Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[Mr Moose]

Sounds like you want him to stand down not me. Why. For the want of something better would I? Am I lying when I say I don't?

I never think you are less than forthright and interesting and generally any exchange with you is to my benefit. But fuck me you can be obtuse.

I’ve always been ambivalent to Corbyn, think he is flawed and the Labour Party can do better. Whatever the limited gains Labour would give I still would like it to succeed. So yes I’d prefer if he went.

I’m not sure why, given your damning assessment of his racism, you don’t.

 

[butchersapron]

I never think you are less than forthright and interesting and generally any exchange with you is to my benefit. But fuck me you can be obtuse.

I’ve always been ambivalent to Corbyn, think he is flawed and the Labour Party can do better. Whatever the limited gains Labour would give I still would like it to succeed. So yes I’d prefer if he went.

I’m not sure why, given your damning assessment of his racism, you don’t.

I don't think he's racist. And in strict electoral terms, if he is, this sort of racism is irrelevant. I think he's the spearhead of a lot of unexamined thinking that needs to be brought to light and that can be changed by doing so. The wider milieu - well, I have no such hope, having been butting heads with them for near three decades.

 

[crossthebreeze]

Why is it necessary to get rid of him as well? Why is he key to this mindset? Surely anyone similarly left wing is going to have comparable views: pro palestine, etc. As long as that's the case they will always be targeted - regardless what they say.

I just don't believe Corbyn is the catalyst. I haven't seen him say or do anything that I feel comfortable calling racist. I could well be wrong, certainly. But it seems to me that much of this is about the kind of people conspiracy theory genmerally takes root in, which is to say people at the bottom of society; socially isolated and marginalised. These are the people I see that buy into, for example, the White Helmets conspiracies or the 'jews did xyz' theories. People who want easier answers than exist who want someone to blame. Not necessarily violent hatemongers, but just ignorant - dangerously so. Yes they need challenging and if Corbyn is consciously contributing to this then yes, my god, that's a problem.

But this incident - its not about him being "pro-Palestine" - he's actually said something racist, in front of a anti-semitic/various other bigotry/conspiriloony audience. He's mired in this sewer of "anti-imperialism" "my enemy of my enemy is my friend", glossing over quite horrendous views.

 

[danny la rouge]

Why is it necessary to get rid of him as well? Why is he key to this mindset?

I didn't say he's the key to the mindset, and I don't think he is. But I don't think he can lead the Labour left out of the mire. He's up to his neck in it.

I don't think he got into this mess by being racist. I think he got into this mess because he doesn't know how else to do politics. Like butchers said, if these people are so pro Palestinian, how did they get it so wrong on Syria? Their impulse isn't to be pro Palestinian, pro solidarity, pro justice. Their understanding of how geopolitics is done is to look for the blocs and see who is against Assad or whoever. Oh, so those are his enemies, that makes him my friend. I know he's done bad stuff but I have to keep quiet, or convince myself he hasn't, for the greater good. Because to undermine my enemy's enemy is to support my enemy.

That's also how Corbyn got himself into this mess on antisemitism. And neither he nor the statist left know how to get out because they don't know how else to do politics.

Corbyn could reject this way of doing things. He could make decisive and clear statements that he's done with this stuff. But just look at him. He's not able. It keeps happening.

OK, the Labour right and others are using this against him. But why are they able to? Because he doesn't know what to do.

So the Labour left want to keep the former New Labour crowd from getting back in? How do they do that? Stick with this accident prone idiot? Or ditch him?

The thing is, the whole statist left is in the same mess as him, so who is there to replace him?

 

[Mr Moose]

I don't think he's racist. And in strict electoral terms, if he is, this sort of racism is irrelevant. I think he's the spearhead of a lot of unexamined thinking that needs to be brought to light and that can be changed by doing so. The wider milieu - well, I have no such hope, having been butting heads with them for near three decades.

