MPs quitting Labour & Conservative parties discussion thread

blanch152 wrote: »

Equally, many hide their antisemitism behind an avowed dislike of the Israelis and claim it is a different thing when it is not.

Here's the thing though.

Some of those who are supposed to be fighting anti-semitism are engaging in prima facie anti-semitism themselves and/or falsely accusing people.

Euan Philipps is viciously anti-Corbyn, and spokesperson for Labour Against Anti-Semitism. Philipps is not Jewish himself however.

Yet here he is calling the Jewish pro-Corbyn journalist Eleanor Penny "a blackshirt". Today.

The other day we had journalist Tom Bower, another man who is viciously anti-Corbyn, and who is Jewish, calling left-wing journalist Mike Segalov "a self-hating Jew".

Stuff like this is why so many people feel that there is something else at play here, that anti-semitism is being weaponised, at least by some people for a specific cynical purpose - that of taking down Corbyn - rather than because of a genuine desire to fight anti-semitism.

It's hard not to think they have a point.

Joan Ryan also has proven form for falsely accusing somebody of antii-semitism.

Yet we never hear about any of this stuff because it disturbs the narrative.

Anti-semitism is an absolute cancer in society, but when people who claim to be fighting it are so utterly hypocritical, it damages the cause of fighting anti-semitism in general in a similar manner to how Jussie Smollett has damaged the cause of fighting anti-black racism.

Further to the previous post, here's Euan Phillips tweeting a joke about Nazi porn.

Again, this guy is the anti-Corbyn spokesperson for Labour Against Anti-Semitism.

And he's joking about Nazi porn.

Folkstonian

Labour cheerleaders are having to work mighty hard to explain why every MP, councillor and long time member leaving the party is absolutely wrong about the cult-like environment that’s been allowed to fester in the upper ranks of the party.

They don’t seem to realise that every time someone from the far left uses words like ‘liar’, ‘traitor’, ‘blairite’, or makes indirect reference to an Israeli led conspiracy, they really are just proving the defectors’ point for them

Folkstonian

Matt Barrett wrote: »

And many aren't antisemitic but don't support Israel and pro-Israeli's tar them as antisemitic to damage them. We could go on.
Just looking for examples. There may be some.

Possibly, however at the same time I think when some absolute loon refers to Zionism, or being an anti-Zionist, or starts ranting about Palestine when it has absolutely no relevance to the current state of the Labour Party, they are in fact simply being antisemitic. And it’s such a common occurrence on radio call ins, on social media etc, there is too much evidence of the problem for it to just be dismissed as an ploy to oust Old Jez

boggerman1

There is something really shifty about corbyn looking at him on sky just now.

Folkstonian wrote: »

Labour cheerleaders are having to work mighty hard to explain why every MP, councillor and long time member leaving the party is absolutely wrong about the cult-like environment that’s been allowed to fester in the upper ranks of the party.

They don’t seem to realise that every time someone from the far left uses words like ‘liar’, ‘traitor’, ‘blairite’, or makes indirect reference to an Israeli led conspiracy, they really are just proving the defectors’ point for them

The Israel lobby does exist however and it is often vicious in its methods to get what it wants, and its favourite method of neutering international support for Palestine is to accuse supporters of Palestine of anti-semitism.

That is a fact. We've seen it over and over and over again. Mark Regev was particularly good at it.

Israel has been against Corbyn from day one and only a person of spectacular naivety could doubt that they have been out to take him down from day one, because they do not want a UK Prime Minister who is sympathetic to Palestine - the UK Prime Minister being, after the US President, perhaps the most important international figure in terms of influence over the Israel-Palestine situation.

Weaponised accusations of anti-semitism are Kafkaesque.

If you make any attempt to deny them or claim that they are being weaponised to try and take down somebody, you're automatically accused of being anti-semitic.

If you make any noise whatsoever that there might be any sort of conspiracy at play, you appear to justify the anti-semitism claims, because allegations of conspiracy have traditionally been a favourite trope of anti-semites.

But orchestrated campaigns to take down people can and do happen.

It's also why those who engage in prima facie anti-semitism, like Viktor Orban, Donald Trump and indeed people in Britain who claim to be fighting anti-semitism, such as Euan Philipps and Tom Bower, as I illustrated above, get a free ride. It's because they're pro-Israel.

