Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[Pickman's model]

I do.

ah - the nec are his team, i see.

 

[kebabking]

... with Hamas/Hazbollah and the IRA...is he genuoinely trying to effect peace in the region to one degree or another...After all we got the Good Friday agreement talking to the IRA...

you don't, i assume, believe that the Oslo Agreement, or the ETA ceasefire, or the GFA came about through random conversations?

they all came about through complex, long-running and inter-connected conversations, sometimes face to face, sometimes through third, fourth and even fifth hand intermediaries - so when the SDLP spoke to SF (for example) about where they thought the armed struggle was going and what might entice them into purely non-violent politics, the SDLP were also talking to the Irish Government, the UK Government, Unionism (who were talking to Loyalists about the same things, as were others), and everyone was feeding the results of their consersations back to the other parties. this allows the 'choriographing' were some relatively minor thing is said/done that allows the other side to reciprocate, which in turn allows a slightly larger confidence building measure to take place, which is then reciprocated and so on until you get to a point where sit-down negotiations can happen, because both sides know roughly what the other side needs, and what its prepared to offer in return.

Corbyn and his bedfellows, the Livingstones etc.. played no part in this hugely interconnected dialogue, at no stage did Corbyn et al have a discreet conversation with intermediaries who were talking to Loyalism, or the UK government, or the Irish Government about what SF were saying to him. he was just talking to them, appearing on joint platforms etc.. and denouncing the UK government.

Corbyn and his fellow travellers also played no role in the 1985/86 decision of SF/IRA to move to the joint political-military campaign - there were people outside republicanism who were involved, peripherally, but lefties from the UK in bad clothes weren't any of them.

interestingly, none of the preople involved in the conversations and choriography that occured prior to either of the PIRA ceasefires, and many of them were involved for at least a decade prior to those ceasefires - and there were lots: politicos from Nationalism, Unionism, the UK government, Irish Governmnt, Loyalism, the US, religious figures from both Catholicism and Prodestantism, people from civil society in NI - thinks that Corbyn and his ilk played any role, however informal and fleeting, in the dialogue. the charitible view is that they were PIRA/SF's useful idiots, the less charitible view - and not just from the UK/Loyalist/Unionist side, is that they were cheerleaders/fellow travellers.

all of the above applies equally to Corbyns' claims to be a peacemaker in the ME - its remarkable, isn't it, that in the flurry of mutual congratulation that followed the Oslo Treaty, not one of the sides thought to mention the low-key contribution of one J Corbyn Esq...?

 

[cantsin]

you don't, i assume, believe that the Oslo Agreement, or the ETA ceasefire, or the GFA came about through random conversations?

they all came about through complex, long-running and inter-connected conversations, sometimes face to face, sometimes through third, fourth and even fifth hand intermediaries - so when the SDLP spoke to SF (for example) about where they thought the armed struggle was going and what might entice them into purely non-violent politics, the SDLP were also talking to the Irish Government, the UK Government, Unionism (who were talking to Loyalists about the same things, as were others), and everyone was feeding the results of their consersations back to the other parties. this allows the 'choriographing' were some relatively minor thing is said/done that allows the other side to reciprocate, which in turn allows a slightly larger confidence building measure to take place, which is then reciprocated and so on until you get to a point where sit-down negotiations can happen, because both sides know roughly what the other side needs, and what its prepared to offer in return.

Corbyn and his bedfellows, the Livingstones etc.. played no part in this hugely interconnected dialogue, at no stage did Corbyn et al have a discreet conversation with intermediaries who were talking to Loyalism, or the UK government, or the Irish Government about what SF were saying to him. he was just talking to them, appearing on joint platforms etc.. and denouncing the UK government.

Corbyn and his fellow travellers also played no role in the 1985/86 decision of SF/IRA to move to the joint political-military campaign - there were people outside republicanism who were involved, peripherally, but lefties from the UK in bad clothes weren't any of them.

interestingly, none of the preople involved in the conversations and choriography that occured prior to either of the PIRA ceasefires, and many of them were involved for at least a decade prior to those ceasefires - and there were lots: politicos from Nationalism, Unionism, the UK government, Irish Governmnt, Loyalism, the US, religious figures from both Catholicism and Prodestantism, people from civil society in NI - thinks that Corbyn and his ilk played any role, however informal and fleeting, in the dialogue. the charitible view is that they were PIRA/SF's useful idiots, the less charitible view - and not just from the UK/Loyalist/Unionist side, is that they were cheerleaders/fellow travellers.

all of the above applies equally to Corbyns' claims to be a peacemaker in the ME - its remarkable, isn't it, that in the flurry of mutual congratulation that followed the Oslo Treaty, not one of the sides thought to mention the low-key contribution of one J Corbyn Esq...?

what a load of old cobblers, no doubt from someone who was referring to SF as terrorists right up to the GFA ( maybe for long after ) - as for ( individual back bench, oppositionist / activist MP ) Corbo not getting a mention post Oslo Treaty - were you sober when you posted this ?

