Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
General British politics discussion thread
Options
Comments
-
For reference:
The article Long Bailey shared is this:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/maxine-peake-interview-labour-corbyn-keir-starmer-black-lives-matter-a9583206.html
The amnesty report originally referenced here:
https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/
The amnesty thing was just a tiny aside halfway through the article, with nothing to do with the thrust of the article or why Long Bailey shared it. For something so small to be picked up on so quickly, it seems pretty obvious that the right wing of the Labour party have been trawling through every single piece of content she and other progressives have shared with a fine toothed comb looking for some dirt they can make stick. Much like they did for the duration of Corbyn's tenure.
I thought Starmer was looking to bring the two wings of the party together but that doesn't seem to be happening sadly. And with FPTP the country is screwed as long as Labour is focussed on in fighting.0 -
Looks like the purge of democratic socialists from the Labour party is beginning. Rebecca Long Bailey sacked for antisemitism after sharing an article that had nothing whatsoever to do with Jewish people but happened to quote an Amnesty International report that was critical of Israeli police.
Corbyn should of delt with the antisemitism problem it seems to have, but he didn't.
You now have a Sir as leader of the labour party. The corbynites will slowly be got rid of, Rebecca is the first. Im afraid to say the UK Labour party is instote for another Blairite era.
Corbyn has only himself to blame, he has left the Brits in the hands of the Tories. I dont think this man could ever look at a working class person straight in the face ever again.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19369
Corbyn should of delt with the antisemitism problem it seems to have, but he didn't.
You now have a Sir as leader of the labour party. The corbynites will slowly be got rid of, Rebecca is the first. Im afraid to say the UK Labour party is instote for another Blairite era.
Corbyn has only himself to blame, he has left the Brits in the hands of the Tories. I dont think this man could ever look at a working class person straight in the face ever again.
He got that for his work in the CPS and as DPP.
The Labour Party have had various ultra lefties as leader such as Michael Foot. It has never worked for them. The labour party are a coalition of Left Wing activists and the Unions, who are generally not left wing. Sometimes one gains sway and other times it is the other.0 -
For reference:
The article Long Bailey shared is this:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/maxine-peake-interview-labour-corbyn-keir-starmer-black-lives-matter-a9583206.html
The amnesty report originally referenced here:
https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/Amnesty link wrote:Baltimore law enforcement officials, along with hundreds of others from Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, California, Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Georgia, Washington state as well as the DC Capitol police have all traveled to Israel for training. Thousands of others have received training from Israeli officials here in the U.S.
This would be the report you reference that literally doesn't mention Minnesota? The quote in the article is not new, it was there when she shared it. It attempted to directly link the Floyd killing with Israel for no reason whatsoever. RLB should have read the article before sharing it and should have enough cop on to realise that was an inflammatory quote and something that shouldn't be shared by a shadow cabinet member given Labour's recent history.0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »He got that for his work in the CPS and as DPP.
The Labour Party have had various ultra lefties as leader such as Michael Foot. It has never worked for them. The labour party are a coalition of Left Wing activists and the Unions, who are generally not left wing. Sometimes one gains sway and other times it is the other.
I think it was working out ok for Corbyn, antisemitism was an issue and should of been sorted but that was not his downfall. Between 2017 and the election he was listening to a very privileged middle class elite. If he had stuck to who he was and his beliefs i believe he would now be Prime Minister of the UK.0 -
Advertisement
-
Long-Bailey either showed some "true colours" or showed shockingly poor judgement and self-awareness in re-tweeting the article. Either way, the optics presented were incredibly bad, leaving Starmer with little choice but to act hard and act fast unless he wanted to see Labour re-living Corbyns failures over again. Regardless of whether Long-Bailey deserved to be sacked or not is an academic foot-note at this point, and she was the architect of her own downfall.0
-
I don't understand how the comment in the article is even anti semitic in the first place. If it had claimed that they learned the moves from the United Arab Emirates police would that automatically make it islamophobic?0
-
Corbyn should of delt with the antisemitism problem it seems to have, but he didn't.
You now have a Sir as leader of the labour party. The corbynites will slowly be got rid of, Rebecca is the first. Im afraid to say the UK Labour party is instote for another Blairite era.
Corbyn has only himself to blame, he has left the Brits in the hands of the Tories. I dont think this man could ever look at a working class person straight in the face ever again.
