Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

[Red Dreams]

That certainly was one issue in 2015. It definitely played a part in relation to economic competence, in part immigration. The economic competence argument was lost in part because of Labour not challenging the Tory's narrative about the cause of the financial crisis, instead focusing on Iraq and how Ed, rather than David, had better judgment because of the fact he wasn't an MP then so didn't vote for the action. I still maintain that naval gazing has helped ruin the lives of millions in the UK through a failure to stand up to austerity, and challenge the austerity narrative built up by Osborne against Labour in 2010. That's an unpopular view, but so be it.

Now I know I have answered a different point from the one you made, but I thought it was a point worth making.

Here's the rub though. The following men have won an electoral majority for Labour:

- Tony Blair
- Harold Wilson
- Clement Attlee

How many of these men won a majority on a 'left' manifesto? Wilson and Blair have long been the target of critics from the Left for being too centrist/right-wing.

Attlee built the bomb, joined NATO, the Korean War and many other belligerent actions. Even the flagship policy - the NHS - was an extension of Conservative policy, not a radical break from it. Ditto universal education.

Now, the key question for me is how a Labour Party can win a majority under FPTP when they are swimming against the predomanant political tide, not in its general direction, on policies which (when measured against the political centre of the age) place them (relatively) to the left of Blair and Wilson.

Regardless of who is in charge, that needs to be answered.

The main area to address is how we pay for socialist policies. And we can. The economic argument is important. To honestly say that Trickle Down Economics (TDE) which is where the Austerity arguments comes in, is a lie.

Its not about Left or Right. Its about Facts.

TDE is propaganda. Simple. Of course there is waste. We need to address that always. I do believe NATO is more a reason why we have to fear Russia.

 

[DenisIrwin]

That certainly was one issue in 2015. It definitely played a part in relation to economic competence, in part immigration. The economic competence argument was lost in part because of Labour not challenging the Tory's narrative about the cause of the financial crisis, instead focusing on Iraq and how Ed, rather than David, had better judgment because of the fact he wasn't an MP then so didn't vote for the action. I still maintain that naval gazing has helped ruin the lives of millions in the UK through a failure to stand up to austerity, and challenge the austerity narrative built up by Osborne against Labour in 2010. That's an unpopular view, but so be it.

Now I know I have answered a different point from the one you made, but I thought it was a point worth making.

Here's the rub though. The following men have won an electoral majority for Labour:

- Tony Blair
- Harold Wilson
- Clement Attlee

How many of these men won a majority on a 'left' manifesto? Wilson and Blair have long been the target of critics from the Left for being too centrist/right-wing.

Attlee built the bomb, joined NATO, the Korean War and many other belligerent actions. Even the flagship policy - the NHS - was an extension of Conservative policy, not a radical break from it. Ditto universal education.

Now, the key question for me is how a Labour Party can win a majority under FPTP when they are swimming against the predomanant political tide, not in its general direction, on policies which (when measured against the political centre of the age) place them (relatively) to the left of Blair and Wilson.

Regardless of who is in charge, that needs to be answered.

I don't understand. I actually believe the "left" strives to support the 95% being exploited by the 5%. I know the 5% are extremely powerful and control MSM etc., but still - there should be enough in the 95% that see the injustice and are not prepared to put up with it to win a GE. What am I missing?

 

[Frosty]

The main area to address is how we pay for socialist policies. And we can. The economic argument is important. To honestly say that Trickle Down Economics (TDE) which is where the Austerity arguments comes in, is a lie.

Its not about Left or Right. Its about Facts.

TDE is propaganda. Simple. Of course there is waste. We need to address that always. I do believe NATO is more a reason why we have to fear Russia.

The highlighted statement is why I was so angry/annoyed/resigned (delete as appropriate) at Corbyn/McDonnell's failure to make use of the Economic Advisory Panel. When you have Stiglitz, Blanchflower, Mazzucato, Piketty et al signed on to create workable policies which can create a dynamic State which can work via the private sector whilst opposing austerity, you really, really shouldn't mess it up.

