Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Keir Starmer's time is up

Wilf said:
You seem to forget that starmer himself gave this story a hefty shove towards the rabbit hole by sacking RLB. Curiouser and Curiouser...
Click to expand...

Yes politicians should only do one thing per week so that nothing ever overshadows anything else. :rolleyes:
 
Replaced RLB with the chair of Owen Smith's 2016 campaign to challenge Corbyn's leadership; "unity".
 
Kate Green was chair of Child Poverty Action Group during the late Blair/Brown era, when many campaigner felt it had been co-opted, very little opposition to the welfare reforms, etc.

Others think she did an OK job later as shadow Disabilities Minister.
 
Wilf said:
But its the morass, the almost neurological network of Cts and antisemitism that is the problem. It sits there as a failed issue for the left, 'a thing', a ball of shite that you either plot your way round with good instincts and good thinking or you find yourself caught up in. Trouble is, if anyone is going to 'solve this' nowadays it will be the likes of Starmer, the Mail and the worst of the worse. In a sense they already have. The left could have done so much more to call out AS and develop it's own solution back in the time of the STWC but didn't (and way before that). Remember all the threads on here.
Click to expand...

There is something of tragedy in this mess
 
I find it pretty depressing watching the Labour left all scrabbling to circle the wagons, impress on everyone that even Peake's apology was unwarranted, and RLB's sacking is the worst thing in the world. This was not the ground on which to confront the Labour right, it just makes them look tribalistic - and to me it looks like they don't actually care about confronting the Labour right on the key economic issues. They seem to care more about being absolutely and totally right about their right to be careless about how they talk about Israel. What a clusterfuck.
 
Brainaddict said:
I find it pretty depressing watching the Labour left all scrabbling to circle the wagons, impress on everyone that even Peake's apology was unwarranted, and RLB's sacking is the worst thing in the world. This was not the ground on which to confront the Labour right, it just makes them look tribalistic - and to me it looks like they don't actually care about confronting the Labour right on the key economic issues. They seem to care more about being absolutely and totally right about their right to be careless about how they talk about Israel. What a clusterfuck.
Click to expand...
Yeh well since your Saudi is the worst country in the world etc I'm less than confident in your analyses. As here - mp right about vile techniques being taught by the ze to Americans, wrong (perhaps) on the specific. What she said, what rlb said, frankly fair comment. Your tosh about confronting the labour right is really poor. The crux of the issue is you can be fired under starmer for as while not actually saying anything anti-semitic. This sets a poor precedent for debate in the LP and will undoubtedly be used as a precedent by ks in the future. I'm not myself a labour supporter and I find this notion the labour left will ever successfully confront the labour right on any issue under starmer frankly laughable. It's as tho the last election had never happened.
 
treelover said:
Kate Green was chair of Child Poverty Action Group during the late Blair/Brown era, when many campaigner felt it had been co-opted, very little opposition to the welfare reforms, etc.

Others think she did an OK job later as shadow Disabilities Minister.
Click to expand...
But what do you think?
 
Kate Green may, or may not, be competent but judging by the reaction from those excited by the news it's a proper return to the 'Sensible Adult (TM)' politics of middle class managers making forensic choices for the rest of us. Bit like that phase of Corona where deers started walking the streets and whatnot - nature's coming back.
 
Pickman's model said:
i am very surprised by your identification of saudi arabia when if i was to point a finger at a country that has had the most damaging effect on the world etc i think i'd point towards westminster. being as britain has been complicit in the things which have really fucked the world in recent years, things like selling weapons to saudi arabia (let's after all blame the seller), things like supporting the united states in its lunatic military adventures and lining up alongside very few countries in the invasion of iraq which created waves the final effects of which we have not yet seen, things like supporting countries like the ze in international institutions like the un. and this is before the uk cheerleading for and participating in the toppling of gadaffi and creation of a situation which looks today like it's going to be a bloody big war potentially involving countries from across the middle east.

it's never a great surprise to me that people don't pay that much attention, never see this country, as a very fucking big problem for the world. every government we've had in my lifetime has always wanted to punch above its weight. has always wanted to retain the ability to fight over the other side of the world. i think this country has been involved in more wars since 1945 than any other. and its always been very willing to sell not only weaponry but equipment whose only purpose is torture to repressive regimes.

things are always sexier when you see them from afar. but perhaps you ought to look at matters rather closer to home.
Click to expand...

For all their outward respectability, they are actually quite shameless. If there's a few quid to be made, the greedy bastards will look for the chance. I don't want to pretend like I've got the final word on the matter, but I think you're right to single them out.
 
YouSir said:
Kate Green may, or may not, be competent but judging by the reaction from those excited by the news it's a proper return to the 'Sensible Adult (TM)' politics of middle class managers making forensic choices for the rest of us. Bit like that phase of Corona where deers started walking the streets and whatnot - nature's coming back.
Click to expand...

Yep. Made a very big point to celebrate armed forces day today as well. It's clear what the approach is going to be. "Smart and sensible politics." He makes my skin crawl to be honest.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
Really? It's simple as that - anyone can organise it just by wanting to?