There's more evidence of anti semitism in the tory party yet the media constantly pushed the idea of a problem within the labour party. Ask yourself why they done this?0 -
I think it was working out ok for Corbyn, antisemitism was an issue and should of been sorted but that was not his downfall. Between 2017 and the election he was listening to a very privileged middle class elite. If he had stuck to who he was and his beliefs i believe he would now be Prime Minister of the UK.
Things were working out ok? HE did better than expected, but still lost, in 2017 after an election campaign by the Tories that lurched from one disaster to the next headed by a PM that had zero charisma and many in her own party didn't like. This was in the midst of austerity.
What elite are you talking about and how did they influence Corbyn? What specific parts of the Labour manifesto do you think were designed by this Elite? And since RLB was his 'right hand man' and clearly was the Corbyn candidate for the leadership, doesn't this mean that she was involved in it all?
It was because he stuck to his beliefs that he lost. He was unwilling to consider any compromise. He was right, people that couldn't see that were simply wrong.
He had some ideas that people liked, but he was a terrible leader. He completely failed to hold the Tory party to account. He couldn't decide which side of the Brexit debate he wanted to be on. He failed to deal with the antisemitism and simply tried to brush it aside. He opted for a GE when he could have had a national government but he refused to accept that he shouldn't be the PM. He put his own ego ahead of the needs of the country.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Things were working out ok? HE did better than expected, but still lost, in 2017 after an election campaign by the Tories that lurched from one disaster to the next headed by a PM that had zero charisma and many in her own party didn't like. This was in the midst of austerity.
What elite are you talking about and how did they influence Corbyn? What specific parts of the Labour manifesto do you think were designed by this Elite? And since RLB was his 'right hand man' and clearly was the Corbyn candidate for the leadership, doesn't this mean that she was involved in it all?
It was because he stuck to his beliefs that he lost. He was unwilling to consider any compromise. He was right, people that couldn't see that were simply wrong.
He had some ideas that people liked, but he was a terrible leader. He completely failed to hold the Tory party to account. He couldn't decide which side of the Brexit debate he wanted to be on. He failed to deal with the antisemitism and simply tried to brush it aside. He opted for a GE when he could have had a national government but he refused to accept that he shouldn't be the PM. He put his own ego ahead of the needs of the country.
Yes he did much better than most people thought he would do.
The elite i talk of are the middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite which the labour party had come to represent.
Ive no real issue with with the manifesto or majority of what corbyn wanted. I say his manifesto would of been accepted by the UK.
Antisemitism issues manifesto differences was not his down fall.
This man scared very powerful people this man could of changed things this man gave many including myself hope.
His down fall was not sticking to what he knew was right not doing what he knew in his heart was right, not listening to what the working class told him to do. Not doing what the majority of people told him to do. This was his downfall.0 -
paddythere wrote: »There's more evidence of anti semitism in the tory party yet the media constantly pushed the idea of a problem within the labour party. Ask yourself why they done this?
Yes i say your right i would not disagree about the anti semitism in the tories.
But there does seem to be an issue in the Labour party which he did not sort out and should of.
I dont belive Corbyn belives antisemitism i say he is totally againt it. His issue would be with the country Isreal not jewish people.
But it does seem that there was an issue that he did not deal with.0 -
Yes he did much better than most people thought he would do.
The elite i talk of are the middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite which the labour party had come to represent.
Ive no real issue with with the manifesto or majority of what corbyn wanted. I say his manifesto would of been accepted by the UK.
Antisemitism issues manifesto differences was not his down fall.
This man scared very powerful people this man could of changed things this man gave many including myself hope.
His down fall was not sticking to what he knew was right not doing what he knew in his heart was right, not listening to what the working class told him to do. Not doing what the majority of people told him to do. This was his downfall.
So your definition of the middle class elite is the "middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite "?
Wouldn't they be more inclined to vote Tory? And what did he change his position on due to this interference? You say you largely agreed with the manifesto but it can't be the policies.
Maybe it was he refusal to stand up for working people when the government was gutting services. Or not holding then to account for the shambles of Brexit?
A leader that, according to you, changed everything he believed in is not much of a leader.
He forgot that in politics it is power that matters. Being Right is great, but what is he doing now with all Right? Nothing, allowed the Tories a iron grip on the country.
