Current Affairs The Labour Party

[zzr45]

**sighs wearily**

There is no evidence whatsoever that Corbyn, at least since the referendum was called, wants out. This is just lazy conjecture from partisan journos and their mindless twitter followers.

What Corbyn himself wants is mostly immaterial. He is following the Party guidelines on Brexit that were established months ago. No more, no less.

What is not immaterial is that a significant minority of Labour voters do want out of the EU. It was reported last week that any moves against Brexit would cost Labour dearly at the polls, and trigger at least a dozen cabinet resignations. As indeed would a decisive move by Labour in favour of Leaving. The Party leadership, just like the Tories, is trying to balance the divide without destroying the party. Whether one agrees or disagrees with this approach, it is dead simple to understand.

Given that they mostly voted Leave in the first place because they felt ignored, Corbyn has decided not to ignore them.

Centrist liberal remainers think the responsible thing to do would be for Corbyn to signal their own virtues by calling for a second referendum, even though they would still never vote for him. This is obviously a stupid and indulgent fantasy on their part, as is the idea that they can somehow roll back the clock to before June 2016 without creating a crisis of political legitimacy even worse than the one we currently have.

If we had a press in this country that did its job, this would all be common knowledge.

But we do not.

read @tsubaki's posts

Is b*llocks.

Meanwhile, back in reality, Corbyn has been very vocal in the past about his dislike of the EU - voted against joining the ECC in 1975. (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11...oted-for-Britain-to-leave-Europe-in-1975.html) and opposed the Maastricht Treaty on the basis that it took us in a more Capitalistic Approach, with the sanctity of the market and by extension that of the consumer/individual at the fore front. Mr Corbyn is not a fan of the EU, and is more concerned with his vision of a Socialist Britain than he is with the people that he clearly sees as below him. The EU blocks certain aspects of what Corbyn wants to do and so he wants out.

So Corbyn, wants Brexit to go ahead so the Tories are out of his way and the EU blocks on his unfettered conversion of Britain to Venezuela 2.0 is completely unheeded. Forget any of the nonsense about Labour voters wanting Leave etc. Corbyn is ignoring even his own parties views now as he is hell bent on getting us out of the EU, no matter what cost to the man on the street. The snide little Socialist weasels on here are backing him to the hilt because they put ideology before actual people.

This government is garbage, of that there is no argument, but for anyone to look at Corbyn and see an answer, Jesus wept we might as well just nuke ourselves now.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

**sighs wearily**

There is no evidence whatsoever that Corbyn, at least since the referendum was called, wants out. This is just lazy conjecture from partisan journos and their mindless twitter followers.

What Corbyn himself wants is mostly immaterial. He is following the Party guidelines on Brexit that were established months ago. No more, no less.

What is not immaterial is that a significant minority of Labour voters do want out of the EU. It was reported last week that any moves against Brexit would cost Labour dearly at the polls, and trigger at least a dozen cabinet resignations. As indeed would a decisive move by Labour in favour of Leaving. The Party leadership, just like the Tories, is trying to balance the divide without destroying the party. Whether one agrees or disagrees with this approach, it is dead simple to understand.

Given that they mostly voted Leave in the first place because they felt ignored, Corbyn has decided not to ignore them.

Centrist liberal remainers think the responsible thing to do would be for Corbyn to signal their own virtues by calling for a second referendum, even though they would still never vote for him. This is obviously a stupid and indulgent fantasy on their part, as is the idea that they can somehow roll back the clock to before June 2016 without creating a crisis of political legitimacy even worse than the one we currently have.

If we had a press in this country that did its job, this would all be common knowledge.

But we do not.

read @tsubaki's posts

I suspect half of the problem is that Brexit has kinda rendered not only traditional notions of right/left irrelevant, but increasingly the Tories/Labour. Both of the parties that dominate British politics are themselves divided on the issue. Both parties have members and voters who like/dislike Brexit enormously, and it's created the current malaise where the government have tried to leave whilst causing the least damage, and have thus pleased no one, and Labour have sat on the fence for as long as possible in an attempt to upset as few people as possible.

That can't be an ideal situation to approach any topic, let alone one as important as this. The whole mess smacks of needing a shake up of parties in Westminster, but that's an outcome that seems impossible to envisage.

 

[abelard]

Is b*llocks.

