Labour and antisemitism

[Conchis]

I haven't had much time for Tom Watson in the past, but he's proving a calm voice in a storm - and a sharper cookie than I'd expected:

On Emily Thornberry's 'rather die than join a new party':

Watson: Dying is a virtue that is over-rated.

Andrew Marr (pressing him on JC's leadership): If I were leader of the Labour party I would blah blah blah …

Watson: That's why you're not leader of the Labour party.

But too centrist for half the Labour party, no doubt.

I lost a lot of respect for him when he tweeted that he'd just cancelled his Sky subscription - this was long after he'd been making waves for his pursuit of the Murdoch family and its nefarious interests.

Evidently, he loved his football club so much that he'd deal with Mephistopheles rather than deny himself the privilege of watching them.

[MrGongGong]

Many people (including me) don't regard Brexit as the only meaningful political issue in the UK today. That doesn't mean they're "ignoring" anything.

Also, it isn't over yet. I'm sure we are in for quite a few more twists and turns and surprises between now and the end of March, and it won't be over then either.

It's not the ONLY issue
But how on earth the UK is able to afford to have a better NHS and all the rest WITHOUT being part of it escapes me.
I think people ARE ignoring the elephant. I've had the "what we need is a GE" conversation many times in the last couple of years. What's the point of that when on the main issue of the day there is NO choice ?

[Conchis]

I don't think the TIGgers have what it takes to make a difference.

But if Labour was led by practically anyone other than Corbyn, the three Tory MPs would have crossed the floor directly to join the Labour Party.

And there would have been no Labour defections.

Would that have made a difference?

[LMcD]

I'm sure I'm not the only person who is genuinely convinced that Jeremy Corbyn isn't that interested in becoming our Prime Minister, and will be happy to be remembered as the man who (at least in his own mind and that of his close colleagues) preserved the soul of the Labour party.

[french frank]

I think … (therefore, erm, I may be wrong)

that on the broad left are the ideologues/revolutionaries - those who make ideology (socialism) the chief driver of policy: they look at how things are and want to make them conform with their ideology. There are centrists/pragmatists who look at how things are and try to incorporate the ideology into the reality as far as is possible (considered part of the opposition in being trimmers, compromisers &c). But in the end it's about which of them will succeed on their own terms: revolutionaries or pragmatists. The long game or the short game.

If the Tories had a general ideology, May would be an ideologue.

[MrGongGong]

I'm sure I'm not the only person who is genuinely convinced that Jeremy Corbyn isn't that interested in becoming our Prime Minister, and will be happy to be remembered as the man who (at least in his own mind and that of his close colleagues) preserved the soul of the Labour party.

I think he is more likely to be remembered as the man who facilitated a disaster.
Sat on his hands and stubbornly refused to listen to those who are more informed than he is.

[Conchis]

....and yet. His election as leader of the Labour Party was entirely explicable. His rival candidates just didn't inspire the troops - whatever the virtues of Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall (remember her?), they were all either tainted by association with the Blair-Brown years, or with the failed Miliband Project. Although he'd been around for decades, Corbyn felt like a breath of fresh (socialist) air.

Had the script not been tampered with, he would have languished in the polls for the last four years and would now be getting ready his defeat (by George Osborne) in next years's General Election.....

[Serial_Apologist]

The following article by Jonathan Cook* would appear to throw a good deal of light on the background to this discussion, and was supported by the vox pop conducted for R4's lunchtime news today in Streatham, where only one interviewee thought either the 8 ex-Labour MPs or any party they might be thinking of forming stood a chance of re-election at the next General Election, eliciting astonishment from the on location reporter, (but not from me ):

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/anti-semitism-cover-much-deeper-divide-britains-labour-party?fbclid=IwAR1GMW_8mz0jGa0ewPuAE9SUdokO5tNTz6MY-JTiJdlFewNARNd0T1_cikQ

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Cook

[french frank]

only one interviewee thought either the 8 ex-Labour MPs or any party they might be thinking of forming stood a chance of re-election at the next General Election, eliciting astonishment from the on location reporter

I would have thought that at this stage most commentators thought their chances were small, but who knows how it will play out?