 

[Pickman's model]

while corbyn may not have been acting as go-between between the 'ra and the thatcher, major or indeed blair governments, he was very much involved in organising meetings where sinn fein representatives spoke to labour party mps (not just corbyn) at westminster.

 

[Idris2002]

while corbyn may not have been acting as go-between between the 'ra and the thatcher, major or indeed blair governments, he was very much involved in organising meetings where sinn fein representatives spoke to labour party mps (not just corbyn) at westminster.

And outreach to the wider world by SF was a key part of the process. Look at it this way: suppose SF/Westminster talks had failed. In that case Adams and company could point to their other external links (including JC), and claim their political strategy wasn't wholly dead.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Was going to comment something similar - SF used JC to keep comms open and try to get across the idea that this was not sone nihilistic campaign for the lolz. Not sure what good it did with the british public obviously.

Which brings up the bigger question as to is corbyn considered a useful idiot for those with an agenda to promote?

He is certainly not a wily fox of a politician

 

[Pickman's model]

And outreach to the wider world by SF was a key part of the process. Look at it this way: suppose SF/Westminster talks had failed. In that case Adams and company could point to their other external links (including JC), and claim their political strategy wasn't wholly dead.

it's strange the tory party's 1992 260 page document listing the claimed misdemeanours of the labour left didn't manage to find space for corbyn's racism.

 

[belboid]

Clean sweep for the JC9, tho Izzard ran Willsman close - Full #JC9 slate elected to Labour's NEC | LabourList

 

[greenfield]

Good.

 

[Toast Rider]

you don't, i assume, believe that the Oslo Agreement, or the ETA ceasefire, or the GFA came about through random conversations?

they all came about through complex, long-running and inter-connected conversations, sometimes face to face, sometimes through third, fourth and even fifth hand intermediaries - so when the SDLP spoke to SF (for example) about where they thought the armed struggle was going and what might entice them into purely non-violent politics, the SDLP were also talking to the Irish Government, the UK Government, Unionism (who were talking to Loyalists about the same things, as were others), and everyone was feeding the results of their consersations back to the other parties. this allows the 'choriographing' were some relatively minor thing is said/done that allows the other side to reciprocate, which in turn allows a slightly larger confidence building measure to take place, which is then reciprocated and so on until you get to a point where sit-down negotiations can happen, because both sides know roughly what the other side needs, and what its prepared to offer in return.

Corbyn and his bedfellows, the Livingstones etc.. played no part in this hugely interconnected dialogue, at no stage did Corbyn et al have a discreet conversation with intermediaries who were talking to Loyalism, or the UK government, or the Irish Government about what SF were saying to him. he was just talking to them, appearing on joint platforms etc.. and denouncing the UK government.

Corbyn and his fellow travellers also played no role in the 1985/86 decision of SF/IRA to move to the joint political-military campaign - there were people outside republicanism who were involved, peripherally, but lefties from the UK in bad clothes weren't any of them.

interestingly, none of the preople involved in the conversations and choriography that occured prior to either of the PIRA ceasefires, and many of them were involved for at least a decade prior to those ceasefires - and there were lots: politicos from Nationalism, Unionism, the UK government, Irish Governmnt, Loyalism, the US, religious figures from both Catholicism and Prodestantism, people from civil society in NI - thinks that Corbyn and his ilk played any role, however informal and fleeting, in the dialogue. the charitible view is that they were PIRA/SF's useful idiots, the less charitible view - and not just from the UK/Loyalist/Unionist side, is that they were cheerleaders/fellow travellers.

all of the above applies equally to Corbyns' claims to be a peacemaker in the ME - its remarkable, isn't it, that in the flurry of mutual congratulation that followed the Oslo Treaty, not one of the sides thought to mention the low-key contribution of one J Corbyn Esq...?

ok, so what do you think Corbyn was trying to do then? Surely he, at least, thought he was helping, no?

 

[Toast Rider]

Momentum are asking people to challenge the cranks. People already do but they're often attacked for it and this should help.

They've also been very critical of people like Willsman and Shawcroft. It will help if Willsman has lost his seat on the NEC. Results tomorrow.

I think you're right that there is nothing Corbyn can do to stop it. He's there because Miliband couldn't stand up to it. His job is to take the heat while the Labour left consolidate power. It's not going to stop. Jeremy Gilbert wrote a really good analysis for Open Democracy about why antisemitism is the weapon of choice and how to deal with it politically.