However, TDE and austerity are not inextricably linked. Again, Attlee and Wilson undertook austerity measures, and TDE operated through the 'roaring nineties' as well. And my point is not that the only alternative to a 'left' manifesto is TDE. That is plainly not true. Just look at the economists who offered their services to the advisory panel. However, the fact is that the UK electorate have, since the War, not elected a government who adopted a 'left' manifesto. Would costing the policies convince people? I am not sure. But then, that is the debate that we should be having on the Left in this country.

 

[Frosty]

I don't understand. I actually believe the "left" strives to support the 95% being exploited by the 5%. I know the 5% are extremely powerful and control MSM etc., but still - there should be enough in the 95% that see the injustice and are not prepared to put up with it to win a GE. What am I missing?

Well, electoral history does not support this. The UK remains a small 'c' conservative country in that respect. However, I do know that the centre can move, and it is possible for an unpopular doctrine to gain widespread acceptance (see the Chicago School of economics for one). That usually takes decades, rather than years, though.

The other point is that the argument you put forward (one which is shared by many) does come close to a form of 'false consciousness' analysis you find in Marx. That the 95% will join the movement once they see the injustice. Again, the historical evidence does not bear this out, and it also can assume that the arguments being offered for solving a nation's problems are the right ones, and the opposite side in the argument are offering the wrong arguments. It doesn't really factor in human agency, and issues relating to why people may actually disagree with your side's arguments yet still feel that they support your causes through different means. To be a little less obtuse - many people feel that voting Conservative is the best way to make people - rich and poor - better off. To form a government under FPTP, Labour needs to convince these voters that Labour offers a better alternative. That takes work, not just talking in the abstract (which is not an accusation of you, but one issue I have with Corbyn's media and political strategy to date).

 

[DenisIrwin]

The highlighted statement is why I was so angry/annoyed/resigned (delete as appropriate) at Corbyn/McDonnell's failure to make use of the Economic Advisory Panel. When you have Stiglitz, Blanchflower, Mazzucato, Piketty et al signed on to create workable policies which can create a dynamic State which can work via the private sector whilst opposing austerity, you really, really shouldn't mess it up.

However, TDE and austerity are not inextricably linked. Again, Attlee and Wilson undertook austerity measures, and TDE operated through the 'roaring nineties' as well. And my point is not that the only alternative to a 'left' manifesto is TDE. That is plainly not true. Just look at the economists who offered their services to the advisory panel. However, the fact is that the UK electorate have, since the War, not elected a government who adopted a 'left' manifesto. Would costing the policies convince people? I am not sure. But then, that is the debate that we should be having on the Left in this country.

What about massively increasing stamp duty on 2nd and subsequent properties to favour homebuyers over private rent landlords seeking to extend their property portfolios? That would increase revenue whilst at the same time empowering those striving to own their own homes. I think it makes sense.
The pledge to build loads of new energy efficient houses also has to be a good move to both ease the housing crisis and stimulate the construction sector, etc..
It seems to me there are loads of ideas like these that just make sense and do no harm - except to those that profit from the current situation where low interest rates, high rents, and high demand stimulate buy-to-let private landlords being supported by increasing housing benefit payments.

 

[Ubik]

The speech was from August 2014.

The Telegraph report it here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-for-nato-to-be-closed-down-and-members-to-g/

The full video is here (he called for NATO to have been dissolved in 1990 and replaced with the OCSE):

Cheers bud.

The "Afghanistan isn't in the North Atlantic" line is unbelievable. He's either dense with no idea about article 5 or a liar.