Meanwhile, back in reality, Corbyn has been very vocal in the past about his dislike of the EU - voted against joining the ECC in 1975. (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11...oted-for-Britain-to-leave-Europe-in-1975.html) and opposed the Maastricht Treaty on the basis that it took us in a more Capitalistic Approach, with the sanctity of the market and by extension that of the consumer/individual at the fore front. Mr Corbyn is not a fan of the EU, and is more concerned with his vision of a Socialist Britain than he is with the people that he clearly sees as below him. The EU blocks certain aspects of what Corbyn wants to do and so he wants out.

So Corbyn, wants Brexit to go ahead so the Tories are out of his way and the EU blocks on his unfettered conversion of Britain to Venezuela 2.0 is completely unheeded. Forget any of the nonsense about Labour voters wanting Leave etc. Corbyn is ignoring even his own parties views now as he is hell bent on getting us out of the EU, no matter what cost to the man on the street. The snide little Socialist weasels on here are backing him to the hilt because they put ideology before actual people.

This government is garbage, of that there is no argument, but for anyone to look at Corbyn and see an answer, Jesus wept we might as well just nuke ourselves now.

Like I said, ^conjecture, with no real evidence^.

More than anything else, Corbyn wants to win power so that the grownups can begin the herculean task of recovering from a decade of Suicide-by-Tory.

Active support for a second referendum would seriously damage if not destroy the Labour Party, guaranteeing another decade of Tory kakocracy - which will be even more damaging to the economy and harmful to everyday people than would Brexit.

A second referendum has, at most, the support of about 100 Labour MPs. It is not remotely close to passing through parliament, and even if it did, god only knows how the current lot could ever agree on the terms of a specific question.

Why do the people who mocked Corbyn for the defeat of the No Confidence motion that the Labour platform essentially demanded (having earlier mocked him for not declaring No Confidence in December) think it wise for him for suffer a far bigger defeat on behalf of liberals who would still never vote for him?

And what exactly do they think, say, Yvette "non-sequitor anti-immigration rant" Cooper would be doing differently as leader?

This is yet another example of how "responsible" elite opinion in this country is every bit as impervious to reality and logic as the Brexiters - their original sin of course being the austerity in the face of a recession (the macroeconomic equivalent of switching Keane to #10 and Bernard in at CB) that brought about the whole mess in the first place.

 

[zzr45]

Like I said, ^conjecture, with no real evidence^.

More than anything else, Corbyn wants to win power so that the grownups can begin the herculean task of recovering from a decade of Suicide-by-Tory.

Active support for a second referendum would seriously damage if not destroy the Labour Party, guaranteeing another decade of Tory kakocracy - which will be even more damaging to the economy and harmful to everyday people than would Brexit.

A second referendum has, at most, the support of about 100 Labour MPs. It is not remotely close to passing through parliament, and even if it did, god only knows how the current lot could ever agree on the terms of a specific question.

Why do the people who mocked Corbyn for the defeat of the No Confidence motion that the Labour platform essentially demanded (having earlier mocked him for not declaring No Confidence in December) think it wise for him for suffer a far bigger defeat on behalf of liberals who would still never vote for him?

And what exactly do they think, say, Yvette "non-sequitor anti-immigration rant" Cooper would be doing differently as leader?

This is yet another example of how "responsible" elite opinion in this country is every bit as impervious to reality and logic as the Brexiters - their original sin of course being the austerity in the face of a recession (the macroeconomic equivalent of switching Keane to #10 and Bernard in at CB) that brought about the whole mess in the first place.

As stated, snide Socialist weasels wanting us out no matter what, trying to take the intellectual high ground. Exhibit A has presented itself here, one suspects Exhibit B is not far behind...

 

[abelard]

As stated, snide Socialist weasels wanting us out no matter what, trying to take the intellectual high ground. Exhibit A has presented itself here, one suspects Exhibit B is not far behind...

lol

yes, as everyone who reads this thread knows, I am a notorious Brexiter

 

[Bruce Wayne]

lol

yes, as everyone who reads this thread knows, I am a notorious Brexiter

Joe is the only lifelong socialist on this forum. Everyone knows that.