"The role of critical intellectuals is not to denounce anti-capitalism because it structurally resembles antisemitism. It is to differentiate the one from the other and to help others to make the same differentiation. Our task is to unmask the fact that the fundamental purpose of antisemitism is always to cover up the truth of power relations, driving wedges between Jewish and non-Jewish communities who should be united in the assertion of their common collective interests.

In the end what this comes down to is a rather banal and predictable observation: but one that radicals will need to keep making no doubt for many years to come. It is that the best cure for antisemitism is not just re-education or disciplinary hearings. It is the positive raising of class consciousness. The more people are enabled to understand the extent to which disparities of wealth and power are what really shape political and social outcomes in the world, the more they are enabled to realise the extent to which they share material interests with millions of others around the world - irrespective of ethnicity or religion - the less susceptible they will be to antisemitism, conspiracy theory, or racism of any kind. This is the response that centrist liberalism cannot make, which is why its response to antisemitism can never be adequate to its task."​

It's good that Momentum are trying to challenge this. But if Corbyn is as bad as people here say, then sooner or later they will find themselves against him surely. Or is he likely to change, perhaps it's a bit agist but I suspect he's too long in the tooth for that.

He has popular support, quite a lot. Mainly because of his broader politics. In truth I suspect that the antisemitism aspect counts for very little for many supporters. Rightly or wrongly.

To that end it concerns me that getting rid of him, which may be justifiable, leaves Labour weakened. We have to get rid of the Tories, there's no other choice. Too many people are suffering right now.

 

[Toast Rider]

You need to widen out from Corbyn's individual gaffes and blunders. There is a wider milieu that he and his team have been very poor at addressing. And responses from his supporters suggesting that there is no problem to address, that it's all smear with no substance, only exacerbate the perception that Labour is at best tone deaf on the issue.

A few months ago, Richard Seymour wrote a good piece in Jacobin. It's been somewhat overtaken by events: there has since been a summer's worth of clusterfuck from the Corbyn leadership combined with the anti-semitic mire bubbling to the surface. But a number of Seymour's observations still stand.

"Unfortunately, the way in which allegations of antisemitism have been used for party-political purposes, has tended to obscure the need to address it."

"However, this can’t be used to avoid a real problem."

I'm glad to see from xarmian's link above that "Momentum, as well as individuals with large followings, have in recent weeks mobilised the Left to combat anti-Jewish tropes and propaganda on the internet." For too long these tropes and anti-semitic social media accounts have been tolerated and shared. I've seen it myself - otherwise sensible people retweeting anti-semites uncritically, presumably not realising what they're doing. One of the reasons I abandoned twitter is that it's festooned with this filth, and many people just don't seem to be able to distinguish. So any push to challenge that is to be welcomed. But Labour needs to be louder and more sure-footed on this.

An example I've returned to several times is Jim Sheridan. Yes, he's suspended. But surely the "investigation" into his Facebook post doesn't take more than three weeks.

In the Labour Party Rulebook, Chapter 2, it states:

"8. No member of the Party shall engage in conduct which in the opinion of the NEC is prejudicial, or in any act which in the opinion of the NEC is grossly detrimental to the Party. The NEC shall take account of any codes of conduct currently in force and shall regard any incident which in their view might reasonably be seen to demonstrate hostility or prejudice based on age; disability; gender reassignment or identity; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; or sexual orientation as conduct prejudicial to the Party: these shall include but not be limited to incidents involving racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia or otherwise racist language, sentiments, stereotypes or actions, sexual harassment, bullying or any form of intimidation towards another person on the basis of a protected characteristic as determined by the NEC, wherever it occurs, as conduct prejudicial to the Party."​

He should already be out. His feet should not have touched the floor in the process.

Thanks.

That article doesn't tell me what Jim Sheridan, about whom I know nothing, actually said.

My reason for posting was to find out just what Corbyn has done; how many people that he ought not be talking to he has met. It's been made out to be a lot. All I want is the evidence. Unfortunately this thread is almost 800 pages long!

 

[Pickman's model]

It's good that Momentum are trying to challenge this. But if Corbyn is as bad as people here say, then sooner or later they will find themselves against him surely. Or is he likely to change, perhaps it's a bit agist but I suspect he's too long in the tooth for that.

He has popular support, quite a lot. Mainly because of his broader politics. In truth I suspect that the antisemitism aspect counts for very little for many supporters. Rightly or wrongly.