You may like the man, you may even like his ideas but he will be remembered as one of the worst political leaders of modern times.
Aman so focused on his ideology that he forgot about the very country, and people, his ideology was meant to serve.0 -
So your definition of the middle class elite is the "middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite "?
Wouldn't they be more inclined to vote Tory? And what did he change his position on due to this interference? You say you largely agreed with the manifesto but it can't be the policies.
Maybe it was he refusal to stand up for working people when the government was gutting services. Or not holding then to account for the shambles of Brexit?
A leader that, according to you, changed everything he believed in is not much of a leader.
He forgot that in politics it is power that matters. Being Right is great, but what is he doing now with all Right? Nothing, allowed the Tories a iron grip on the country.
You may like the man, you may even like his ideas but he will be remembered as one of the worst political leaders of modern times.
Aman so focused on his ideology that he forgot about the very country, and people, his ideology was meant to serve.
No that would not be my definition of the middle class as i think you well know.
I said a middle class elite, as in the middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite he surrounded himself with.
IMO he was not a good leader
I never said he changed everything he believed in.
I think you know well what he changed his position on.
I agree that he forgot what power means or didnt realize.
I never said i liked him, I didnt know him so i dont know if i would of liked him. But i did like some most of his views, polices, ideas.
I agree that his ideology about his own country and its people fell short.0 -
I agree that his ideology about his own country and its people fell short.
I this particular quote sums up Corbyn and his problem, blame the voters. This is incredibly condescending insulting and undemocratic to boot. In any fair democracy the politicians have to do what voters want not the other way around as this quote implies. The voters can never fall short it's the job of politicians to listen to people and persuade them they are the right people to lead. If Corbyn wanted to be PM he had to listen to the public or at least the voters in the marginal constituencies that decide UK elections. His ideology might suit people in safe seats or his supporters but won't persuade the middle ground.
The UK for all its faults with its first past the post voting system and politicised media is still a strong democracy. If voters don't like your ideology you either change or admit defeat. The only other option is dictatorship.0 -
No that would not be my definition of the middle class as i think you well know.
I said a middle class elite, as in the middle class university educated metropolitan liberal elite he surrounded himself with.
IMO he was not a good leader
I never said he changed everything he believed in.
I think you know well what he changed his position on.
I agree that he forgot what power means or didnt realize.
I never said i liked him, I didnt know him so i dont know if i would of liked him. But i did like some most of his views, polices, ideas.
I agree that his ideology about his own country and its people fell short.
Most middle class people do tend to have a 3rd lvl education.0 -
I this particular quote sums up Corbyn and his problem, blame the voters. This is incredibly condescending insulting and undemocratic to boot. In any fair democracy the politicians have to do what voters want not the other way around as this quote implies. The voters can never fall short it's the job of politicians to listen to people and persuade them they are the right people to lead. If Corbyn wanted to be PM he had to listen to the public or at least the voters in the marginal constituencies that decide UK elections. His ideology might suit people in safe seats or his supporters but won't persuade the middle ground.
The UK for all its faults with its first past the post voting system and politicised media is still a strong democracy. If voters don't like your ideology you either change or admit defeat. The only other option is dictatorship.
I think i would agree with most if not all of that, except for one thing.
I lived in the UK in the 90s and 2000s and have to say i prefer the first past the post system.0 -
ZeroThreat wrote: »Most middle class people do tend to have a 3rd lvl education.
I couldn't argue or disagree with that.0 -
I this particular quote sums up Corbyn and his problem, blame the voters. This is incredibly condescending insulting and undemocratic to boot. In any fair democracy the politicians have to do what voters want not the other way around as this quote implies. The voters can never fall short it's the job of politicians to listen to people and persuade them they are the right people to lead. If Corbyn wanted to be PM he had to listen to the public or at least the voters in the marginal constituencies that decide UK elections. His ideology might suit people in safe seats or his supporters but won't persuade the middle ground.
The UK for all its faults with its first past the post voting system and politicised media is still a strong democracy. If voters don't like your ideology you either change or admit defeat. The only other option is dictatorship.
