Labour leadership race - Corbyn elected leader

pap · 27 August 2015 12:26

Originally posted by @Furball

Why should it matter to you which one of the candidates wins?

Interesting question. It’s probably because for the last 80 years, the Labour Party has been one of two parties capable of forming a majority government. Therefore one of those candidates could be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, which is a country I live in.

You’re not a member of the Labour Party

Registered supporter, ta.

and you voted against it just three months ago in the General Election.

Did I bollocks. Stephen Twigg got my vote.

Shortly before that, you were a delegate at the Left Unity annual conference.

Which is not incompatible with the aims of the Labour movement.

I take it therefore that you don’t have a vote in this leadership election.

I do, I’ve voted and posted details of my vote here.

Furball · 27 August 2015 12:29

Originally posted by @pap

Originally posted by @Furball

Shortly before that, you were a delegate at the Left Unity annual conference.

Which is not incompatible with the aims of the Labour movement.

I take it therefore that you don’t have a vote in this leadership election.

I do, I’ve voted and posted details of my vote here.

It is most certainly incompatible with the Labour Party. Members of Left Unity should not be voting in this leadership election. Period.

KRG · 27 August 2015 12:29

Originally posted by @Furball

Originally posted by @KRG

Originally posted by @Furball

I don’t understand your point. The often-repeated slogan of the Corbynites (and I have no idea whether you are or are not one of these) is that he’s putting stuff out there for disucssion. It’s been discussed. The overwhelming opinion, although not unanimous, is it’s a really terrible idea. What’s the problem with that?

Beneath this rather characteristic thin-skinnedness among Corbynites in general is the suspicion that they actually only really want acclaim for words handed down from Himself.

If you disagree with anything he says, you get one of three - and sometimes all - responses:

He’s only putting stuff up for discussion so why are you opposing this? (That is, don’t disagree.)

You know if you oppose Him you’ll only drive up His support. (That is, to say you oppose Him it is merely adding another vote for Him.)

You’re just joining a media campaign to destroy Him!! (That is, any published argument against His non-policies is just part of an establishment conspiracy.)

I’m sure I’m not the only one to think this, but there’s a lot in Corbyn’s platform that I could sign up to, but I would never vote for him in this leadership election, precisely because his supporters are so sanctimoniously smug.

He leads a narrow rainbow coalition of disaffected middle-class voters who adore his consequence-free, never-tested grandstanding. He has no connection with disaffected voters in general. The losers in all of this will be all of us - His accession will cement the Tories in power for another generation.

** You don’t understand my point, or you just want another chance to have a pop at ‘Corbynites’, again? **

See above, points 1 & 2.

Right, at a stretch you could say 1 was applicable to my post. 2 never.

Though, neither, unless you really are trying to twist things for a row. Which is a game I’m not playing, thanks.

pap · 27 August 2015 12:31

Originally posted by @Furball

It is most certainly incompatible with the Labour Party. Members of Left Unity should not be voting in this leadership election. Period.

Yes, that’s an expansive case that’s well argued*.

*Stick to telling people they’re “spot on” when they happen to agree with you. You can’t get that wrong.

Furball · 27 August 2015 12:33

So you’re going to contact the Labour Party to tell them your vote shouldn’t count?

pap · 27 August 2015 12:41

Am I fuck. Going by Harman’s statement, I have every right to vote in that election. Going by my last vote, I have every right to vote in that election. Going by my voting over time, I have every right to vote in that election. I have also belonged to the Labour Party, which doesn’t really reconcile itself with being fundamentally at odds with its aims.

One of the aims of LU is to seek consensus with other leftist parties. If Corbyn wins, Labour is a leftist party again. Again, no incompatibility.

Labour have made an utter fucking balls up with their purge. They’ve gone back on Harman’s word, and the only time you ever hear about entryism is when one of the other candidates takes a look at their dismal polling to date.

So no, I won’t be emailing the Labour Party to tell them to discount my vote. There is no need to, although they should have a long hard look at some of theirs, particularly Iraq and the Welfare Bill.

Furball · 27 August 2015 12:44

But as a delegate of Left Unity you’re an entryist. And entryists - Tories and Trots alike - are being denied a vote. Correct?

pap · 27 August 2015 12:46

High profile people have been purged. They haven’t denied me my vote. I guess all that long term history counts for something.

Furball · 27 August 2015 12:51

Not only high profile people. All entryists that they can find.

But my point is this. Corbyn himself has defied the Labour whip in an astonishing 25% of all votes in the Commons since he entered Parliament in more than thirty years ago. If nothing else, it’s a measure of how broad a church the Labour party actually is.

So why is it necessary for you to split off from Labour and join Left Unity. Moaning about the ‘wreckers’ - nice Maoist language, by the way - in the Labour party rather than fighting for what you believe in within the party is surely not a better tactic. Splitters like LU and TUSC just make the Labour ‘movement’ look ridiculous.

