Comrade Corbyn to the fore - whither (or wither) the Labour Party?

maguire

LE
Book Reviewer
Have a look and come back to us
I cant speak for Corbyn - he may well have referred to a terror attack once details were known - and as others have pointed out condemning someone for terminology when its all still rather confused is unfair

Abbott however used the term incident long after it was known to be a terrorist attack - but I dont suppose any ones shocked by that - what with her being little more than nick griffins alter ego
 
I think you'll find if you're on the left you can't be racist. it's impossible. and if you don't agree with them you're a nazi.
Interestingly, though, I was talking to a friend yesterday who has an associate within his circles who is (brace yourself) thinking of leaving Momentum because it's not Left-leaning enough for him.

You really, really have to wonder.
 
Interestingly, though, I was talking to a friend yesterday who has an associate within his circles who is (brace yourself) thinking of leaving Momentum because it's not Left-leaning enough for him.

You really, really have to wonder.
Not really, the rush to "purify" is a self-destructive impulse in politics.

It is interesting coming back to the UK and seeing such open discussion of "Betrayl", "Traitors", and people talking of "plots".

On one of the YouTube feeds I was watching of the Speaker yesterday, it too a couple of minutes for someone to comment that Bercow is an Anglicized form of "Berkowitz".

I really don't remember this sort of thing before the referendum, and I don't really approve or like it.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
Abbott however used the term incident long after it was known to be a terrorist attack - but I dont suppose any ones shocked by that - what with her being little more than nick griffins alter ego
How dare you libel Nick Griffins charater in such a disgusting manner.
 
Interestingly, though, I was talking to a friend yesterday who has an associate within his circles who is (brace yourself) thinking of leaving Momentum because it's not Left-leaning enough for him.

You really, really have to wonder.
Bugsy?
 
A pity that the PCC job is party political in the first place.
This worried me.
This is why I firmly believe we need a strong Labour voice as Police and Crime Commissioner.
Personally, the party politicisation of policing is not a good thing. it is an extension of the divisions we have. It should not matter what party sits over the police, and the police should never be used as a political weapon.

That comes after the fall of the Weimar Republic, and whilst we maybe at "ten to midnight" we have not hit 30th January 1933 just yet.
 
Not really, the rush to "purify" is a self-destructive impulse in politics.

It is interesting coming back to the UK and seeing such open discussion of "Betrayl", "Traitors", and people talking of "plots".

On one of the YouTube feeds I was watching of the Speaker yesterday, it too a couple of minutes for someone to comment that Bercow is an Anglicized form of "Berkowitz".

I really don't remember this sort of thing before the referendum, and I don't really approve or like it.
If people are called thick, racist bigots often enough, some of them are likely to respond in kind. Until people wake up to the fact that moderation and the centre ground in politics is defined by a commitment to pluralism; respect for alternative views and those who express them, and not to ultra-liberalism, we're going to get an increasingly angry, intemperate and abusive politics.
 
If people are called thick, racist bigots often enough, some of them are likely to respond in kind. Until people wake up to the fact that moderation and the centre ground in politics is defined by a commitment to pluralism; respect for alternative views and those who express them, and not to ultra-liberalism, we're going to get an increasingly angry, intemperate and abusive politics.
Indeed, which is why I worry about the name calling.

The power of persuasion is always preferrable to persuasion by power.
 
Indeed, which is why I worry about the name calling.

The power of persuasion is always preferrable to persuasion by power.
For that to happen, it has to be possible to question and dispute the prevailing political orthodoxies without personal or professional sanction. That has not been the case in this country for some time.
 
Inr
For that to happen, it has to be possible to question and dispute the prevailing political orthodoxies without personal or professional sanction. That has not been the case in this country for some time.
It may have been around on a small scale before but I only really started noticing when it picked up during the Blair/Brown years when any criticism of their immigration policies was met with the racist/little Englander smear, end of debate.
 
Last edited:
Inr

It may have been around on a small scale before but I only really started noticing when it picked up during the Blair/Brown years when any critism of their immigration policies was met with the racist/little Englander smear, end of debate.
Because there was a concerted, unarticulated policy of mass inward migration and any challenge to it needed to be dealt with swiftly and harshly otherwise the deceit would have been laid bare.
 
I cant speak for Corbyn - he may well have referred to a terror attack once details were known - and as others have pointed out condemning someone for terminology when its all still rather confused is unfair

Abbott however used the term incident long after it was known to be a terrorist attack - but I dont suppose any ones shocked by that - what with her being little more than nick griffins alter ego
I raised that issue and @76mill threw in a question. I wasn't sure if it was rhetorical or not, so I asked him to seek the answer. I don't expect one

I don't know why anyone gets so frothy about a few words here and there. The 'wider audience' comment felt like classic snowflakery.

It reeked of "Let's get the message out, even if it's slightly unfair or misleading, but suits my agenda!"
 
I raised that issue and @76mill threw in a question. I wasn't sure if it was rhetorical or not, so I asked him to seek the answer. I don't expect one

I don't know why anyone gets so frothy about a few words here and there. The 'wider audience' comment felt like classic snowflakery.

It reeked of "Let's get the message out, even if it's slightly unfair or misleading, but suits my agenda!"
In these days of Twitter and Facebook etc. politicians and celebrities have to be seen to say something within minutes of an event, often before any facts are known. If you haven't got a weeping face or a nations flag up on your account within 10 mins. you're a heartless/racist/Nazi (delete as appropriate) bastard.
It's a bit like 24 hr rolling news after such events, we are taken back to the location regularly to be told by a stern looking reporter that nothing of interest has happened in the last quarter of an hour but here's a quick vox pop from a bystander who didn't see anything.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top