By that logic I assume you hold the EU entirely responsible for the referendum result in the same way then.0 -
Apparently there is a long standing anti semitic trope that Jews have been fomenting race wars through history. So if there was a false story that UAE police had taught the technique and also a long history of anti UAE propaganda that they were fomenting race wars, then arguably. (Then only arguably because you would still be conflating Islam with the UAE - when in fact there are multiple forms of Islam and multiple countries which are Islamic - there is only 1 Judaism related State).paddythere wrote: »I don't understand how the comment in the article is even anti semitic in the first place. If it had claimed that they learned the moves from the United Arab Emirates police would that automatically make it islamophobic?
The analogy holds a little better if you use Iran - as it is the primary Shia state.0 -
Advertisement
-
By that logic I assume you hold the EU entirely responsible for the referendum result in the same way then.
If the EU or any organisation cannot convince voters that it is a good thing voters will vote to eliminate it in the long term. The EU though is not answerable to just UK voters but voters of 27 countries. The other thing to remember for all the power the parliament has all the big decisions are still made by the heads government of the member states.The Brexit vote was a UK vote not an EU vote. If UK voters are not happy with how the EU has evolved they are free to leave as has been the case.
As the EU continues to evolve if it doesn't change in a way that satisfies its member states it will cease to exist. To survive it has to change in line with voter requirements. The post I was replying to said the issue was the voters not Corbyn. Saying your boss is stupid and calling them names is never a good idea.0 -
A highly extraordinary day in Westminster that seemed to go fly under the radar here, but in only the way Chris Grayling can, Chris Grayling got beaten in a rigged election.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1283437271300046849?s=19
The Twitter thread explains the ins and outs. But Julian Lewis is now chairman of the Intelligence & Security Committee (ISC) and as a result has been kicked out of the Tory PP.
Another juicy tidbit to emerge from this though:
https://twitter.com/joncraig/status/1283467291578032129?s=19
The ISC are now in a position to publish the Russia Brexit collusion report.0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »A highly extraordinary day in Westminster that seemed to go fly under the radar here, but in only the way Chris Grayling can, Chris Grayling got beaten in a rigged election.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1283437271300046849?s=19
The Twitter thread explains the ins and outs. But Julian Lewis is now chairman of the Intelligence & Security Committee (ISC) and as a result has been kicked out of the Tory PP.
Another juicy tidbit to emerge from this though:
https://twitter.com/joncraig/status/1283467291578032129?s=19
The ISC are now in a position to publish the Russia Brexit collusion report.
Truly extraordinary. What makes it even better is hearing various government sources whingeing about it being convention for them to nominate thr chair. It's also convention for the government not to interfere in the selection of the chair for liaison committee but they didnt care a fig about that when insisting johnson brexiteer pal Bernard Jenkyn got the job, just before pm agrees to appear before it. Rotten to the core.0 -
If the EU or any organisation cannot convince voters that it is a good thing voters will vote to eliminate it in the long term. The EU though is not answerable to just UK voters but voters of 27 countries. The other thing to remember for all the power the parliament has all the big decisions are still made by the heads government of the member states.The Brexit vote was a UK vote not an EU vote. If UK voters are not happy with how the EU has evolved they are free to leave as has been the case.
As the EU continues to evolve if it doesn't change in a way that satisfies its member states it will cease to exist. To survive it has to change in line with voter requirements. The post I was replying to said the issue was the voters not Corbyn. Saying your boss is stupid and calling them names is never a good idea.
This is incorrect.
Whether a country joins, remains a member of, or leaves, any international organisation is a matter for the domestic politics of the country concerned.
It was a failure of British domestic politics that resulted in them leaving, since there was always a lack of reality in their “debates” about it with “the EU” being criticised in one breath for failing to act unilaterally (ie override the wishes of member states) and in the next for over-acting (when it was acting with the unanimous support or QMV support of the member states). They had decades to figure this out but chose not to do so.0 -
This is incorrect.
Whether a country joins, remains a member of, or leaves, any international organisation is a matter for the domestic politics of the country concerned.
It was a failure of British domestic politics that resulted in them leaving, since there was always a lack of reality in their “debates” about it with “the EU” being criticised in one breath for failing to act unilaterally (ie override the wishes of member states) and in the next for over-acting (when it was acting with the unanimous support or QMV support of the member states). They had decades to figure this out but chose not to do so.