It’s a comfort blanket that it’s electorally irrelevant. It is until it reaches critical mass and then it’s everything.

It’s not an easy position this, that he is saying racist things to very racist people, but he’s not a racist. It’s true they can be dealt with easily enough when brought into the light, except at every airing someone else in Labour makes a fool of themselves about it. It is damaging and he continues to be at the epicentre of it.

 

[butchersapron]

It’s a comfort blanket that it’s electorally irrelevant. It is until it reaches critical mass and then it’s everything.

It’s not an easy position this, that he is saying racist things to very racist people, but he’s not a racist. It’s true they can be dealt with easily enough when brought into the light, except at every airing someone else in Labour makes a fool of themselves about it. It is damaging and he continues to be at the epicentre of it.

It has made no electoral impact - over the entirety of his leadership - including a general election.

Of course it's not an easy position, but it's one that i think people on the left have to take. Any other position is just party consumerism.

 

[butchersapron]

Go back to the lib-dems and greens you folding bike twats.

 

[sihhi]

It KEEPS happening.

It's not him, so what is this longstanding culture he keeps accidentally doing this in?

It's a culture of a large part of Palestine solidarity in the UK they are locked in a nationalist battle about who can influence the master USA (and its appendage UK). There's no belief in any concept of world revolution of working-class producers, or a working class people acting across cultural boundaries. It's an endless smokescreen lobbying competition with Israel and its lobbyists doing better than Palestinians. The material interests of the USA (and the material interests of the UK in parterning the USA) get increasingly sidelined and the lobbyists for Israel assume pride of place as the chief actors in the whole thing.
In this environment, conspiracists like Stephen Sizer can make hay. With enough of them, their attitude rubs off on others, and anything riling up Israel lobbyists, damaging their morale, becomes OK hence such pointless "jokes".

take the second and third words out and his right imo. I'm sympathetic to his economic stuff but surely Labour can have that without the baggage of 80s ant imperialism and more of a focus on the working class?

80s anti imperialism has been dropped at the toss of a hat, being as Corbyn is a. committed to remaining in NATO b. keeping nuclear weapons.

 

[Toast Rider]

I didn't say he's the key to the mindset, and I don't think he is. But I don't think he can lead the Labour left out of the mire. He's up to his neck in it.

I don't think he got into this mess by being racist. I think he got into this mess because he doesn't know how else to do politics. Like butchers said, if these people are so pro Palestinian, how did they get it so wrong on Syria? Their impulse isn't to be pro Palestinian, pro solidarity, pro justice. Their understanding of how geopolitics is done is to look for the blocs and see who is against Assad or whoever. Oh, so those are his enemies, that makes him my friend. I know he's done bad stuff but I have to keep quiet, or convince myself he hasn't, for the greater good. Because to undermine my enemy's enemy is to support my enemy.

That's also how Corbyn got himself into this mess on antisemitism. And neither he nor the statist left know how to get out because they don't know how else to do politics.

Corbyn could reject this way of doing things. He could make decisive and clear statements that he's done with this stuff. But just look at him. He's not able. It keeps happening.

OK, the Labour right and others are using this against him. But why are they able to? Because he doesn't know what to do.

So the Labour left want to keep the former New Labour crowd from getting back in? How do they do that? Stick with this accident prone idiot? Or ditch him?

The thing is, the whole statist left is in the same mess as him, so who is there to replace him?

Who else can lead Labour? Who else, now, would the membership accept? Anyone that's pro palestine is going to be similarly targeted (rightly or wrongly).

I'm sorry I don't know enough about Syria or Corbyn's position on it to understand what you mean when you ask why they got it so wrong on it. Does he buy into the Syrian terrorist conspiracy theories personally? I've only heard that come from others, perhaps he does.

I take your point that he could do something. If he can certainly he should. FWIW (notmuch) I've tweeted Chris Williamson a couple of times in respect of his disastrous public endorsement of Beeley. He hasnt responded, but then I'm just another anonymous tweeter so...perhaps that's the problem.