 

[abelard]

I suspect half of the problem is that Brexit has kinda rendered not only traditional notions of right/left irrelevant, but increasingly the Tories/Labour. Both of the parties that dominate British politics are themselves divided on the issue. Both parties have members and voters who like/dislike Brexit enormously, and it's created the current malaise where the government have tried to leave whilst causing the least damage, and have thus pleased no one, and Labour have sat on the fence for as long as possible in an attempt to upset as few people as possible.

That can't be an ideal situation to approach any topic, let alone one as important as this. The whole mess smacks of needing a shake up of parties in Westminster, but that's an outcome that seems impossible to envisage.

And this, for Labour, is the great appeal of a general election - it allows them to move the conversation away from Brexit, providing a forum to address the many self-inflicted wounds that prompted Brexit in the first place. It represents the means to start bringing people together in opposition to the disaster that the Tories and Lib Dems have wrought, and in support of a more inclusive vision, in which the government invests in the country rather than flogs it off and strips it down for parts.

It shifts the debate from Brexit to this:


...which the Tories are demonstrably terrified will defeat them

And it will also very likely provide the parliamentary support needed for a softer Norway-style Brexit, which, unlike the Tories, the Labour leadership has publicly championed; and which doesn't run risk of either permanently alienating some 40% of the population, or binding us to No Deal - which a very plausible second Leave victory all but guarantees.

 

[abelard]

Joe is the only lifelong socialist on this forum. Everyone knows that.

I wonder Joe was very vocal about in 1975...

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I wonder Joe was very vocal about in 1975...

Word has it ARPANET was created in large part to allow Joe to communicate his wisdom to a wider audience.

 

[abelard]

Word has it ARPANET was created in large part to allow Joe to communicate his wisdom to a wider audience.

Yes, the Pentagon wanted to weaponise him against the commies. Some say he single-handedly brought down the Berlin Wall.

So show a little more gratitude, you princox! It's only thanks to Joe that there's a Mme. Bruce Wayne

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Yes, the Pentagon wanted to weaponise him against the commies. Some say he single-handedly brought down the Berlin Wall.

So show a little more gratitude, you princox! It's only thanks to Joe that there's a Mme. Bruce Wayne

Joe's the 64 year old man who climbed out of the window...

 

[Bruce Wayne]

And this, for Labour, is the great appeal of a general election - it allows them to move the conversation away from Brexit, providing a forum to address the many self-inflicted wounds that prompted Brexit in the first place. It represents the means to start bringing people together in opposition to the disaster that the Tories and Lib Dems have wrought, and in support of a more inclusive vision, in which the government invests in the country rather than flogs it off and strips it down for parts.

It shifts the debate from Brexit to this:


...which the Tories are demonstrably terrified will defeat them

And it will also very likely provide the parliamentary support needed for a softer Norway-style Brexit, which, unlike the Tories, the Labour leadership has publicly championed; and which doesn't run risk of either permanently alienating some 40% of the population, or binding us to No Deal - which a very plausible second Leave victory all but guarantees.

I don't doubt that the causes of Brexit need to be addressed, but is there any evidence that the Norway option has support? If anything, May's deal offers a lot of what Norway would offer but without free movement of people, which seems to have been a major sticking point for many. Norway would keep us in the single market and all that, which is great but it would still require free movement (which I love, but many don't) and we still wouldn't have any say in EU laws. Where is the impression that many Labour voting Brexiters would support it?

 

[zzr45]

I don't doubt that the causes of Brexit need to be addressed, but is there any evidence that the Norway option has support? If anything, May's deal offers a lot of what Norway would offer but without free movement of people, which seems to have been a major sticking point for many. Norway would keep us in the single market and all that, which is great but it would still require free movement (which I love, but many don't) and we still wouldn't have any say in EU laws. Where is the impression that many Labour voting Brexiters would support it?

Because Labour have said it and therefore it is gospel.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Because Labour have said it and therefore it is gospel.

I'm sure many people would love to put the Brexit genie back in the bottle and move on to other stuff, I'm just not sure given that a lot of Brexiters regard May's deal as any kind of Brexit, how the Norway option would fare any better.

 

[The binman chronicles]

I'm sure many people would love to put the Brexit genie back in the bottle and move on to other stuff, I'm just not sure given that a lot of Brexiters regard May's deal as any kind of Brexit, how the Norway option would fare any better.

Imho if we go for a Norway deal we may as well stay in the EU. But that is a remainer trying to get into the mind of leaver saying that.