As to what the job of the leader of the opposition is, it's surely way beyond parliament. Labour cannot actually do anything in parliament aside from making speeches most people will ignore. Is it not also their job to build movements and alliances for change?

They might even think about causing some trouble even. Showing some passion and commitment. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Sadly, Labour doesn't see it's role as leading anything outside Parliament.

This is especially so in industrial relations. The idea that a Labour leader could challenge union general secretaries by pushing for effective strikes is so far beyond the pale that even Corbyn never hinted at it. At least he didn't pull the usual trick of condemning strikes (which is faint praise at best)

As for causing trouble, that's not the role of a loyal opposition. :(
 
Pickman's model said:
Yeh well since your Saudi is the worst country in the world etc I'm less than confident in your analyses. As here - mp right about vile techniques being taught by the ze to Americans, wrong (perhaps) on the specific. What she said, what rlb said, frankly fair comment. Your tosh about confronting the labour right is really poor. The crux of the issue is you can be fired under starmer for as while not actually saying anything anti-semitic. This sets a poor precedent for debate in the LP and will undoubtedly be used as a precedent by ks in the future. I'm not myself a labour supporter and I find this notion the labour left will ever successfully confront the labour right on any issue under starmer frankly laughable. It's as tho the last election had never happened.
Click to expand...
But in the context of the Labour left having problems with AS, why pick that hill to die on?. Did she think Starmer wouldn’t have the guts to sack her?. That she would kick off a revolt?.
 
sleaterkinney said:
But in the context of the Labour left having problems with AS, why pick that hill to die on?. Did she think Starmer wouldn’t have the guts to sack her?. That she would kick off a revolt?.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you've understood my post

Do you think people like rlb should withdraw a statement which isn't anti-semitic because their party leader demands it on the basis of anti-semitism?
 
sleaterkinney said:
But in the context of the Labour left having problems with AS, why pick that hill to die on?. Did she think Starmer wouldn’t have the guts to sack her?. That she would kick off a revolt?.
Click to expand...

I don’t think she did pick that hill to die on. I think she thoughtlessly (literally) hastily retweeted a piece she saw largely about the faults of capitalism that contained this small piece wrongly directly linking Floyd’s death to Israel.

The AS angle gave Starmer the perfect chance to get rid of a ‘lefty’. I’m sure he was equally annoyed by the politics of the rest of the piece she thought was the work of an ‘absolute diamond’. And I think there’s probably deep irony in there somewhere in that I don’t really believe RLB does want to overthrow capitalism while Starmer hates her for even pretending she does. I think working this into AS as the main drift was just a gift for him. She’s not being sacked for being AS, she’s being sacked for liking ideological views on economics way to the left of Starmer.
 
Pickman's model said:
Right. so maybe now you can explain how that's in any way equivalent to what rlb did. And continue by explaining why you think what rlb did is racist. Don't turn all brave sir robin again like you did on the Dominic Cummings thread
Click to expand...

Your question was whether people like rlb should withdraw a statement which isn't anti-semitic because their party leader demands it on the basis of anti-semitism. My point is that if the party says you should apologise/withdraw something because it's racist, you probably should. Protestations of "I'm not racist actually, it wasn't meant that way, I didn't read all of the article, 95% wasn't racist" etc will only make things worse.

As to whether it was actually anti-semitic or not, I think we've gone around in circles enough on that point already.
 
platinumsage said:
Your question was whether people like rlb should withdraw a statement which isn't anti-semitic because their party leader demands it on the basis of anti-semitism. My point is that if the party says you should apologise/withdraw something because it's racist, you probably should. Protestations of "I'm not racist actually, it wasn't meant that way, I didn't read all of the article, 95% wasn't racist" etc will only make things worse.
Click to expand...
I'll take that as a no then.
 
sleaterkinney said:
Yeah, do you want her to say “I support her apart from the bit of AS”.
Click to expand...
Why not. I am totally fucking sick of this idea of some sort of ideological purity where the tiniest deviation from a(vague and mutable) party line is seen as proof of being a total wrong'un. This sort of absolutist crap has disabled any attempt at mutual support and solidarity across an entire spectrum of leftish theory and practice. Calling out, accusations arising from a single thoughtless jab on social media is truly working for a rightwing which doesn't give the tiniest fuck about minority support, racism, and so on. It's so effective because there is and never has been any clarity or even fixed positions in any social, economic, political, cultural or historical grouping because we are dynamic, evolving, alive. The whole idea of a contested terrain should be an accommodation with difference and not a fucking popquiz where a single statement is proof of someone's fitness, (or lack of) in perpetuity, for any position within a wider group. Sick to death of 'gotchas' because I will happily participate in a class struggle but not when scrutinised by purity gatekeepers. for the tiniest wrong move.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Kemi Badenoch’s time is up!
2 3 4 5
Replies
133
Views
4K
stavros
S
krtek a houby
King William’s time is up
Replies
7
Views
580
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Kid_Eternity
David Lammy’s time is up
Replies
10
Views
559
Karl Masks
K
Larry O'Hara
Chancellor Rachel Reeves: Her Time Is Up!
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
292
Views
11K
A380
A380
JimW
Jon Benjamin's time is up
Replies
6
Views
596
Chz
Chz
Back
Top Bottom