To that end it concerns me that getting rid of him, which may be justifiable, leaves Labour weakened. We have to get rid of the Tories, there's no other choice. Too many people are suffering right now.

Yeh let's see a different quality of suffering from a Labour government

 

[danny la rouge]

That article doesn't tell me what Jim Sheridan, about whom I know nothing, actually said.

It does. It quotes exactly what he says.

I've also quoted it. As have others.

He was a Paisley MP for 15 years, and is currently a Cllr on Renfrewshire Council.

 

[danny la rouge]

To that end it concerns me that getting rid of him, which may be justifiable, leaves Labour weakened

I don't think anyone's predicting he'll be ousted. Nor, probably, will his poll ratings be affected.

 

[redsquirrel]

Pushing Oslo as a success is nonsense. In a large part is led (as it was designed to do) into the current situation.

EDIT: That's not to excuse Corbyn, his naive anti-imperialism is both nasty and stupid but Oslo is at least as vicious and stupid.

 

[Quote]

Adventures in Centrism:

The Waplington Files: a non-exhaustive list of centrist conspiracy theories

 

[Toast Rider]

It does. It quotes exactly what he says.

I've also quoted it. As have others.

He was a Paisley MP for 15 years, and is currently a Cllr on Renfrewshire Council.

No, it doesn't. It simply says the comments have been taken down.

Could you link me to them?

I'm not defending him, I'm just interested in finding out what he actually said. I've never heard of the guy before.

 

[danny la rouge]

No, it doesn't. It simply says the comments have been taken down.

Could you link me to them?

I'm not defending him, I'm just interested in finding out what he actually said. I've never heard of the guy before.

The comments are quoted in the Daily Record link.

The 65-year-old, who represents the Houston, Crosslee, and Linwood ward, is now under investigation over the Facebook rant posted on Friday.

He wrote: "For all my adult life I have had the utmost respect and empathy for the Jewish community and their historic suffering.

“No longer due to what they and their Blairite plotters are doing to my party and the long-suffering people of Britain who need a radical Labour government."

The post has since been taken down.

 

[killer b]

the quote is

"For all my adult life I have had the utmost respect and empathy for the Jewish community and their historic suffering.

“No longer due to what they and their Blairite plotters are doing to my party and the long-suffering people of Britain who need a radical Labour government."

 

[Toast Rider]

The comments are quoted in the Daily Record link.

You mean this?

He wrote: "For all my adult life I have had the utmost respect and empathy for the Jewish community and their historic suffering.

“No longer due to what they and their Blairite plotters are doing to my party and the long-suffering people of Britain who need a radical Labour government."

 

[killer b]

Jesus christ though. This cunt. A total liability. The sooner he's drummed out the better.

 

[danny la rouge]

You mean this?

Yes. The quote about no longer having empathy for the Jewish community and their historic suffering due to what they and their Blairite plotters are doing to his party and the long suffering people of Britain.

 

[andysays]

Labour: Activist in anti-Semitism row elected to ruling body

A Labour Party official who suggested Jewish "Trump fanatics" were behind accusations of anti-Semitism in Labour ranks has been re-elected to the party's ruling body. Peter Willsman was criticised when a recording of his remarks emerged in July, and the pro-Corbyn Momentum group withdrew its backing for him.

 

[two sheds]

I think quite a few people voted for him before the story broke.

 

[danny la rouge]

I think quite a few people voted for him before the story broke.

When did voting open?

 

[Gramsci]

Read this today.

As Palestinian Arab MPs in Israel, we salute Corbyn as a champion of peace and justice | Letter

The view of Palestines in Israel on the Labour party / Corbyn anti semitism issue.

Incredibly, instead of taking that government (Netanyahu government) to task for its unadulterated racism, the British political class ignores the Palestinian historical plight, and attacks and abuses the British and European leader ( Corbyn) who vocally supports the Palestinian cause of peace and equality. With the Netanyahu government ramping up the racism, our struggle for survival is more precarious than ever.

Corbyn has for years supported Palestinians. I'm glad representatives of Palestinians in the State of Israel have written this letter.

 

[killer b]

Stephen Bush's piece (presumably written well in advance and the numbers stuck in this afternoon) is good. I think he's got it about right.

Pro-Corbyn candidates sweep the board in elections to Labour’s ruling NEC

 

[two sheds]

When did voting open?

Not sure but as I recall I got the Momentum e-mail giving their preferred candidates and so I voted and the story about him broke the day after.

 

[killer b]

When did voting open?

Four days before the Willsman story broke. As Bush says, most people either vote as soon as they get the email - so before he was dropped from the slate - or just before the deadline. Izzard came within a couple of points of taking 9th place, so it did have a significant impact IMO - last year they were way off.