Labour leadership race - Corbyn elected leader

Reasonably serious discussion
481

Originally posted by @Furball

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 score of Tories and Greens, are having their votes nulled. Quite right too.

Which speaks precisely to KRG’s comment about you seeing members of a particular group as some kind of uniform hive mind. It isn’t, as was more than apparent if you actually watched the LU party conference. What universal characteristics apply equally to all Left Unity members that would make them incompatible with the aims of the Labour movement?

It’s a bloody ineffective way of trying to make a point, and only really works if others subscribe to your hive mind theory, which falls down the minute anyone has experience with mammals, let alone the complex diversity that exists in humans.

You’ve been saying that LU members (and other entryists) shouldn’t be able to vote in Labour’s elections with zero justification. Why?

482

Them’s the rules pap. You’re the one who’s broken them.

As for ‘hives’, don’t be ridiculous. The Corbynite position is awash with the ‘he’s principled, the others aren’t’ arguments.

Also, I personally would run a mile from an organisation that made pro-ISIS statements. What about you?

483

Originally posted by @Furball

Them’s the rules pap. You’re the one who’s broken them.

Feel free to grass me up. From the constant comments about my eligibility, it seems like that’s what you’re after.

As for ‘hives’, don’t be ridiculous. The Corbynite position is awash with the ‘he’s principled, the others aren’t’ arguments.

Well answer the reasonable questions posed to you, instead of your usual deflection. I asked why being a member of LU is incompatible with supporting the aims of the Labour movement, which you seem to think it is.

If that’s your position, then it follows that LU members must share some universal trait which makes them fundamentally incompatible. You cannot deduce someone’s politics from their party affiliation, as this thread should show.

Why are you confident that all LU members should not be able to vote? Rules? They’re making them up as they’re going along, if the repeated Harman quote is owt to go by.

484

On one level, I don’t have to answer the question about why LU is incompatible with Labour party membership - to repeat, the rules exclude your voting as an LU member yet you have done so. By that definition it’s fraudulent.

The philosphical argument is obvious: LU split from the Labour party because of its members-to-be’s scathing antipathy towards it. Instead of fighting from the inside - at least Corbyn himself did that - you and the rest of LU marched out in a fit of pomp and hiss. So why should you come back into the party just to vote?

485

Originally posted by @Furball

On one level, I don’t have to answer the question about why LU is incompatible with Labour party membership - to repeat, the rules exclude your voting as an LU member yet you have done so. By that definition it’s fraudulent.

Yeah, well my old CLP know who I am - the secretary was good enough to give me a three decade history of my house, so it’s not like I have tried pulling the wool over their eyes. They have a process for weeding out entryists, and they didn’t weed out me.

Who do I believe? You, who says I can’t vote, or West Derby CLP, who cleared me to do so, and let me vote :cool:

The philosphical argument is obvious: LU split from the Labour party because of its members-to-be’s scathing antipathy towards it.

Toward the leadership, it’s slavish devotion to neo-liberalism and the turn-everyone-into-a-debtor agenda. That’s fair enough.

Instead of fighting from the inside - at least Corbyn himself did that

Corbyn would have never had a chance of winning the leadership without this new voting format. He’s been plugging away for 32 years and mostly his reward has been being right on the issues he has campaigned on.

Let’s remember that he almost wasn’t in the contest at all, and that some of those who lent their nominations publicly recanted afterwards.

This is a party that for decades, has been parachuting its preferred children into the safest seats, that has let lobbying interests like LFI spend ten million on _candidate selection. _ A party that went to war for money and influence with arguably the most right wing government that it has ever had.

I think traditonal Labour supporters had every right to look at the decisions of the leadership and not see them as agents for positive change.

Also, you’re confusing voters with politicians. We can switch allegiance much easier than an MP can. We don’t have the responsibilities, nor are we as invested.

  • you and the rest of LU marched out in a fit of pomp and hiss. So why should you come back into the party just to vote?

