Forum Topic

Interesting it definitively will be I think. I am curious however that his past vociferous defences of some seriously nasty people are being hand-waved away by his supporters though. I have read two articles in the last 48 hours or so, one written by a journalist who had voted twice for Corbyn as his MP and this one on the left foot forward blog. http://leftfootforward.org/2015/06/an-open-letter-to-jeremy-corbyn/Neither are exactly right-wing tabloid muckrakers and their examples are impeccably sourced, and yet, like some anti-Farage, none of this seems to matter. I find it curious in the extreme."I just do not understand how you can support so unthinkingly those political forces which oppose to their dying breath everything  – literally, everything – the labour movement has ever stood for: trade union rights, freedom of speech and organisation, women’s equality, gay and lesbian rights, anti-racism, the enlightenment, and reason."I find this absolutely astonishing. I'm not a Labour voter by inclination but I do recognise that that party and its supporters have been at the vanguard of anti-facism, anti-racism and equal rights, for years, decades before they were fashionable cause celebres. For him to be vocal in his support for these thugs, and for his supporters to just ignore it, well, words fail me."One or two of these clangers could be written off as “gaffes”; three or four you could brush under the rug... perhaps. But we seem to be looking at a lifetime of this stuff. And those of us who care about such things, and are prepared to say so, just face snarky, eye-rolling ridicule from people whose instincts are so acute that six years back they were telling us that George Galloway was a principled opponent of tyranny. (Corbyn, incidentally, sent a congratulatory tweet on the occasion of Galloway's victory in the Bradford West by-election. Always good for the party leader to be on record celebrating the election defeat of a Labour MP. Inspires loyalty, that.)"So yes, I'm not posting these things to have a pop, but because I am genuinely perplexed, much as I am with Farage, as to why gaffe after gaffe which would normally be enough to bury someone, is met with nothing more than a shrug and handwaving away.

Huw Burford-Taylor ● 3797d

Yes, I just watched that Panorama programme and I was not impressed (with Panorama)Whether Jeremy wanted/wants to win is a good question. My guess is that he will have mixed feelings, a bit like me!I thoroughly welcome that he's been part of the race and I believe whatever the outcome it will be good for the Labour Party because we've had a wide-ranging debate with neo-liberal economics being challenged, all too scarce in recent history.I personally believe his economic policies are good, though 'People's Quantitative Easing' would have to be pursued cautiously. I'm more cautious about his foreign policy, though like Jeremy I have never seen the point of our supposedly independent nuclear 'deterrent'. I have met quite a number of new Labour members and supporters and I've yet to meet even one who is a mad entryist - they are good Labour people coming home to their natural party (just like I did a few years ago).Because I do think it's vital that we win the next election I voted for Andy Butnham for leader, though I could easily have been swayed to Yvette and I certainly don't think it would be a catastrophe if Jeremy wins. I just think it will be hard to win with him, partly because of who he is and partly because the press will assassinate him with more fervour even than standard Labour leaders (see above, Panorama).By the way, since somebody asked, Stella Creasy was an easy choice for me as deputy, because of her success against loan sharks (a matter of particular interest to credit unions) but also becase she's a real campaigner and talks about rebuilding Labour as a movement, exactly what I'd like to see more of.

Guy Lambert ● 3798d

John McDonald told Jeremy Corbyn before the election process started that since he had stood as left candidate in the previous two leadership elections and since he had had a heart attach meanwhile, this time it was really Jeremy's turn.I think that Jeremy C accepted the responsibility as a duty with no expectation of the build up of pressure for change that it would release. Let's face it NO ONE expected this. It is really extraordinary.So what do you do in when carried along by extraordinary and unpredictable events? You rethink and re-adjust and try to act according to the principles that motivated you in the first place (if you have any that is). That is, I think, exactly what Jeremy Corbyn has done. He now has responsibilities that he never dreamed that he would have (whether he wins or loses). I would say that he is rising to the occasion. He is more convincing and clearly more straightforwardly honest than any of the other candidates. He never got into the habit of adjusting his thoughts to whatever the admen told him focus groups found acceptable.That is not to say that his own personal beliefs and actions are without problems. He is not a new Messiah and doesn't pretend to be one. He most important card is not that he has the answer to every problem (he clearly does not) but that he would make the Labour Party more genuinely democratic and that he would lean on the collective wisdom of the Party. That's a ludicrous proposition for dead-beat politicians who long ago stopped believing in democracy in any real sense. But for hundreds of thousands of people wanting to be politically active it has acted like an enormous political magnet. That's why he got my vote.