....and yet. His election as leader of the Labour Party was entirely explicable. His rival candidates just didn't inspire the troops - whatever the virtues of Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall (remember her?)

Owen Smith in 2016, but I would agree that to certain sections of the Labour Party he would have looked like Same old, Same old. Nevertheless, 'twas he who predicted a possible Labour split. There were also the rows on anti-semitism involving Naz Shah, and Ken Livingstone.

As an apparently dubious response to Smith: ("On July 27 I asked @jeremycorbyn 3 times if he was prepared to see our party split & worse, wanted it to. He offered no answer") JC replied ' "he had "absolutely not" told Mr Smith that he would prefer to see the party split than stand aside.

"I've no idea why Owen should say such a thing," he said.'

On the face of it, it doesn't look as if he did say it.

[Dave2002]

On the face of it, it doesn't look as if he didn't say it.

I can't quite disentangle the negatives here.

However, re Corbyn he's good at denying things he didn't say!

If I were in Parliament, which I'm not, I'd probably be ordered to retract a relevant statement.

[french frank]

I can't quite disentangle the negatives here.

I thought I'd missed out the not when not was not needed. So I added one.

[Lat-Literal]

Luciana Berger and Heidi Allen did themselves no favours today on the Andrew Marr Show. They were totally unable to say where they stood on nationalisation, tuition fees and other matters. One Conservative commentator described them as lightweight although they were both, quote "nice girls". Nice-ish yes but - and maybe this is my age - I just can't come to terms with the sheer lack of gravitas now across the political spectrum. There is a toe-curling photograph of when the so-called Independent Group took their seats in Parliament. It is of its members taking a selfie. Berger is at the centre of this activity in which they and the MPs around them - one 20 something SNP MPs is waving like a loon and another MP, possibly SNP, is posing self-mockingly and downright peculiarly as pre-adolescents do - resemble something rather younger than my friends at junior school on a visit to the Tower of London.

Louise Ellman who Corbyn has called "the member for Tel Aviv" is rumoured to be the next to leave. I feel that she is altogether more substantial. But given that there is a huge slice of immaturity too in the intimidation that has been meted out to Jewish and other MPs - of itself it can make the Labour leader appear to be the one elderly sage although one of his wives said that he would never read a book - isn't it about time that the law dealt with some of the issues arising rather than for it merely to be the trigger for a set of political responses? In many ways, the absence of that sort of escalation just encourages all the half-baked manoeuvring and, yes, fragmentation when none of the splinters is anything to write home about.

[Frances_iom]

It's intriguing that the supposed stumbling block the Irish border is a result of England's own attempt to set up an Israel in Northern Ireland by ethnically cleansing the leaders, installing military outposts and treating any remaining locals of the wrong religion as 2nd class (or worse) citizens (Israel has much to learn from the actions of the Unionists) - it took almost 400 years before some solution was found.

[french frank]

Luciana Berger and Heidi Allen did themselves no favours today on the Andrew Marr Show. They were totally unable to say where they stood on nationalisation, tuition fees and other matters. One Conservative commentator described them as lightweight although they were both, quote "nice girls".

How patronising. Quite unlike a Conservative politician. There may, or may not, be a new party founded. I fully understand them not wishing to prejudge what the policies of that party - if there is one - will be or should be. Nor would they wish to be hostages to fortune by being leapt on by a hostile press with: "You said on the Andrew Marr Show in February 2019 ………… now you're supporting the exact opposite."

The new grouping is ad hoc. The defectors have done so 1) as a protest to their parties' policies towards the EU and/or 2) perceived, alleged anti-semitism in the Labour party.

It's wholly unreasonable to expect them to deliver their thoughts on nationalisation, tuition fees, the cost of a First Clas stamp, free milk for schoolchildren &c &c &c.

[Serial_Apologist]

&c &c &c.

But we know that they're all for Remain, don't we. Don't we? Ticktickticktickticktick......................