 

[Toast Rider]

But this incident - its not about him being "pro-Palestine" - he's actually said something racist, in front of a anti-semitic/various other bigotry/conspiriloony audience. He's mired in this sewer of "anti-imperialism" "my enemy of my enemy is my friend", glossing over quite horrendous views.

I haven't followed everything he's said. I'll be honest. I've found the whole thing too depressing for words. Admittedly perhaps that's a bit self absorbed, but I feel that if he goes so do Labour's chances of ousting the Tories and that, imo, cannot happen. I say that simply because the abuse of the poorest/sick that we all know about, probably even more than me, must stop. Self indulgent mini-rant over.

I don't really understand what of the things he's said that I'm aware of that is racist. Not to say it isn't, but that I'm not getting it. I don't think I'm alone in this.

 

[butchersapron]

That there cannot be such a thing as an English Zionist due to something in their nature that doesn't apply to others. Palestinians say. They are an undigestible foreign body.

There's not much to follow. It's there in front of you and you're replying to a debate about it.

 

[The39thStep]

It's a culture of a large part of Palestine solidarity in the UK they are locked in a nationalist battle about who can influence the master USA (and its appendage UK). There's no belief in any concept of world revolution of working-class producers, or a working class people acting across cultural boundaries. It's an endless smokescreen lobbying competition with Israel and its lobbyists doing better than Palestinians. The material interests of the USA (and the material interests of the UK in parterning the USA) get increasingly sidelined and the lobbyists for Israel assume pride of place as the chief actors in the whole thing.
In this environment, conspiracists like Stephen Sizer can make hay. With enough of them, their attitude rubs off on others, and anything riling up Israel lobbyists, damaging their morale, becomes OK hence such pointless "jokes".



80s anti imperialism has been dropped at the toss of a hat, being as Corbyn is a. committed to remaining in NATO b. keeping nuclear weapons.

Cold War stuff.

 

[Toast Rider]

That there cannot be such a thing as an English Zionist due to something in their nature that doesn't apply to others. Palestinians say. They are an undigestible foreign body.

There's not much to follow. It's there in front of you and you're replying to a debate about it.

Sure, and all I'm asking is for something I don't understand to be clarified. Not unreasonable, I think

 

[danny la rouge]

Who else can lead Labour? Who else, now, would the membership accept? Anyone that's pro palestine is going to be similarly targeted (rightly or wrongly).

The first point is for Labour members to decide. The second point, you've missed entirely what I've been saying: that there are ways to be pro Palestinian without giving succour to antisemitism. Corbyn could do that, even now, but won't.

 

[danny la rouge]

That there cannot be such a thing as an English Zionist due to something in their nature that doesn't apply to others. Palestinians say. They are an undigestible foreign body.

There's not much to follow. It's there in front of you and you're replying to a debate about it.

It's all in the video.

"Manuel understands English irony".

 

[butchersapron]

The only way to be pro-palestinian is through hamas, through the syrian regimes PFLP-GC cops and dungeons...this is the mindset

 

[Wilf]

The first point is for Labour members to decide. The second point, you've missed entirely what I've been saying: that there are ways to be pro Palestinian without giving succour to antisemitism. Corbyn could do that, even now, but won't.

In terms of the mindset of the left and day to day politics, that's the absolute core of this. It also feels like a replay of some of the stuff that went on in Respect/stwc a decade or more ago (though actually in a slightly less overt form).

 

[butchersapron]

In terms of the mindset of the left and day to day politics, that's the absolute core of this. It also feels like a replay of some of the stuff that went on in Respect/stwc a decade or more ago (though actually in a slightly less overt form).

Same people shaken through.

 

[Wilf]

Same people shaken through.

… and of course as chair of stwc, Corbyn was well placed to hear the criticisms of the organisation, respect and others at the time over anti-Semitism. Didn't learn anything and still has the same reflexes when it comes to the Palestinian struggle.

