Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[londonblue]

I really don't think that Cameron dictates who is a member of the Labour Party - as PM I would hope that he has better things to do.
If you want to vote for a party that has never expelled a member for racism then you won't be voting.

What you mean is that you don't think he should, but he did. You also seem to be missing my point. Corduroy let this person back in, even though he knew his views. It was only when Camerscum pointed it out that he was expelled for a 2nd time.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

What you mean is that you don't think he should, but he did. You also seem to be missing my point. Corduroy let this person back in, even though he knew his views. It was only when Camerscum pointed it out that he was expelled for a 2nd time.

I'm not missing your point I am disagreeing with it. Membership jumped from 201,293 on 6 May last year, the day before the general election, to 388,407 on 10 January. Lots of those will have been previous members returning. If some were at some point expelled and were given a second chance then that's fair enough. If anyone steps out of line they risk expulsion as has happen with this guy.
At a time where the government are going to war with the disabled and the medical profession and the teaching profession I'm not so fussed on the exact circumstances of a couple of racists being expelled from the Labour Party - the fact they were is job done for me. May elections - I'm not into getting distracted by a bit of internal membership refining.

Mr Cameron's interest in party membership should be that his party has well under 50% that the Labour Party has, that should be more pressing.

 

[rigsby]

I'm not missing your point I am disagreeing with it. Membership jumped from 201,293 on 6 May last year, the day before the general election, to 388,407 on 10 January. Lots of those will have been previous members returning. If some were at some point expelled and were given a second chance then that's fair enough. If anyone steps out of line they risk expulsion as has happen with this guy.
At a time where the government are going to war with the disabled and the medical profession and the teaching profession I'm not so fussed on the exact circumstances of a couple of racists being expelled from the Labour Party - the fact they were is job done for me. May elections - I'm not into getting distracted by a bit of internal membership refining.

Mr Cameron's interest in party membership should be that his party has well under 50% that the Labour Party has, that should be more pressing.

Perhaps their finishing what Labour started, with the Police and Fire service in 2006 long before the recession or austerity. Even Jim Fitzpatrick the MP for Poplar who was a former London Firefighter and funded into office by us mugs in the FBU remained completely silent.

Still Jim the Traitor was climbing the political ladder and like any MP they only stick to their promises while their in opposition.

 

[londonblue]

I'm not missing your point I am disagreeing with it. Membership jumped from 201,293 on 6 May last year, the day before the general election, to 388,407 on 10 January. Lots of those will have been previous members returning. If some were at some point expelled and were given a second chance then that's fair enough. If anyone steps out of line they risk expulsion as has happen with this guy.
At a time where the government are going to war with the disabled and the medical profession and the teaching profession I'm not so fussed on the exact circumstances of a couple of racists being expelled from the Labour Party - the fact they were is job done for me. May elections - I'm not into getting distracted by a bit of internal membership refining.

Mr Cameron's interest in party membership should be that his party has well under 50% that the Labour Party has, that should be more pressing.

I totally disagree. You really think all those things are more important than the Labour party welcoming back a bunch of racists? I think the Labour party needs to get its house in order before it will be in a position to speak on any of the issues you mention.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I totally disagree. You really think all those things are more important than the Labour party welcoming back a bunch of racists? I think the Labour party needs to get its house in order before it will be in a position to speak on any of the issues you mention.

Yes, by expelling anyone found to be racist, which is what has happened.

 

[londonblue]

Yes, by expelling anyone found to be racist, which is what has happened.

After they had been re-admitted. The problem is that most parties will throw out anyone who is racist. However it seems the Labour party under Corduroy is prepared to re-admit them so long as the other parties don't find out. This element of the Labour party have a leader who is sympathetic to their views, unlike any of the other main parties, and because of this they have become louder and increasingly big in number. That is the issue.

