy further away.
Working outside the labour party on campaigns which seek to get social democratic policies implemented, on actions or policies that emphasise collective rather than individual action, because social democracy is a collective response to capitalism, and actions which build working class networks and solidarity because social democratic policies benefit the working class most and (in the short term anyway) is not to the benefit of capital, so to get those settlements from the political arena you need significant pressure from the working class to achieve it.
What I'm saying, I'm saying because I think that's the quickest way to get to social democracy. I think that what you are proposing will take longer, but I don't insult you and say that you want to do that because you're an arsehole who doesn't care about all the people being fucked by the cuts do I.

Perception is so important, I can't believe you dismiss it like that - if people perceive a party / leader as unelectable, are they going to vote for them? probably not, why would you. If people think a party has policies that are radical, unthinkable, unworkable they are less likely to vote for them. That's all perception. If people perceived Corbyn as a great leader, his policies as sensible and workable, they'd be more likely to vote for him. Having people who are ostensibly on his side saying he's not electable is massively damaging, and it's all about people's perceptions.

You've misunderstood what I said about corbyn being electable - I think that if after he was voted in by the labour party membership in 2015 (or was it 16 by the time that was done?), if the whole of the plp and rest of the membership, and the left-liberal media had got behind him, he could now be electable in 2020. I don't think he can win now, any chance there was has been totally fucked by everyone who supports the labour party undermining him at every turn. 2025 is irrelevant, he won't be around after 2020 unless he does win, and if he wins in 2020 I think you'll be assessing his chances of winning in 2025 rather differently.

You know what your problem is, Tom?

It's that you're worse than fucking Kristallnacht, you bastard!!!

 

[mojo pixy]

Not while its politically acceptable to put them down. If Theresa May outlawed unions would she stil win the next election. Probably.

So, if that's what you think, what do you think Labour should do to win the next election? Specifically.

 

[B.I.G]

So, if that's what you think, what do you think Labour should do to win the next election? Specifically.

Are you asking me? Make a list of the 10 most important things to the electorate and propose what they want to do make them better. The bigger the better.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But my argument is that Labour governments fund essential services far better than tory governments do. Even Blair and Brown’s did.

The election of a Labour government is the one thing which can save essential services and that’s clearly not going to happen while Corbyn remains leader.

Now did Blair and Brown fund those services? At least partially through PFI. In other words, they didn't fund it, the Hospital Trusts and Education Authorities did, and do, through extortionate deals that were designed to stick around long after Blair and Brown had been put out to grass.

"Far better"? Don't take the fucking piss.

 

[mojo pixy]

Make a list of the 10 most important things to the electorate and propose what they want to do make them better.

So, populism is the answer...
How very 2017

 

[B.I.G]

So, populism is the answer...
How very 2017

I think appealing to the electorate is how elections are won in any era.

Populism as I define it would mean bringing back hanging. Banning the foreigns. And turfing anyone without a job onto the street.

Dont think the Labour party and Corbyn should try that.

The last thing I heard the labour party propose was gender neutral budgets. A great vote winner I am sure.

 

[oryx]

Not while its politically acceptable to put them down. If Theresa May outlawed unions would she stil win the next election. Probably.

I think the tide may be turning in terms of labour relations. Look at the recent Uber/Deliveroo/Sports Direct cases.

I would like to think, perhaps optimistically, that any proposal to ban unions (pretty unlikely but not unthinkable) would result in a general strike.

 

[B.I.G]

I think the tide may be turning in terms of labour relations. Look at the recent Uber/Deliveroo/Sports Direct cases.

I would like to think, perhaps optimistically, that any proposal to ban unions (pretty unlikely but not unthinkable) would result in a general strike.

A general strike which would (wrongly) turn people against them. Any labour party should surely be proposing stronger legislation not just expecting unions to fight all the time for better conditions.

The presence of the 'gig' economy is another open goal. Left wing policies from Corbyn on them. Nothing of note.

 

[mojo pixy]

So despite posting that Labour should

Make a list of the 10 most important things to the electorate and propose what they want to do make them better.

You believe that

Populism as I define it would mean bringing back hanging. Banning the foreigns. And turfing anyone without a job onto the street.

I'd like to see you explain how both of these can be things you truly believe.

 

[B.I.G]

So despite posting that Labour should


You believe that


I'd like to see you explain how both of these can be things you truly believe.

Labour needs to appeal to the people that match their own values. If their values are really so narrow that they can't ever win an election ever again then so be it, but at the moment they are barely appealing to anyone.

 

[mojo pixy]

Labour needs to appeal to the people that match their own values. If their values are really so narrow that they can't ever win an election ever again then so be it, but at the moment they are barely appealing to anyone.

What values do you mean? The people that match their own values - who are these people? What values do you mean? I'm getting a contradiction here - that
1. Labour should have values, but
2. Should appeal to the values of 'the people'

This is like
1. Having a cake, but
2. Eating it.

You need to check your incoherence.

 

[B.I.G]

What values do you mean? The people that match their own values - who are these people? What values do you mean? I'm getting a contradiction here - that
1. Labour should have values, but
2. should appeal to he values of 'the people'

This is like
1. Having a cake, but
2. Eating it.

You need to check your incoherence.

Err no. Corbyn has values. The electorate has values. He needs to find the policies that he agrees with that will appeal to the electorate. And then campaign to win the election on those policies.