KRG · 27 August 2015 13:01

So, didn’t you do a whole bit earlier about how you can’t understand why anyone see’s Corbyn as principled, yet now you are telling us that in a quarter of all votes in over 30 years, he has gone against his party. Surely, that, instead of playing the game and climbing the ‘greasy pole’ is a demonstration of the man’s principles?

Or at least, to many I’m sure it would be seen as such.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

pap · 27 August 2015 13:06

Originally posted by @Furball

Not only high profile people. All entryists that they can find.

It’s a ridiculous state of affairs which directly contradicts Harman’s statement in May,

The requirement then was being on the electoral register.

But my point is this. Corbyn himself has defied the Labour whip in an astonishing 25% of all votes in the Commons since he entered Parliament in more than thirty years ago. If nothing else, it’s a measure of how broad a church the Labour party actually is.

Hardly a surprise when the governments have been supporting apartheid, dismantling the industry in the North, entering illegal wars, removing habeas corpeas, creating enabling acts, etc.

So why is it necessary for you to split off from Labour and join Left Unity. Moaning about the ‘wreckers’ - nice Maoist language, by the way - in the Labour party rather than fighting for what you believe in within the party is surely a better tactic. Splitters like LU and TUSC just make the Labour ‘movement’ look ridiculous.

People break off for all kinds of legitimate reasons. The Iraq War saw people leave in droves, Labour’s attitude towards trade unions undoubtedly alienated more. Those people still deserve to have political conversations and define their own politics, should they fundamentally disagree with those of the leadership.

Why would anyone campaign for a party that was so clearly suicidal at the last election? The one thing I agree with all the candidates with is that Labour wasn’t listening. Didn’t listen over the EU, didn’t listen over the cuts. Ed Miliband wouldn’t even march with NHS activists as they were protesting the cuts to public services.

Labour listened to the wrong people, and when they tried, they got it spectacularly fucking wrong.

What right do the people that produced this have to define whether anyone else is Labour or not?

Furball · 27 August 2015 13:08

Originally posted by @KRG

So, didn’t you do a whole bit earlier about how you can’t understand why anyone see’s Corbyn as principled, yet now you are telling us that in a quarter of all votes in over 30 years, he has gone against his party. Surely, that, instead of playing the game and climbing the ‘greasy pole’ is a demonstration of the man’s principles?

Or at least, to many I’m sure it would be seen as such.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

Go and find the post and quote it, KRG. I think you’ll find I made no such argument.

My point was that one of the ways in which Corbynites have proved insufferably smug is by arguing that Corbyn alone has ‘principles’ and no one with opinions to the right of him have can be similarly principled. It’s an absurd and stupid argument.

KRG · 27 August 2015 13:15

Hmmm, this Corbynite boogey/straw man you are building up seems to dig you out of lots.

It’s reminiscent of a Gamergate-r, “But, the SJW!!!”.

It’s pretty meaningless.

Furball · 27 August 2015 13:17

Ah, the strawman strawman.

As I said, go and find the supposedly offending post. Then you can criticise me for something I actually have said as opposed to something I haven’t.

KRG · 27 August 2015 13:36

Ah, now “no you”.

Continually labelling a group of ‘Corbynites’ then acting as is they are a unified, hive-minded group that all act the same, and then attribute things to that group (or as above, someone not part of that group - and actually weren’t doing) is really not coming off as all that convincing.

Furball · 27 August 2015 15:25

So where’s the quote from me, KRG?

And your second para suggests to me that you have either completely misunderstood what I’ve been saying or haven’t been following the arguments online and elsewhere (you said you never read below-article comments, so I suspect the latter).

Again: It is a trope of Corbynites to say that they are supporting Corbyn because he is principled and the other candidates are not.

If you think this is not true, google “Corbyn” and “principled” and you’ll be awash with Corbynites saying exactly what I’ve just said they’re saying.

If you want me to go the whole hog and provide dozens of links where this argument is made, I’ll do that too. But at least make a little effort.

KRG · 27 August 2015 15:36

Oh christ, so we are building bogeymen to rail against based on comment sections? Wow.

Nah, I have no intention whatsoever to go trawling through them. Wasn’t it you that posted an article recently that demonstrated just how trashy they were?

Furball · 27 August 2015 15:44

There you go again.

Is it too much to ask that you actually quote me when you want to claim I’ve said something?

It just seems bad manners.

pap · 27 August 2015 15:59

Originally posted by @Furball

It just seems bad manners.

As is telling people how they voted, or not fessing up when getting stuff wrong. I’m starting to wonder if this outbreak of uncordial comments is contagious

No-one’s interested in the Spanish Inquisition, Furbs. At least, not in this present, figurative context.

Furball · 27 August 2015 16:05

Oh, I’ll happily concede that you more than likely voted for Twigg. That doesn’t alter the fact that you’re an entryist whose vote should, by the rules, be excluded from the Labour leadership election.

You’re a member of Left Unity, and we’ve talked at length before about that conference you attended (including the rather eye-popping motion from a very senior LU member to define ISIS as a ‘progressive force’).

Other Left Unity and TUSC members, as well as scores of Tories and Greens, are having their votes nulled. Quite right too.