While I agree with your point re British politics and the EU on a more general point every organisation changes country, company charity etc. If the EU wants to survive it has to change in a manner that suits its members. The same for the Irish or any nation state(assuming no wars etc). Will every country like every change the EU makes no it won't. You can see that with some of the diverse membership options it has, Euro, non Euro, Efta etc. Same for a company that sells stuff they will make changes overtime which will keep some customers, hopefully attract new ones but will lose existing ones at the same time.
So you are right whether a country stays as part of an organisation is down to domestic politics the changes or more importantly perceived changes within the organisation have an impact. If Scotland breaks away from the UK, it won't be as simple as Scotlands population making a purely domestic decision. The perceived actions of Westminster will have an impact. As you have pointed out it is the perceived changes in the EU from the UKs perspective that have caused some of the issue. So it's not a purely domestic issue even though I'd agree with you that the actions of the EU have been warped by domestic politicians for a combination of ideological and short term electoral gains.0 -
-
Referenda are entirely a domestic issue and it is not for the EU to convince the electorate of a member state which way to vote.
Of course it isn't but are we honestly saying changes and particularly perceived changes in the EU don't impact areferenda on its membership. If the EU wants to continue to exist it has to make sure its citizens understand its value. It's the same for the Irish state it has to convince people it's a good thing. The biggest challenge for the EU is the lense which it's viewed through in the domestic politics of each member state. Look at the various Irish referenda and the various scare stories propagated about the EU and which many people believed. The major parts were addressed by the EU and local politicians before revised referenda.
I'm not blaming the EU for the UK leaving that's down to UK politics. But at the same time the EU does need to get better at communicating with its citizens about the good stuff it does. Even though this is very challenging because a lot of stuff the EU sorts out you only see when it's gone. Hence one of the reasons Brexit had been very good because it shown the complexity of the relatively boring stuff it does and how it impacts people day to day.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19369
I'm not blaming the EU for the UK leaving that's down to UK politics. But at the same time the EU does need to get better at communicating with its citizens about the good stuff it does. Even though this is very challenging because a lot of stuff the EU sorts out you only see when it's gone. Hence one of the reasons Brexit had been very good because it shown the complexity of the relatively boring stuff it does and how it impacts people day to day.
Well, I for one have learnt a lot from the Brexit business.
I know a lot about the single market and actually understand how it works.
I understand better how the EU works with its competences and shared competences and how they mesh with national politics.
I understand the Mastericht and Lisbon treaties now better than before.
I realise how efficient the EU is with such a small workforce can achieve so much, contrary to the UK propaganda of untold bureaucracy. Now there are nonsenses like the EP sitting Strasbourg and the gravy train, but that aside, they do a lot for not very much cost.
I also realise there are much bigger problems within the EU than Brexit, and anyway Brexit is priced in at this stage. Poland and Hungary are the next problems that need tackling, after Covid.
I hope others have gained as much.0 -
I'm not blaming the EU for the UK leaving that's down to UK politics. But at the same time the EU does need to get better at communicating with its citizens about the good stuff it does. Even though this is very challenging because a lot of stuff the EU sorts out you only see when it's gone. Hence one of the reasons Brexit had been very good because it shown the complexity of the relatively boring stuff it does and how it impacts people day to day.
Therein lies the problem. Apart from the 'Part funded by EU" on signs etc, the decisions on how to communicate with the domestic audience is left down to the individual country. To do otherwise would be seen as more power grab by those that claim that the EU is taking over.
Where, of course, it breaks down is where the national government actually uses the EU as a whipping horse, blaming for anything 'bad' and ignoring it for anything good - the relatively recent mobile phone roaming charges being a perfect example whereby according to the Uk government it was entirely a UK scheme, with hardly any mention of the EU.0 -
Advertisement
-
The problem here is that we risk buying into a basically brexiter trope that sees the EU as something apart from, and even against, its member states. The EU is its member states, acting collectively and collaboratively. So if the EU has a need to communicate with citizens of a particular member state, the most appropriate and most effective way to do that should be through the member state concerned. If the member state will not communicate to its citizens about what it is doing collaboratively with other member states, the other member states are not really well-positioned to fill that gap.. . . I'm not blaming the EU for the UK leaving that's down to UK politics. But at the same time the EU does need to get better at communicating with its citizens about the good stuff it does. Even though this is very challenging because a lot of stuff the EU sorts out you only see when it's gone. Hence one of the reasons Brexit had been very good because it shown the complexity of the relatively boring stuff it does and how it impacts people day to day.0
Advertisement