 

[Frosty]

What about massively increasing stamp duty on 2nd and subsequent properties to favour homebuyers over private rent landlords seeking to extend their property portfolios? That would increase revenue whilst at the same time empowering those striving to own their own homes. I think it makes sense.
The pledge to build loads of new energy efficient houses also has to be a good move to both ease the housing crisis and stimulate the construction sector, etc..
It seems to me there are loads of ideas like these that just make sense and do no harm - except to those that profit from the current situation where low interest rates, high rents, and high demand stimulate buy-to-let private landlords being supported by increasing housing benefit payments.

The big issue with housing is land. Here is a long read, but interesting nonetheless: http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2010/10/land-tax-labour-britain

The policies you mention are certainly intriguing prospects, but do miss the bigger picture I think (not that they may not help in some regard). We need hundreds of thousands of new properties. Housing policy could be changed in a number of ways to assist (more high rise properties, for instance, as London has some of the lowest housing density for any major city on the planet). A land tax could help in this regard too.

 

[Frosty]

Cheers bud.

The "Afghanistan isn't in the North Atlantic" line is unbelievable. He's either dense with no idea about article 5 or a liar.

I did cringe when I listened to it (like I did with Smith made his ridiculous 'negotiate with ISIS' pledge).

Being charitable, it looks like Corbyn is speaking from the heart and in the heat of the moment at a political rally. Many of the points he makes are reasonable in terms of a broadly pacifist view (People can always disagree as to whether they are idealistic etc). However, he does jump the shark with more than a few lines. What I found most interesting was the introduction - it sounded like most people needed to be told who this man was and what he stood for at the time (at least that is how the MC's intro sounded to me). Perhaps he was going for a killer line, knowing that as a backbench MP that was how he could ensure coverage? I don't know...

 

[Red Dreams]

The highlighted statement is why I was so angry/annoyed/resigned (delete as appropriate) at Corbyn/McDonnell's failure to make use of the Economic Advisory Panel. When you have Stiglitz, Blanchflower, Mazzucato, Piketty et al signed on to create workable policies which can create a dynamic State which can work via the private sector whilst opposing austerity, you really, really shouldn't mess it up.

However, TDE and austerity are not inextricably linked. Again, Attlee and Wilson undertook austerity measures, and TDE operated through the 'roaring nineties' as well. And my point is not that the only alternative to a 'left' manifesto is TDE. That is plainly not true. Just look at the economists who offered their services to the advisory panel. However, the fact is that the UK electorate have, since the War, not elected a government who adopted a 'left' manifesto. Would costing the policies convince people? I am not sure. But then, that is the debate that we should be having on the Left in this country.

The key is to bring in economists from different sectors. The goal that should be given is to ensure the least number of people suffer. Obviously the vast majority of ordinary people are the ones that are affected.

 

[Ubik]

I did cringe when I listened to it (like I did with Smith made his ridiculous 'negotiate with ISIS' pledge).

Being charitable, it looks like Corbyn is speaking from the heart and in the heat of the moment at a political rally. Many of the points he makes are reasonable in terms of a broadly pacifist view (People can always disagree as to whether they are idealistic etc). However, he does jump the shark with more than a few lines. What I found most interesting was the introduction - it sounded like most people needed to be told who this man was and what he stood for at the time (at least that is how the MC's intro sounded to me). Perhaps he was going for a killer line, knowing that as a backbench MP that was how he could ensure coverage? I don't know...

His career basically was speaking at anti-war rallies prior to last year, that was probably his equivalent of a stump speech. Usual anti-west stuff, Russia annexing Crimea is a like-for-like reaction to NATO expansion etc.

 

[Frosty]

The key is to bring in economists from different sectors. The goal that should be given is to ensure the least number of people suffer. Obviously the vast majority of ordinary people are the ones that are affected.

The Economic Advisory Council seems to fit this remit: http://press.labour.org.uk/post/129975218774/labour-announces-new-economic-advisory-committee

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Advisory_Committee

The one positive is that those who remain seem happy to keep advising the party after September. They really, really need to be listened to.