I read something over the weekend that I was going to post in the US election thread, but it is just as relevant here. Unfortunately the work firewall won't let me access it. It was about a group of white middle class American's who went to a Trump rally and what they heard and felt. There was a lot of racist behaviour and "noise". Anyone and everyone was a target, even them when they walked out early. These racists now have a voice in America, and a (potential) leader who may not share their views, but is certainly prepared to accept their voice, and their vote. There is very little difference between Trump and Corduroy in that respect.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

After they had been re-admitted. The problem is that most parties will throw out anyone who is racist. However it seems the Labour party under Corduroy is prepared to re-admit them so long as the other parties don't find out. This element of the Labour party have a leader who is sympathetic to their views, unlike any of the other main parties, and because of this they have become louder and increasingly big in number. That is the issue.

I read something over the weekend that I was going to post in the US election thread, but it is just as relevant here. Unfortunately the work firewall won't let me access it. It was about a group of white middle class American's who went to a Trump rally and what they heard and felt. There was a lot of racist behaviour and "noise". Anyone and everyone was a target, even them when they walked out early. These racists now have a voice in America, and a (potential) leader who may not share their views, but is certainly prepared to accept their voice, and their vote. There is very little difference between Trump and Corduroy in that respect.

Congratulations.That's the most absurd comment I've ever seen posted on SZ.

 

[londonblue]

Congratulations.That's the most absurd comment I've ever seen posted on SZ.

I notice you didn't bold the next three words.

Granted it's difficult to fully understand without reading the article I was referring to, but that doesn't excuse you deliberately taking it out of context.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

After they had been re-admitted. The problem is that most parties will throw out anyone who is racist. However it seems the Labour party under Corduroy is prepared to re-admit them so long as the other parties don't find out. This element of the Labour party have a leader who is sympathetic to their views, unlike any of the other main parties, and because of this they have become louder and increasingly big in number. That is the issue.

I read something over the weekend that I was going to post in the US election thread, but it is just as relevant here. Unfortunately the work firewall won't let me access it. It was about a group of white middle class American's who went to a Trump rally and what they heard and felt. There was a lot of racist behaviour and "noise". Anyone and everyone was a target, even them when they walked out early. These racists now have a voice in America, and a (potential) leader who may not share their views, but is certainly prepared to accept their voice, and their vote. There is very little difference between Trump and Corduroy in that respect.

He is not sympathetic to racist views, he is anti racist.
I'd suggest you are losing the big picture by focussing on the minutiae. You won't be voting Labour - not a problem, plenty of people won't be, but I don't think you need to search out new reasons as you have some already. I will be, and I'll be focussing on issues that I see as more prominent as I feel that when this issue comes up it is being dealt with by expelling those that need expelling.
Let's agree to disagree.

 

[londonblue]

He is not sympathetic to racist views, he is anti racist.
I'd suggest you are losing the big picture by focussing on the minutiae. You won't be voting Labour - not a problem, plenty of people won't be, but I don't think you need to search out new reasons as you have some already. I will be, and I'll be focussing on issues that I see as more prominent as I feel that when this issue comes up it is being dealt with by expelling those that need expelling.
Let's agree to disagree.

I guess actions speak louder than words. To be clear here: Corduroy and his views are the ONLY reason I won't be voting Labour any more.

I also worry when I hear people thinking that racism isn't a big deal, and other issues are more important. I would suggest that is the attitude that is allowing these people to take hold of the party.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I guess actions speak louder than words. To be clear here: Corduroy and his views are the ONLY reason I won't be voting Labour any more.

I also worry when I hear people thinking that racism isn't a big deal, and other issues are more important. I would suggest that is the attitude that is allowing these people to take hold of the party.

I didn't say racism isn't a big deal and I have spent many hours making sure it is seen as a big deal. What I don't see as a big deal is a handful of new members out of 100,000++ new members being deemed racist and being expelled. That to me is a problem dealt with.

 

[londonblue]

I didn't say racism isn't a big deal and I have spent many hours making sure it is seen as a big deal. What I don't see as a big deal is a handful of new members out of 100,000++ new members being deemed racist and being expelled. That to me is a problem dealt with.

