IanB
|
Edited Aug 12, 2016, 22:47
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 12, 2016, 20:04
|
Extraordinary amounts of bullshit being talked today by the New Labour old guard. Tom "Blowin' In The Wind" Watson, has even mentioned going for costs from the five who petitioned.
I will happily donate and donate again to see this over-turned and / or help the five defend their corner.
I would not be surprised if people who donated either to fund the original case or to fund the appeal or will donate to fund the appeal to the appeal end up being disbarred from voting in the leadership election on the grounds that they do not "share the aims of the Labour Party".
Kafka Schmafka.
|
Markoid
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 12, 2016, 23:01
|
It's absolute nonsense. The NEC should be ashamed of themselves. The 130,000 extra people who joined Labour obviously had some kind of interest in The Labour Party before they joined. Doesn't that count? The January 'watershed' to be entitled to vote for leader is an obvious and laughable re-drawing of the lines. The NEC wouldn't even entertain that idea if they had a couple of yes men as candidates. Instead the 130,000 new members are effectively being branded as infiltrators. It staggers belief that a so called social democratic party can act in such an un-democratic way. The Tories must be pissing themselves laughing.
This is a fairly accurate article in my opinion.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-nec-ruling-high-court-supreme-court-wrecked-your-own-party-a7187456.html
|
Captain Starlet
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 13, 2016, 12:24
|
The irony of this is that the saving labour thing backed by Alaistair Campbell to get rid of Corbyn attracted about 120,000 people. Many of who now can't vote.
Out of CLP nominations so far 255 have nominated Corbyn, 49 have nominated smith. It's close!
|
Stevo
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 15:39
|
JUst heard they're not taking this any further.
Not sure it would have done any good anyway.
Or if the initial win would have been what was needed.
JUst seems stupid taht they are disenfranchising so many would be supporters.
How does that make a floating voter feel?
Labour given a weapon and a target finds it has fewer toes?
|
IanB
|
Edited Aug 15, 2016, 07:58
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 16:38
|
I could talk about this for hours (and do much to the annoyance of friends and family).
Watson's strategy seems to be to try and scare the full members into voting for Smith and to effectively split the membership. It wont get rid of Corbyn but it will, in some minds, put an extra question mark over his mandate. Hopefully he will run away with both constituencies and we can get on with the urgent task of deselecting the naysayers er .... I mean opposing the Tories.
There is a lot in this that makes me think the opposition on the Guardian, BBC and from the PLP is the snobbery of those who were university educated and never really got over it. JC has one year at a Poly under his belt and is up against people who, even if they started in the state system, in many cases went to the kind of universities whose USPs imply that you will get the chance to propel yourself into the ranks of the 1%. Not necessarily in economic terms but certainly in terms of where the political, religious, cultural and educational power in the land lies. The kind of 1% Tristram Hunt talked about.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tristram-hunt-tells-oxbridge-labour-students-that-the-top-1-per-cent-must-take-leadership-in-labour-a6717731.html
|
Captain Starlet
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 18:35
|
|
One thing I've seen over the past few days, talking with people about this, is that many people don't care if the party splits or not, they just want a party that focuses on opposing the tories and not squabbling between themselves.
|
Toni Torino
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 19:55
|
|
I sort of recall - though I can't find reference to it - Billy Bragg chiding Nicky Wire during the aftermath of the Glastobog fallout about professing to being a socialist while actually disliking working class people (hope I'm not misrepresenting Wire here...), I suppose the vulgarity & uncouthness inherent. Watson & the PLP by and karge remind me of that.
|
Captain Starlet
|
Edited Aug 14, 2016, 20:34
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 20:31
|
This it? https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/jul/24/fiachragibbons
I don't remember this personally, never been a Bragg or Manics fan, neither of whom I consider 'socialist'
EDIT: (as I forgot what I was going to post) Yeah I see all this as essentially abuse, Michael Foster's comments today are so bad that a number of Jewish organisations have publicly slammed it an complained to Labour.
|
Toni Torino
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 20:56
|
|
Captain Starlet wrote: This it? https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/jul/24/fiachragibbons
I don't remember this personally, never been a Bragg or Manics fan, neither of whom I consider 'socialist'
EDIT: (as I forgot what I was going to post) Yeah I see all this as essentially abuse, Michael Foster's comments today are so bad that a number of Jewish organisations have publicly slammed it an complained to Labour.
Not quite that bit, the working-class comment specifically.
|
Captain Starlet
|
Re: Labour party membership court case
Aug 14, 2016, 20:59
|
|
Not sure about that then, Wire's wife used to work in the town library and I think he was involved a bit against the closures of them around the town. Can't remember now
|