Mariana Mazzucato, an economics professor at Sussex University, Ann Pettifor, the director of economics consultancy Prime and the Oxford University professor Simon Wren-Lewis were among the other advisers to agree that they should delay further meetings until “the dust has settled”.

They said in a statement: “We have always seen this body as providing advice to the Labour party as a whole, and not as an endorsement of particular individuals within it.

“For example, we all share the view that the EU referendum result is a major disaster for the UK and we have felt unhappy that the Labour leadership has not campaigned more strongly to avoid this outcome.

“We believe it is now crucial to find a way to resolve the economic and political impasse with the EU in a way that brings the least damage possible to the UK economy and those of our neighbours. We will be honoured to advise the Labour party in the future, should our advice be sought once the current situation is resolved.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/29/thomas-piketty-quits-as-adviser-to-jeremy-corbyn

 

[Red Dreams]

cheers @Frosty

 

[Ubik]

The Economic Advisory Council seems to fit this remit: http://press.labour.org.uk/post/129975218774/labour-announces-new-economic-advisory-committee

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Advisory_Committee

The one positive is that those who remain seem happy to keep advising the party after September. They really, really need to be listened to.



http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/29/thomas-piketty-quits-as-adviser-to-jeremy-corbyn

Not sure Wren-Lewis will be back - http://www.theguardian.com/politics...remy-corbyn-cant-win-next-election-owen-smith

None of them have been particularly complimentary about McDonnell's use of it.

 

[DenisIrwin]

His career basically was speaking at anti-war rallies prior to last year, that was probably his equivalent of a stump speech. Usual anti-west stuff, Russia annexing Crimea is a like-for-like reaction to NATO expansion etc.

He does seem to know a lot about it - as you would expect from someone that has spent his entire life thinking and speaking about the subject. Who is to say really - he might know a bit more about the subject than you or I.

 

[Red Dreams]

In these debates, my question is always...'What do you do once in power?'

How do the policies that we plan to implement help the vast majority.

The economy Is the welfare of ordinary people.

 

[Frosty]

Not sure Wren-Lewis will be back - http://www.theguardian.com/politics...remy-corbyn-cant-win-next-election-owen-smith

None of them have been particularly complimentary about McDonnell's use of it.

I was genuinely excited when it was announced. There was such an opportunity to do something fantastic with it. There still is, given half a chance. To be honest, I hold McDonnell more responsible than Corbyn for its failure. He didn't take it seriously enough.

Sorry to sound like an ITK, but I actually know one of the SPADs who works for McDonnell. The report was not flattering. He is interested in posturing more than policy. Apparently everyone tried to talk him out of the stunt with the Little Red Book, but he went ahead with it anyway.

After September he really needs to focus on policy constructively, working with the EA Council and business and unions to offer a credible alternative.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Two endless middle eastern wars that crippled the global economy not good enough for you?

Rather a facile argument, unless you believe that one wrong must beget others out of a misguided penance.

Maybe you can point to an scenario where Corbyn could be relied upon to act? Something comparable to the Rwandan genocide or the Congolese wars perhaps, or would he fall short even then?

 

[sun_tzu]

Firstly, if we're already under attack then we're presumably fecked. Retaliating with nukes that will kill millions of civilians is atrocious and barbaric.

Secondly, don't you think an enemy should be able to deduce that we won't actually retaliate unless we have an utterly careless, uncaring person for a prime minister? And if they're just mad enough to do it anyway, they probably don't care about their civilian casualties.

feck the so-called "deterrent". It's a waste of space and money.

Congratz... you just disproved game theory

 

[Smores]

Its a bit much when even the Daily Mail are slagging off Smiths attempts and declaring him worse than Corbyn. To think all these terribly electable and qualified Labour MPs who care so much about the party stood aside and let Eagle and Smith challenge.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...tent-Owen-Smith-s-house-cards-collapsing.html

 

[Ramshock]

Rather a facile argument, unless you believe that one wrong must beget others out of a misguided penance.

