2020 Labour Leadership Election

[cp]

Wow, that report is…Something. Serious chance Corbyn would be PM right now following the 2017 election if it wasn't for some of the stuff in it. I think its pretty obvious that people intentionally working to sabotage the party from the inside should be kicked out.

Unlikely they will be. Many of them are now in the shadow ministry.

This is untrue & I would be careful about making comments about a report like this.

David Lammy, Rachel Reeves, Jon Ashworth and Ian Murray are all in the shadow cabinet.

Jess Phillips, Pat McFadden, Wes Streeting, Stephen Kinnock, Stephen Doughty and Lucy Powell are all in the outer ministry.

With regard to your warning, I highly doubt the UK Labour Party cares about what a random man in Australia posts on a forum.

Thank you for telling me members of the Shadow Cabinet.

No problem. I doubt I’ll be on here in 5 years when the next Labour Shadow Cabinet is sworn in, so you may have to look elsewhere for your information at that stage.

Alright, alright, enough sass y'all!

In all sincerity, Starmer's best move is probably what he's already done: treat the leak and its contents equally seriously, wait for the report before taking any disciplinary action, and count his lucky stars that this is happening during a global pandemic so the general public will barely notice.

[CumbrianLefty]

the vibe I got from the leaks is grown up student politicians, which is to be expected. Not that I imagine the contents of other parties' groupchats would be particularly edifying material, but is it too much to want an apolitical party bureaucracy that isn't staffed by the spouses of MP's (freaking Phil Woolas's wife was in there, blast from the past) and union heavies rotating their guys out in turn?

That single fact is, on its own, totally astonishing.

[cp]

Iain McNichol, one of the anti-Corbyn conspirators implicated in the leaked report, has stood down from the front bench pending the outcome of the investigation.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

https://twitter.com/lmharpin/status/1251179471132073984

[CumbrianLefty]

Should arguably have been done anyway when the report was leaked, but as ever that's pretty grim.

[CumbrianLefty]

Jennie Formby (one of the last signifcant holdovers from the Corbyn era) standing down as the party's Gen Sec - expect more factional skirmishing over her replacement.

[DaWN]

Jennie Formby (one of the last signifcant holdovers from the Corbyn era) standing down as the party's Gen Sec - expect more factional skirmishing over her replacement.

Predictably sending the Corbynites into apoplectic fury. Perhaps all is not quite yet lost?

[CumbrianLefty]

There is a section of online Corbynism who have been in a state of constant apoplectic fury about literally everything - however trivial it is in some cases - for the past month. As with the centrists who spent the previous five years in such a state, it must be pretty enervating and exhausting.

[StateBoiler]

Not exactly. Pabloite Trotskyism descended from a split in the post WWII Fourth International. Michael Pablo was the pen name of a Greek-Egyptian who was exiled to France following his imprisonment by Metaxis, and miraculously survived the Nazi occupation. As the Secretary of the Fourth International, Pablo was faced by a movement that had been all but anhiliated over the last 20 years. And so he basically concluded that the best path forward for militants was not to form separate parties, but to practice "entryism" into the official workers movements of the times - namely Communist Parties and Unions. This led to a split in the International, the leaders of which would soon practice all of the things they accused Pablo of. Pablo soildered on, but was eventually cut out of the International in favor of a unification with some of the "Orthodox Trotskyists" that had split (chiefly the American SWP). The main sticking point? Pablo's support for national liberation movements, most prominently the FLN.

Left-wing politics is amusing in a coffee house philosophy discussion kind of way. I was somewhere else where they were describing the differences between all the tiny U.S. far-left parties and it sounded like it was out of a Saturday Night Live skit.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Formby's position was, of course, untenable for an impressively long list of reasons. It is possible that if she had not gone now, that she might have been compelled to shortly.

The replacement process will be a mess, because it always is. A political appointments process for an administrative post: genius stuff, comrades. Of course as Starmer has a proven majority on the NEC and as the unions are not acting as a block against everyone else,* the eventual winner will be someone that Starmer wants, or at least broadly approves of. Fundamentally, the role of GS is basically the Party's Chief Filing Clerk and the hope has to be that whoever is appointed to the post is someone who believes, above all else, very strongly in tidy filing systems and with no interest whatsoever in becoming a household name.