And you can certainly be an anti-semite yet be pro-Israel. Rodrigo Duterte has gloried in comparing himself to Hitler. Yet he is on extremely good terms with Israel.

None of this is to say that anti-semitism doesn't exist in the Labour party, of course it does - like it exists in society, and there is such a thing as the horseshoe theory, where the far right and the far left share certain characteristics, such as authoritarianism and anti-semitism and a fondness for conspiracy theories.

But we are seeing actual conspiracies play out in front of our eyes in international politics now - most obviously in the form of the widespread nefarious activities of Russia. We've just seen a conspiracy to create a fake hate crime in the US with the Jussie Smollett case. And technology makes it very easy to spread fake anti-semitism claims if you are so inclined. You just set up a load of Twitter accounts and post anti-semitic abuse.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The Israel lobby does exist however and it is often vicious in its methods to get what it wants, and its favourite method of neutering international support for Palestine is to accuse supporters of Palestine of anti-semitism.

That is a fact. We've seen it over and over and over again. Mark Regev was particularly good at it.

Israel has been against Corbyn from day one and only a person of spectacular naivety could doubt that they have been out to take him down from day one, because they do not want a UK Prime Minister who is sympathetic to Palestine - the UK Prime Minister being, after the US President, perhaps the most important international figure in terms of influence over the Israel-Palestine situation.

Weaponised accusations of anti-semitism are Kafkaesque.

If you make any attempt to deny them or claim that they are being weaponised to try and take down somebody, you're automatically accused of being anti-semitic.

If you make any noise whatsoever that there might be any sort of conspiracy at play, you appear to justify the anti-semitism claims, because allegations of conspiracy have traditionally been a favourite trope of anti-semites.

But orchestrated campaigns to take down people can and do happen.

It's also why those who engage in prima facie anti-semitism, like Viktor Orban, Donald Trump and indeed people in Britain who claim to be fighting anti-semitism, such as Euan Philipps and Tom Bower, as I illustrated above, get a free ride. It's because they're pro-Israel.

And you can certainly be an anti-semite yet be pro-Israel. Rodrigo Duterte has gloried in comparing himself to Hitler. Yet he is on extremely good terms with Israel.

None of this is to say that anti-semitism doesn't exist in the Labour party, of course it does - like it exists in society, and there is such a thing as the horseshoe theory, where the far right and the far left share certain characteristics, such as authoritarianism and anti-semitism and a fondness for conspiracy theories.

But we are seeing actual conspiracies play out in front of our eyes in international politics now - most obviously in the form of the widespread nefarious activities of Russia. We've just seen a conspiracy to create a fake hate crime in the US with the Jussie Smollett case. And technology makes it very easy to spread fake anti-semitism claims if you are so inclined. You just set up a load of Twitter accounts and post anti-semitic abuse.

The way to de-fang these accusations is to make sure that when criticising the Israeli government, is to do just that. Criticising Israel or calling people pro-Israel is a slippery slope. And directing that criticism at Jewish people is where it all goes awry. Whether or not it's anti-semitism in its intent is irrelevant to the person being targeted. It feels like anti-semitism. Just search for 'Israel' in Luciana Berger's Twitter mentions and you'll find hundreds of posts asking her why she isn't condemning Israel for some Israeli government action or other. Tweeting "Palestine lives" after Joan Ryan's resignation from an official Labour youth account is pretty damn conclusive.

prawnsambo wrote: »

The way to de-fang these accusations is to make sure that when criticising the Israeli government, is to do just that. Criticising Israel or calling people pro-Israel is a slippery slope. And directing that criticism at Jewish people is where it all goes awry. Whether or not it's anti-semitism in its intent is irrelevant to the person being targeted. It feels like anti-semitism. Just search for 'Israel' in Luciana Berger's Twitter mentions and you'll find hundreds of posts asking her why she isn't condemning Israel for some Israeli government action or other. Tweeting "Palestine lives" after Joan Ryan's resignation from an official Labour youth account is pretty damn conclusive.

