2020 Labour Leadership Election

[Pulaski]

If you mouth stuff about ‘Zionists not understanding English irony’ then imo expect people to get a bit worried.

Some people might be worried, yes. I'd hope they'd get similarly worried about anti-muslim sentiment in a leader responsible for 100 000 civilian deaths in Iraq, but I suppose as long as Blair didn't give a dodgy quote beforehand it's all above board.

I know I'm American so my opinion really doesn't affect anything, but I think Blair and Corbyn are both awful, and I'd be shocked if there weren't a significant contingent among Starmer's people and among the Labour base as a whole who feel the same way. There's a big, fat, very well-populated grey area between Blairism and Corbynism within the spectrum of Labour politics, and the idea that those are the only options is classic extremist/ideologue "with us or against us" rhetoric. And, yes, both sides do it.

There's absolutely a broad spectrum between Blairism and Corbynism. Corbyn's fanatics never numbered the 60% he garnered in either leadership election. He carried numerous segments of the Left. But that didn't stop the Labour right claiming it was an entryist coup, or refusing to serve in a frontbench, or launching a challenge because he wasn't sufficiently enamoured with the EU (a classic "with us or against us" pitch; Corbyn campaigned for Remain, but because his legitimate criticisms tempered his defence, he must've been a closet Leaver according to some). And you had it on antisemitism; you either think the leadership should have immolated itself in apology, or you mustn't be sufficiently appraised of the evils of antisemitism. Justice Blair exemplifies this in this very thread - if you sympathise with Corbyn at all and think antisemitism was used as a tool by some to undermine him, you just don't think it's a problem. It was the right, and has always been the right, that has fostered this divide.  

[cp]

If you mouth stuff about ‘Zionists not understanding English irony’ then imo expect people to get a bit worried.

Some people might be worried, yes. I'd hope they'd get similarly worried about anti-muslim sentiment in a leader responsible for 100 000 civilian deaths in Iraq, but I suppose as long as Blair didn't give a dodgy quote beforehand it's all above board.

I know I'm American so my opinion really doesn't affect anything, but I think Blair and Corbyn are both awful, and I'd be shocked if there weren't a significant contingent among Starmer's people and among the Labour base as a whole who feel the same way. There's a big, fat, very well-populated grey area between Blairism and Corbynism within the spectrum of Labour politics, and the idea that those are the only options is classic extremist/ideologue "with us or against us" rhetoric. And, yes, both sides do it.

There's absolutely a broad spectrum between Blairism and Corbynism. Corbyn's fanatics never numbered the 60% he garnered in either leadership election. He carried numerous segments of the Left. But that didn't stop the Labour right claiming it was an entryist coup, or refusing to serve in a frontbench, or launching a challenge because he wasn't sufficiently enamoured with the EU (a classic "with us or against us" pitch; Corbyn campaigned for Remain, but because his legitimate criticisms tempered his defence, he must've been a closet Leaver according to some). And you had it on antisemitism; you either think the leadership should have immolated itself in apology, or you mustn't be sufficiently appraised of the evils of antisemitism. Justice Blair exemplifies this in this very thread - if you sympathise with Corbyn at all and think antisemitism was used as a tool by some to undermine him, you just don't think it's a problem. It was the right, and has always been the right, that has fostered this divide.  

Much as I agree with some of the arguments here, for the sake of fairness and civility I'd like to make two points clear: the right of the Labour party has acted appallingly in the last few years, but they are hardly the sole or originating font for divisive factionalism in the LP; though we don't see eye to eye on a lot (read: Corbyn/AS), Justice Blair is generally a good poster and a respectful interlocutor who doesn't deserve to be singled out like that.

[CumbrianLefty]

That the "Bitterites" post-2015 (and in certain cases, during the Ed M era too) were often behaving in a way traditionally associated with the party's hard left did not go unnoticed, I assure you.

One thing you could always assume about the party's right wing, whatever else you thought about them, was that they put Labour winning elections above all else (almost painfully so, at times) Since 2015 it can no longer be assumed automatically this is the case, and the recent leaks only confirmed that. The headbangers amongst them would rather "be in charge" of a ruined rump party instead of compromising with a left that they despise and fear far more than their supposed Tory opponents.

*That* is maybe what has fundamentally changed.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think it's about time people Respected the Massive Mandate granted by the Sanctified Membership towards Starmer. Thread's over, thread's locked!