David Pavett ● 3799d

From the article I linked to (naughty language blanked)"Assuming he comes out on top this Saturday, the media assault on Jeremy Corbyn will barely have begun. What we've heard so far is just a clearing of the throat.Of course, a lot of it's pure hysteria, the same old junk that's hurled at every lefty who breaks cover: he's mad, he's weird, he wants to force us all to dress in boiler suits and only eat potatoes. A lot of it involves the twisting of his words until they squeak – e.g. the flagrant misreporting of some cautious and equivocal comments re. segregated carriages on late night trains. But much of it is not hysteria. Much of it has not been twisted. Much of it is simply reportage; the startling facts. Incredulous hacks, digging not-very-deep, have uncovered a seam of words and deeds so appallingly and astonishingly ill-judged, they cannot believe their luck. Do not doubt that there will be a whole lot more of this. Corbynites' attempts to wave this stuff away, as though it were just tittle-tattle, are foolish indeed (and in some cases, shameful). This stuff is incredibly worrying – both in terms of what it says about the man behind the beard, and in terms of what it means for the future of the Labour Party, specifically the Labour Left. And by extension, the future of Britain.We needn't go through all the details again. Everyone's aware by now that Corbyn has referred to members of Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends”, that he's courted and supported all kinds of anti-semitic nutbags and babbling enthusiasts for jihad, then defended them in robust terms when asked what the hell he was doing. (It's not unusual for those in Corbyn's position to find themselves sharing platforms with people whose wider views they find repulsive; not so common to big them up at great length after the fact.)Corbyn fans' response to these unsettling revelations has been rather dismissive, even impatient. Again and again, the same responses: “Huh! Another smear!” Well no – a smear is something which isn't true. “Tony Blair met Hamas just last week – and no one had a problem with that!” Intelligent people, trying to pretend that they see no difference between a former Prime Minister and UN Middle East Peace Envoy – grotesquely amusing as that may be – attempting to negotiate a ceasefire in Palestine, and some obscure backbench MP, with close-to-zero power and influence, having a pow-wow with his curious “friends”. Whatever Corbynites claim, this is not international diplomacy. These were not summit meetings, nor were they peace talks; more like publicity stunts. Publicity stunts for peace, perhaps, or something similarly asinine and Lennonish, but still, the fact remains: there's no conceivable way that anything constructive – not one thing – could ever have come from any of them. And nor did it; only the provision of a platform for bastards.Incidentally, wouldn't it have been nice to see, in amongst those shots of him sat next to Dyab Abou Jahjah – the Lebanese activist who rages against “Jew-worship” and describes gay men as “AIDS-spreading fagots” (sic) – pictures of Jeremy Corbyn hanging out with... I dunno, Bat Shalom, the joint Israeli-Arab women's peace organisation? Some of the many Israeli Leftists opposed to the occupation, but also to Hamas' thirst for genocide?There is at least one Israeli citizen to whom Corbyn has chosen to extend the hand of friendship: Raed Salah, leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, enthusiastic proponent of the “Jews did 9/11” theory and spreader of the Blood Libel. Now, there's really no point in talking to people like Raed Salah – other than to say “**** off, Raed Salah.” There's simply nothing to be gained. They have no interest in “finding common ground”... “a greater understanding”... “peace”. It's clear what Corbyn was thinking: Theresa May was trying to boot Salah out of the country at the time, on charges which Corbyn considered unfair. But the warmth with which he hailed his latest cause celebre was startling: “[Salah] is far from a dangerous man,” he gushed. “He's a very honoured citizen. He represents his people very well.” And, issuing an invitation to the House of Commons: “You will be assured of a very warm welcome, and I look forward to giving you tea on the terrace, because you deserve it.”It just goes on and on: anyone who can be arsed to look will discover a list of crackpots, Jew-haters and general scumbuckets longer than both your arms. Corbyn seems to think that anti-imperialism is a simple thing: you just seek out some underdogs and slap them on the back. Never mind who or what they are; never mind the dungeons dark and gallows grim these “friends” provide for the secular Left, wherever they find them. Never mind if some of these “anti-imperialists” happen to subscribe to the most imperialist ideology that the world has ever seen. Never mind, never mind.This stuff will undo him. It may well undo the Labour Party, too. This is not just “muckraking”. And this is not a trivial matter."Labour needs to present a credible alternative and a genuine government in waiting. With this guy in charge they will simply be a receptacle for protest votes.

Huw Burford-Taylor ● 3799d