_{*Which has often been the case in the past. McNichol was picked in this manner.}

[EastAnglianLefty]

Yes. Traditionally, the role of the General Secretary is to be embroiled in scandal five years after they leave the job with a peerage, when they're caught saying something they shouldn't have done to an undercover journalist posing as a lobbyist. Recently there's been a worrying tendency not to wait for the peerage, and to say the embarrassing things to non-undercover journalists.

[Blair]

There is a section of online Corbynism who have been in a state of constant apoplectic fury about literally everything - however trivial it is in some cases - for the past month. As with the centrists who spent the previous five years in such a state, it must be pretty enervating and exhausting.

I honestly think that it's because they've had 6-9 months of dissapointment; sh**tty conference, party pushed to a 'remain' stance, awful election campaign, suffered a huge defeat, none of their hereos ran for leader, they had an awful leadership candidate, got smashed, lost their NEC majority & had the shadow cabinet purged of the the SCG.

So much of it (something that was equally true of the People's Vote campaign) is around wanting a politics that is based on appeasing your feelings; they want an opposition that makes them feel good and reaffirms what they believe; so it should spend it's whole time calling the tories heartless, inept killers with blood on their hands (comments I've seen in my own CLP groups) The thing Corbyn was always really good at was making the left feel good; you see it on a much smaller form when people tweet out the GB speech of New Labour achievements (which in itself spoke to the 2010 labour position of listing a bunch of achievements that everyone agreed on)

People talk about how badly the right of the party lost there mind but I'm not sure if any faction has lost control of all parts of a party so quickly as the left have; from a quick think even the parts of the party still controlled by the left have surrendered (Scottish leadership, half the '19 PLP intake, ASLEF & other left unions) which has just left a rump on the NEC. They had complete control...

[Pulaski]

There is a section of online Corbynism who have been in a state of constant apoplectic fury about literally everything - however trivial it is in some cases - for the past month. As with the centrists who spent the previous five years in such a state, it must be pretty enervating and exhausting.

A quick google of Corbyn's name will immediately yield articles from people outraged at the suggestion coronavirus lockdowns might still be around for a while, the idiocy of his brother (HOW IS THIS NEWS) and even for attending parliament, literally his job. The man is a backbench MP, but certain sections will take a microscope to every action he takes, just itching to find something to be annoyed about. There was a years-long campaign to malign him with accusations of antisemitism or sexism every time he so much as mouthed words.

Glass houses, stones.

[EastAnglianLefty]

There is a section of online Corbynism who have been in a state of constant apoplectic fury about literally everything - however trivial it is in some cases - for the past month. As with the centrists who spent the previous five years in such a state, it must be pretty enervating and exhausting.

A quick google of Corbyn's name will immediately yield articles from people outraged at the suggestion coronavirus lockdowns might still be around for a while, the idiocy of his brother (HOW IS THIS NEWS) and even for attending parliament, literally his job. The man is a backbench MP, but certain sections will take a microscope to every action he takes, just itching to find something to be annoyed about. There was a years-long campaign to malign him with accusations of antisemitism or sexism every time he so much as mouthed words.

Glass houses, stones.

Those are all in the Mail and Express, which do not have many Labour activists on staff. You can find that sentiment amongst ex-Labour activists, but the emphasis there is important, because it's mostly the people who left three years ago and still haven't got over it.

At this stage, the grumpiness amongst online Corbynism seems to extend much more widely, which is interesting because there hasn't been that much concrete to be grumpy about.

[Blair]

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

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

At this stage, the grumpiness amongst online Corbynism seems to extend much more widely, which is interesting because there hasn't been that much concrete to be grumpy about.

The aesthetics are all wrong now and that's enough for some.

[CumbrianLefty]

There is a section of online Corbynism who have been in a state of constant apoplectic fury about literally everything - however trivial it is in some cases - for the past month. As with the centrists who spent the previous five years in such a state, it must be pretty enervating and exhausting.

