Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Labour leadership

Given that there are a lot more workers than bosses, it stands to reason that a party for the workers should always win in a general election. If Labour truly were a party for the workers, well could they be, perhaps with someone like Corbyn?

He doesn't have enough support from the Labour benches, even if he wins the leadership the rest of the parliamentary party would sooner sabotage the party completely than let Corbyn stand as leader in a general election. Any kind of popular victory for the left would invalidate the entire blairite project and the blairites know this all too well.

Still, at least this leadership election is giving the blairites plenty of rope with which to hang themselves. Openly threatening to defy the results of a democratic election, encouraging everyone to gang up on Corbyn and other such school playground tactics.
 
He doesn't have enough support from the Labour benches, even if he wins the leadership the rest of the parliamentary party would sooner sabotage the party completely than let Corbyn stand as leader in a general election. Any kind of popular victory for the left would invalidate the entire blairite project and the blairites know this all too well.
...
You are saying that even if Corbyn wins the leadership election he won't be permitted to serve as leader?
 
Meaning presumably that there would have to be another leadership election?

Yes. Although it's not clear why the public should be expected to bother voting in a second leadership election if the results of the first one were cast aside so readily.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...emy-corbyn-labour-hustings-lbc_n_7851474.html
Labour leadership candidates were asked in this LBC debate if they'd taken drugs, Liz Kendall claims she last had a toke at uni but not since. Judging by her squirming body language she's not a skilled liar. Which is not a good trait for a prime minister. Corbyn however has never taken drugs, which is more than you can say for anyone who thinks he'll be PM one day.
 
Yes. Although it's not clear why the public should be expected to bother voting in a second leadership election if the results of the first one were cast aside so readily.
I think it is silly. If Corbyn is elected, that is that, he has been elected and they should live with it!
 
So Cooper and Kendall will refuse a place in the Shadow Cabinet if Corbyn wins the leadership!
So what was all the abstaining about the other day?
I understood all those who abstained did so to show how united the party was, guess that was pants too!
''I'll do this for the party, I'll do that for the party, as long Corbyn isn't in charge!''

How will Unite feel now, back Corbyn and get no support from the rest of the parliamentary labour party?
 
So Cooper and Kendall will refuse a place in the Shadow Cabinet if Corbyn wins the leadership!
So what was all the abstaining about the other day?
I understood all those who abstained did so to show how united the party was, guess that was pants too!
''I'll do this for the party, I'll do that for the party, as long Corbyn isn't in charge!''

How will Unite feel now, back Corbyn and get no support from the rest of the parliamentary labour party?

Corbyn was meant to be a joke candidate and proof positive that Labour was safe...safe for capital. He has shown himself to be resonant rather than risible; agreed with not laughed at. But the imperative for Labour to show itself as an absolutely trustworthy (i.e. capital friendly) potential party of government remains. So social democrat Corbyn cannot be allowed success, let alone allowed to succeed. This is why Blair traduces social democracy and demands that any 'socialist heart' left in the Labour party is ripped out. This is why Cooper and Kendall publicly state they won't serve in a Corbyn cabinet. This is why a humiliated Beckett admits to being a 'moron'. They are all shouting 'it's ok...we get it...we'll behave and we'll make sure the party does to'.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
Just occasionally the right can produce something quite amusing...

CKk-xGtWEAAD9L4_zpsilzez0vz.jpg
 
Corbyn was meant to be a joke candidate and proof positive that Labour was safe...safe for capital. He has shown himself to be resonant rather than risible; agreed with not laughed at. But the imperative for Labour to show itself as an absolutely trustworthy (i.e. capital friendly) potential party of government remains. So social democrat Corbyn cannot be allowed success, let alone allowed to succeed. This is why Blair traduces social democracy and demands that any 'socialist heart' left in the Labour party is ripped out. This is why Cooper and Kendall publicly state they won't serve in a Corbyn cabinet. This is why a humiliated Beckett admits to being a 'moron'. They are all shouting 'it's ok...we get it...we'll behave and we'll make sure the party does to'.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
Spot-on.
I believe the phrase is 'market compliant'.
 
Back
Top Bottom