But it isn't dealt with until the leader who has sympathy with these people (to the extent that he shares a platform with them, and allows them back into the party) goes. I guess worse case he'll be gone when he loses the next GE...

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

But it isn't dealt with until the leader who has sympathy with these people (to the extent that he shares a platform with them, and allows them back into the party) goes. I guess worse case he'll be gone when he loses the next GE...

He joins protests about specific issues but that doesn't mean that he agrees with everything the other attendees stand for.
Farage and Galloway have shared a stage recently - they does share any political leanings other than the out campaign - it's what people do, share a stage on a specific issue, it's not a general alliance.

 

[londonblue]

He joins protests about specific issues but that doesn't mean that he agrees with everything the other attendees stand for.
Farage and Galloway have shared a stage recently - they does share any political leanings other than the out campaign - it's what people do, share a stage on a specific issue, it's not a general alliance.

It means they share a view on the EU. I think you would agree with that. I think you need to read the Guardian article posted on here previously. To make is simple, here's the most important point:

Which brings us to Jeremy Corbyn. No one accuses him of being an antisemite. But many Jews do worry that his past instinct, when faced with potential allies whom he deemed sound on Palestine, was to overlook whatever nastiness they might have uttered about Jews, even when that extended to Holocaust denial or the blood libel – the medieval calumny that Jews baked bread using the blood of gentile children. (To be specific: Corbyn was a long-time backer of a pro-Palestinian group founded by Paul Eisen, attending its 2013 event even after Eisen had outed himself as a Holocaust denier years earlier. Similarly, Corbyn praised Islamist leader Sheikh Raed Salah even though, as a British court confirmed, Salah had deployed the blood libel.)

With a leader like that, it's unsurprising that the Labour party now has a vociferous and growing racist element. If he had any sense he would steer clear of people like that. So at best he lacks the judgement needed to be a good leader.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

It means they share a view on the EU. I think you would agree with that. I think you need to read the Guardian article posted on here previously. To make is simple, here's the most important point:



By your own logic, it should mean that Corduroy shares the same views as these people on these subjects because he shared a platform with them. With a leader like that, it's unsurprising that the Labour party now has a vociferous and growing racist element.

Galloway and Farage share an opinion on one subject not all subjects.
Labour does not have a racist problem, it has a tiny amount of members who a racist and they are being expelled.

We disagree on this, I can't see that changing.

 

[londonblue]

Galloway and Farage share an opinion on one subject not all subjects.
Labour does not have a racist problem, it has a tiny amount of members who a racist and they are being expelled.

We disagree on this, I can't see that changing.

That we can agree on! However, I edited my post whilst you were typing...

You may not think Labour has a racist problem. I think it has a growing racist element, and left too long it will become a problem. The problem is Corduroy is too weak to do a whole lot about it because he sympathises with some of their views.

 

[londonblue]

Oh dear, another one:

Independent

This guy really is a loon. The problem is he's a Momentum activist, which presumably means he voted for Corduroy. How many of these new members will have to be expelled?

That article also has links to other articles about people who have been suspended. The Labour party is becoming a magnate for these kind of lunatics.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

That we can agree on! However, I edited my post whilst you were typing...

You may not think Labour has a racist problem. I think it has a growing racist element, and left too long it will become a problem. The problem is Corduroy is too weak to do a whole lot about it because he sympathises with some of their views.

People are being expelled, so it is not being left.

 

[londonblue]

People are being expelled, so it is not being left.

And being re-instated when no-one is looking!

Suspicion that anti-Semitism is tolerated with the Labour Party was fuelled by the case of Vicki Kirby, a Labour parliamentary candidate who was suspended from the party for a series of tweets, including one in which she described Jews as having “big noses”.

Earlier this month, Guido Fawkes spotted that she had been reinstated and had been made vice chair of the Woking Labour Party. Last week, her membership was suspended for the second time.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

And being re-instated when no-one is looking!

And then suspended again.

I think this might be getting boring. A problem exists - I think it does in all parties (and there has been a massive increase in membership) and is being dealt with, you don't. That's the conclusion to the discussion really - we disagree.