"Anyone - providing that they are on the electoral register - can become a registered supporter, pay £3 and have a vote to decide our next leader"

Would you like to see the receipt?

486

When you signed up and paid your £3 you were asked to abide by the following:

“I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.”

Left Unity, of which you’re a member, is opposed to the Labour party - is by its founders’ own definition in opposition to it.

Here’s Ken Loach:

“The Greens are alone among the political parties in not standing up for the interests of big business.”

He wants LU to be a “UKIP of the left”, “a successful party to the left of Labour as UKIP appears to be a successful party to the right of the Tories”.

As you see, by that definition you should not have agreed to the “aims and values” statement because you’re a member of an organisation opposed to Labour.

487

Loach made those statements at a time when he couldn’t support the Labour Party. Now he can, and he did indeed try to get himself on the ballot. Keep plugging away. I suspect its only you that cares. Assuming that the vetting team is doing their job with any degree of competence, I’m clear. I’ve sent umpteen tweets to @UKLabour alone.

There is also the grassing option, though. You could tell them I’m a member of LU. Let’s see how it goes. You’re clearly irked by my voting, so take action!

488

You’ve made the ‘grassing’ accusation before. Firstly, do try to give up the gangster guff - it’s ridiculous. Secondly, I couldn’t give a flying whether your vote counts or not. What I do say is it’s clearly fraudulent to vote knowing you’re a member of an orgnanisation opposed to the Labour Party. It’s on your conscience as an entryist.

As for Ken Loach, whom I admire as a filmmaker, I don’t know, and I’m not interested in knowing, whether he thinks Labour are now acceptable in his eyes. (I take it they didn’t accept his membership dues) I do know he launched the LU manifesto in March this year - a manifesto which lined up Labour with the Tories as the enemies of the people.

489

It’s not an accusation, it’s a suggestion, one that’ll hopefully break the monotony of this increasingly pointless exchange. My eligibility has been assessed, accepted and is of no interest to anyone else, unless we spice it up some way. Grassing offers such an avenue. Take it if you care that much; just don’t bore the arse off everyone looking for a wider debate by focusing on my personal eligibility. Shit or get off the pot.

490

You’ve voted fraudulently. End of story.

491

Oh behave. You’re taking this all a bit too seriously fella.

4 Likes
492

This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.

493

omg sounds like frbl is really on to something here!

494

what is LU?

495

We are at page 25 of what appears to be Furball V Pap thread. Seemingly both like the last word on things. I have a friend who is a UKIP voter. We just agree to disagree on that. Maybe draw a line under this now?

2 Likes
496

i think ur getting close frbl i would keep going

497

more personal attacks tho pls those are my favourite bits!

1 Like
498

Originally posted by @Intiniki

We are at page 25 of what appears to be Furball V Pap thread. Seemingly both like the last word on things. I have a friend who is a UKIP voter. We just agree to disagree on that. Maybe draw a line under this now?

Definitely on the eligibility thing. It was a dead horse from the start, which is why I wanted to bring it to a decisive end.

We’ve not been helped by the fact that there hasn’t been a great deal of news on the Labour leadership election today. But yep, we’ve differing, irreconcilable opinions on the eligibility question. Furball is more than welcome to his view. Wordy regurgitation won’t reinforce that any, nor can I state my case any plainer without repeating myself.

Shame, because I thought yesterday’s debate on the women only carriages was a good one.

499

There are more indications from hustings that the Labour Party could be a very different animal under Corbyn. In many senses, it has to be. He can only rely on the support of 20 MPs, despite the expected mandate he will receive from the party. It will be interesting to see whether he can wrest unity from the wider party when the Parliamentary Party is going to be up against him.

500

Tony Blair is on the case again. Says Corbyn’s politics are Alice in Wonderland, probably because if Corbyn wins, it’ll be Tony in Prisonland.