 

[Mr Moose]

It has made no electoral impact - over the entirety of his leadership - including a general election.

Of course it's not an easy position, but it's one that i think people on the left have to take. Any other position is just party consumerism.

I agree with your last para, but the first is pure opinion. There was an election that was possibly winnable and level pegging with the Tories right now is not so impressive that it couldn’t be improved.

 

[butchersapron]

Opinion? Labour were expected to be wiped out. That is not opinion. Anything else is rewriting of history That result would not have happened under any of the other available leaders. That's opinion, near fact.

 

[Gramsci]

I haven't followed everything he's said. I'll be honest. I've found the whole thing too depressing for words. Admittedly perhaps that's a bit self absorbed, but I feel that if he goes so do Labour's chances of ousting the Tories and that, imo, cannot happen. I say that simply because the abuse of the poorest/sick that we all know about, probably even more than me, must stop. Self indulgent mini-rant over.

I don't really understand what of the things he's said that I'm aware of that is racist. Not to say it isn't, but that I'm not getting it. I don't think I'm alone in this.

I decided to try and find all he said at the Palestinian Return Centre.

Found this on YouTube.



Its about ten minutes in all. Its theme is importance of history. At beginning he praises contribution of Jews to the British Labour movement in its early years. He distinguishes between Zionism and Jews in general. He speaks about Palestinian history. That for years Palestinian peoples history had been denigrated. That when he was growing up he was taught that Palestine was an empty land that the Zionists developed. This was historically wrong. He refers to Balfour agreement and British Imperialism.Its about two thirds at through he makes reference to speech by Palestinian politician. He is criticising the Zionists who were present when speech was made. He said that the speech was good overview of the Palestinian situation. So looks to me he was critical of Zionists not Jews in general.

 

[bimble]

Gramsci if he’d just said the zionists were wankers who don’t understand history have no sense of humour whatever, that would have been fine.
Why do you think he talked of them as not being properly English despite having lived here for years probably their whole lives.
That’s the bit. Can you see why it’s a problem?

 

[Gramsci]

Gramsci if he’d just said the zionists were wankers who don’t understand history have no sense of humour whatever, that would have been fine.
Why do you think he talked of them as not being properly English despite having lived here for years probably their whole lives.
That’s the bit. Can you see why it’s a problem?

Have you watched the whole speech?

No where in press reports is it mentioned the beginning where he is praising contribution of Jewish people to early Labour movement.

 

[Hollis]

Gramsci if he’d just said the zionists were wankers who don’t understand history have no sense of humour whatever, that would have been fine.
Why do you think he talked of them as not being properly English despite having lived here for years probably their whole lives.
That’s the bit. Can you see why it’s a problem?

The full clip certainly provides some context... as he separately mentions Jewish issues before bringing in Zionism. And then if he is using Zionism as a political term, then the whole 'not properly English' argument falters - or it least is reduced to the level of '.. the Marxists/liberals/Vegans don't undertand English irony..'

 

[butchersapron]

What?

 

[butchersapron]

The full clip certainly provides some context... as he separately mentions Jewish issues before bringing in Zionism. And then if he is using Zionism as a political term, then the whole 'not properly English' argument falters - or it least is reduced to the level of '.. the Marxists/liberals/Vegans don't undertand English irony..'

Can you think of any examples of scene setting praise followed by something unbelievablely crass? You must have seen Alan partridge? Classical rhetoric? Enoch Powell?

 

[danny la rouge]

The Jews: a grand bunch of lads.

 

[Wilf]

The Jews: a grand bunch of lads.

Whole thing has elements of Father Ted and Craggy Island'S Chinese population.

 

[Hollis]

Regardless of what you think about the quality of the rhetoric...though i'd hazard it's fairly typical in its tone for a political rally/meeting; the full clip does change the context of what he said - if you accept/believe he was using 'Zionism' as a political term.