I agree that Corbyn and a significant section of his support both within the parliamentary party (especially Chris Williamson) and at grass roots level are tone deaf, and they continually do themselves no favours.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I agree that Corbyn and a significant section of his support both within the parliamentary party (especially Chris Williamson) and at grass roots level are tone deaf, and they continually do themselves no favours.

Yeah. But the question has to be asked why such a simple, easy to understand policy couldn't be proposed and why people can't see how these sorts of actions can be construed as anti-semitism. It's quite legitimate to criticise the Israeli government, in fact most of the time it's a no-brainer. But this stuff is counter-productive and actually takes the heat off them and allows them to pretty much dismiss any criticism. It's very disappointing.

ilkhanid

hill16bhoy wrote: »

It's also why those who engage in prima facie anti-semitism, like Viktor Orban, Donald Trump and indeed people in Britain who claim to be fighting anti-semitism, such as Euan Philipps and Tom Bower, as I illustrated above, get a free ride. It's because they're pro-Israel.

Eh? A free ride from whom exactly? I see nothing but abuse in the media for Viktor Orban or Donald Trump.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

I agree that Corbyn and a significant section of his support both within the parliamentary party (especially Chris Williamson) and at grass roots level are tone deaf, and they continually do themselves no favours.

I agree that Jeremy Corbyn is unlikely to be an anti-Semite. I also believe that Pope Francis is not a paedophile or a rapist, or even somebody who excuses those malefactors, but neither are pro-active enough in smoking out these practises on their watch.

ilkhanid wrote: »

Eh? A free ride from whom exactly? I see nothing but abuse in the media for Viktor Orban or Donald Trump.

If you'd expect any person to call out genuine anti-semitism fearlessly, it's the Prime Minister of Israel.

Yet that's not how it works.

Viktor Orban and Donald Trump engage in outright anti-semitism. So does Rodrigo Duterte.

Yet they're all pro-Israel and especially pro-Benjamin Netanyahu, because in Netanyahu they see a reflection of their authoritarian, illiberal selves.

And they're all on the very best of terms with him. Netanyahu and his government give them an absolutely free ride.

It seems, for Netanyahu and his government, there's very much such a thing as an acceptable of anti-semitism, depending on whether you're his ally or not.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

And they're all on the very best of terms with him. Netanyahu and his government give them an absolutely free ride.

It seems, for Netanyahu and his government, there's very much such a thing as an acceptable of anti-semitism, depending on whether you're his ally or not.

That's politics. You take your support wherever you can get it, even if you have to hold your nose while doing so. It's exactly the same with US and UK support for Saudi Arabia. It smells to high heaven, but you can kill the smell with all that oil and ready cash.

Four defections tipped for the weekend - Phil Wilson would be a surprise, given his amendment has re-ignited the potential for a second referendum:

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/02/22/excl-the-4-mps-labour-expects-to-jump-this-weekend/

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Four defections tipped for the weekend - Phil Wilson would be a surprise, given his amendment has re-ignited the potential for a second referendum:

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/02/22/excl-the-4-mps-labour-expects-to-jump-this-weekend/

Just Read it there. BTW hello everyone, i have not posted in this section before but i am a graduate of Political science and Brexit has re-ignited my political interest in a big way.

In terms of TIG, do we think it has potential to grow further? Apparently Chuka Umunna has been tipped as potential leader of a 'party' as opposed to a group.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-02-22/umunna-is-obvious-candidate-to-lead-independent-mps-says-allen/

As for the possibility of further labor resignations, it does seem to be polarizing an already divided party. The reaction of the youth labor movement 'keeping the red flag flying' was rather shocking, even to me as a leftie myself. So Labor dividing, with possible further defections. The harder left segment sticking with Corbyn, and centerists and moderates leaving.

And is it possible we will see more Conservatives leaving to join too? With the more pro EU Remainers, along with Anti ERG's defecting to TIG? and what would remain in the Tory Party? it could really be a far more right wing tory party than we are used to at this point in history.

The current situation RE Brexit, a possible no deal. Its fascinating in a terrifying kind of way.

liamtech wrote: »

Just Read it there. BTW hello everyone, i have not posted in this section before but i am a graduate of Political science and Brexit has re-ignited my political interest in a big way.