I honestly think that it's because they've had 6-9 months of dissapointment; sh**tty conference, party pushed to a 'remain' stance, awful election campaign, suffered a huge defeat, none of their hereos ran for leader, they had an awful leadership candidate, got smashed, lost their NEC majority & had the shadow cabinet purged of the the SCG.

So much of it (something that was equally true of the People's Vote campaign) is around wanting a politics that is based on appeasing your feelings; they want an opposition that makes them feel good and reaffirms what they believe; so it should spend it's whole time calling the tories heartless, inept killers with blood on their hands (comments I've seen in my own CLP groups) The thing Corbyn was always really good at was making the left feel good; you see it on a much smaller form when people tweet out the GB speech of New Labour achievements (which in itself spoke to the 2010 labour position of listing a bunch of achievements that everyone agreed on)

People talk about how badly the right of the party lost there mind but I'm not sure if any faction has lost control of all parts of a party so quickly as the left have; from a quick think even the parts of the party still controlled by the left have surrendered (Scottish leadership, half the '19 PLP intake, ASLEF & other left unions) which has just left a rump on the NEC. They had complete control...

Whilst it has been a rough few months for the Labour left beyond question, objectively speaking it is still in a vastly stronger position than it was even five years ago. Some of them tbf do realise this, and know that once the grieving process is complete life must go on.

[cp]

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

And if the right of the party insists on bringing up purposely misleading/inaccurate recitations of the worn out anti-Corbyn catechism even after dispatching him and his supporters from power, their loss in 2024 will be entirely deserved.

[Blair]

deleted my post because I can't be asked to discuss this again; by now you either think it's a problem or you don't.

[cp]

deleted my post because I can't be asked to discuss this again; by now you either think it's a problem or you don't.

The Corbyn Rorschach Test strikes again.

Good call, though.

[Pulaski]

Those are all in the Mail and Express, which do not have many Labour activists on staff.

Thank god Labour figures never cooperate with such gutter journalism then.

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.

Whilst it has been a rough few months for the Labour left beyond question, objectively speaking it is still in a vastly stronger position than it was even five years ago. Some of them tbf do realise this, and know that once the grieving process is complete life must go on.

Bickering aside, this is definitely true. Starmer was probably a better figure to lead the party than RLB, too.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'd make a few comments on... all of that above... but I don't think it would be healthy. I have my views and I followed them up with action and all that is known and that will do.

People talk about how badly the right of the party lost there mind but I'm not sure if any faction has lost control of all parts of a party so quickly as the left have; from a quick think even the parts of the party still controlled by the left have surrendered (Scottish leadership, half the '19 PLP intake, ASLEF & other left unions) which has just left a rump on the NEC. They had complete control...

Nothing like it has ever happened in the Labour Party before. Sudden changes of direction and tempo are common enough, but there has always been enough of an institutional redoubt left for the deposed faction to fight on from for a while. One issue here might simply be that the alignments of the past five years have been actually quite unnatural, that most of the different elements of the broader Left Faction (and even within the Left Cadre itself) have goals and interests that are entirely incompatible with each other and that it makes little sense for them to act as allies, let alone act as part of a tightly-controlled block. The clock struck midnight and the carriage turned back into a pumpkin.

[Blair]

I don’t get what Iraq has to do with anti-semitism so I’m gonna leave it at that.

Again you either think it’s a problems or you don’t- no-one is going to change their mind now in the party

[cp]

I don’t get what Iraq has to do with anti-semitism so I’m gonna leave it at that.

Again you either think it’s a problems or you don’t- no-one is going to change their mind now in the party

At the risk of putting words in Pulaski's mouth, I believe the point they were alluding to is that if the same standards of rhetorical and ideational policing were applied to Islamophobia post 9/11 as they have been to anti-Semitism since 2015, then virtually every corner of the Labour Party, including Blair, could be labeled a bigot.

Personally, I'd say such an metric for bigotry would result in a harmful overuse of the term. It would end up labeling many people as bigots who were not. Just like Corbyn was.