Maybe you can point to an scenario where Corbyn could be relied upon to act? Something comparable to the Rwandan genocide or the Congolese wars perhaps, or would he fall short even then?

Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else who would be PM would act accordingly in such a situation. This left is soft on military action rhetoric is tired and cliched. Playing to your political base whilst in opposition is entirely different to being the countries leader. You know this well

 

[Cheesy]

Its a bit much when even the Daily Mail are slagging off Smiths attempts and declaring him worse than Corbyn. To think all these terribly electable and qualified Labour MPs who care so much about the party stood aside and let Eagle and Smith challenge.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...tent-Owen-Smith-s-house-cards-collapsing.html

Remember when we were being told that Eagle/Smith were just the initial challengers and someone more viable would emerge long-term?

 

[Red Dreams]

So how long before this is decided?

 

[DenisIrwin]

So how long before this is decided?

http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/leadership/info

 

[ClutchHunter]

Congratz... you just disproved game theory

Solid refutation there.

 

[Dobba]

So how long before this is decided?

It depends who wins. If it is Corbyn, the even less electable Miliband brother will have a go at toppling him. If Owen Smith wins, the PLP will stage another election and the even less electable Miliband brother will have a go at toppling him.

 

[berbatrick]

Very Kenobi-ish vibe from this photo

Help me Jeremy Kenobi, you're my only hope.

 

[Frosty]

Remember when we were being told that Eagle/Smith were just the initial challengers and someone more viable would emerge long-term?

I think that it is clear that Eagle/Smith were stalking horses once the disparate unhappy parties thought things were desperate enough that Corbyn needed to be challenged. There are plenty of viable candidates in one sense.

The political logic dictated that after the vote of confidence Corbyn would resign and figures like Cooper, Jarvis and Starmer (basically the big names who have remained silent throughout the crisis) would enter the fray. Of course, that didn't happen, so it looks like the other candidates chose to keep their powder dry rather than face Corbyn and a selectorate which would probably not choose them.

 

[DenisIrwin]

I think that it is clear that Eagle/Smith were stalking horses once the disparate unhappy parties thought things were desperate enough that Corbyn needed to be challenged. There are plenty of viable candidates in one sense.

The political logic dictated that after the vote of confidence Corbyn would resign and figures like Cooper, Jarvis and Starmer (basically the big names who have remained silent throughout the crisis) would enter the fray. Of course, that didn't happen, so it looks like the other candidates chose to keep their powder dry rather than face Corbyn and a selectorate which would probably not choose them.

The hustings and Corbyn's rallies have no doubt increased membership's confidence in Corbyn. Ironic, that.

 

[Frosty]

The hustings and Corbyn's rallies have no doubt increased membership's confidence in Corbyn. Ironic, that.

Perhaps yes. Corbyn has certainly had more energy and enthusiasm since the leadership contest has started then he showed leading the party in my view. Possibly because he was speaking to a friendly audience.

Post September, the two key issues remain unresolved for Labour. First, the fact that the party membership is unrepresentative of Labour voters nationwide, and even more unrepresentative of the electorate at large. Second, the conundrum of how the current policies can win a GE majority when it flies in the face of electoral history and, probably, electoral logic.

 

[Ubik]

Surely this thing about Khan being booed at the Corbyn rally today is bullshit?

 

[Cheesy]

Surely this thing about Khan being booed at the Corbyn rally today is bullshit?

Could be true. Owen Jones was getting a lot of flak from Corbyn fans for merely suggesting that the whole thing might not work out and for minor criticisms and he's about as left as they come, so Khan getting booed considering he's been fairly vocal in the fact that Corbyn might not be a good choice seems like something that would happen.

Suppose some would argue that Khan's been cynical and pragmatic in his approach of nominating Corbyn in the leadership contest to either open the debate or look like a supportive leftie, before going in another direction now he's got the Mayor gig and may have longer term leadership ambitions. The truth's somewhere in the middle...but then reasoning hasn't been the strong point of either side of the debate in this Labour dispute.

 

[Ubik]

Just saw a video of it, good grief. Can't wait for this month to be over.

 

[Sweet Square]

Could be true. Owen Jones was getting a lot of flak from Corbyn fans for merely suggesting that the whole thing might not work out and for minor criticisms and he's about as left as they come, so Khan getting booed considering he's been fairly vocal in the fact that Corbyn might not be a good choice seems like something that would happen.

Suppose some would argue that Khan's been cynical and pragmatic in his approach of nominating Corbyn in the leadership contest to either open the debate or look like a supportive leftie, before going in another direction now he's got the Mayor gig and may have longer term leadership ambitions. The truth's somewhere in the middle...but then reasoning hasn't been the strong point of either side of the debate in this Labour dispute.

I image he's getting a slagging off from Corbyn supporters because of his comments today in The Guardian. Although not that I care much as Khan pretty much fits your second paragraph, the back down on train fairs was enough to loose my interest in him(Also I'm pretty sure he hasn't talked at all about deliveroo payment scandul)

 

[Cheesy]

I image he's getting a slagging off from Corbyn supporters because of his comments today in The Guardian. Although not that I care much as Khan pretty much fits your second paragraph, the back down on train fairs was enough to loose my interest in him(Also I'm pretty sure he hasn't talked at all about deliveroo payment scandul)

Yeah, admittedly I don't know too much about him and it's still very early in his mayoral tenure, but it'll be interesting to see whether or not he ends up being another polished figure who looks good but doesn't deliver all that much.

 

[DenisIrwin]

Could be true. Owen Jones was getting a lot of flak from Corbyn fans for merely suggesting that the whole thing might not work out and for minor criticisms and he's about as left as they come, so Khan getting booed considering he's been fairly vocal in the fact that Corbyn might not be a good choice seems like something that would happen.

Suppose some would argue that Khan's been cynical and pragmatic in his approach of nominating Corbyn in the leadership contest to either open the debate or look like a supportive leftie, before going in another direction now he's got the Mayor gig and may have longer term leadership ambitions. The truth's somewhere in the middle...but then reasoning hasn't been the strong point of either side of the debate in this Labour dispute.

I'll just leave these here...

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...y-london-was-jeremy-corbyn-s-not-sadiq-khan-s

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Anyone on this football fan's forum other than Ubik outraged at a bit of booing?

 

[Dobba]

Anyone on this football fan's forum other than Ubik outraged at a bit of booing?

To be fair Ubik did rush to condemn Ian Austin shouting "Sit down and shut up, you're a disgrace" while Corbyn was talking about the Iraq War dead in the HoC.

Actually they didn't, I just made that up.

 

[Shamwow]

To be fair Ubik did rush to condemn Ian Austin shouting "Sit down and shut up, you're a disgrace" while Corbyn was talking about the Iraq War dead in the HoC.

Actually they didn't, I just made that up.

feck me I dont always agree with you but that was a good one

 

[Frosty]

Anyone on this football fan's forum other than Ubik outraged at a bit of booing?

Not so much outraged as resigned at the way the Left eats its own young. It's like the Spanish Civil War and the trenches outside Barcelona all over again....

Also, not that it matters much now, but this welfare Bill vote has taken on almost mythical proportions for all involved.

 

[Ubik]

I'll just leave these here...



Anyone on this football fan's forum other than Ubik outraged at a bit of booing?

Outraged is the wrong word, more dismayed that people in the party are booing the new Labour mayor of London. The one who a few months back was enduring a racist campaign from Goldsmith.

But then it's a personality **** now, so I can't be that surprised.

 

[Kaos]

Hardly surprised by Khan, rode Corbyn's popularity to get him elected as Mayor and now stabbing him in the back to further via own career. Khan shouldn't be surprised to find himself booed by the same people who were invaluable in helping him achieve the nomination and consequent victory.

Sian Berry will probably be licking her lips.