In terms of TIG, do we think it has potential to grow further? Apparently Chuka Umunna has been tipped as potential leader of a 'party' as opposed to a group.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-02-22/umunna-is-obvious-candidate-to-lead-independent-mps-says-allen/

As for the possibility of further labor resignations, it does seem to be polarizing an already divided party. The reaction of the youth labor movement 'keeping the red flag flying' was rather shocking, even to me as a leftie myself. So Labor dividing, with possible further defections. The harder left segment sticking with Corbyn, and centerists and moderates leaving.

And is it possible we will see more Conservatives leaving to join too? With the more pro EU Remainers, along with Anti ERG's defecting to TIG? and what would remain in the Tory Party? it could really be a far more right wing tory party than we are used to at this point in history.

The current situation RE Brexit, a possible no deal. Its fascinating in a terrifying kind of way.

In the short term, it has the potential to grow within the HoC - by the time B-Day arrives, you could well see 40-50 MPs in the group, mostly Labour, but there should be more Tory Remainer defectors also. In the long-term, however, I don't see any permanent future after Brexit - partly because of FPTP, which stymies all such initiatives in the UK, but more crucially, one significant contrast with the SDP is that after the Gang of Four issued the Limehouse Declaration, there was significant public support and membership driving events, and I don't see that materialising currently with TIG.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

In the short term, it has the potential to grow within the HoC - by the time B-Day arrives, you could well see 40-50 MPs in the group, mostly Labour, but there should be more Tory Remainer defectors also. In the long-term, however, I don't see any permanent future after Brexit - partly because of FPTP, which stymies all such initiatives in the UK, but more crucially, one significant contrast with the SDP is that after the Gang of Four issued the Limehouse Declaration, there was significant public support and membership driving events, and I don't see that materialising currently with TIG.

I can understand that position, and i agree on FPTP inhibiting thje growth of new parties, but considering Vince Cables hints that the LibDems wouldnt run againts TIG candidates in the next election, i would think they might have a chance? if there was actually a pledge on this basis, urging Lib Dem voters to back TIG. Along with general dissatisfaction at both the Torys (for causing this mess) and Labor (for not offering leadership at a time of crisis) - would you not give them a better chance than previous breakaways? especially if there membership increases on levels that you suggest?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-47279812

Basically splitting the Lib Dem vote - certainly not gaining anything from the Tories:

http://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1099383145768599553

Harry Palmr

Guardian running two Labour Party stories tonight - one is party bigwigs tell Corbyn to stop arseing about and address what's staring him in the face, the other is of 20 MPs ready to jump ship this coming through anecdote mind you

The Observer has spoken to Labour MPs, peers and supporters who are all on the verge of quitting. “I know personally there are up to 20 MPs sitting on the cliff edge,” said one MP. “The interesting thing is of the 20, it’s whether they jump or are kicked off.” Another said: “100%, more will go.” Several peers are also considering their position. “In many cases they’ve had 50 or 60 years of membership,” said one. “It is a wrench. However, there are people in the ‘not if, but when’ mode.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Basically splitting the Lib Dem vote - certainly not gaining anything from the Tories:

http://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1099383145768599553

If Independent Group MPs are getting 6% (or even 26% for that matter) of the vote in their constituencies in an election there aren't going to be any returning to the next parliament.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

If Independent Group MPs are getting 6% (or even 26% for that matter) of the vote in their constituencies in an election there aren't going to be any returning to the next parliament.

Yeah. But a national poll isn't a constituency poll. Chuka Umunna is not going to get 6% in his constituency.

Professor Moriarty

Interesting poll quoted on the Marr show today. Under Corbyn: Con 39% Lab 31%. Under a new leader: Lab 40% Con 37%.

Water John

Snap polls in a changing environment don't provide major guidance, but the 9% jump without Corbyn is credible. Too large to be ignored. Is it within Corbyn's skill set to change tack?

Water John wrote: »

Snap polls in a changing environment don't provide major guidance, but the 9% jump without Corbyn is credible. Too large to be ignored. is it within Corbyn's skill set to change tack?

Considering he wont

-even state catagorically that George Galloway wont be admitted back into the party (instead saying that policy states he cant for at least another 3 years due to Galloway running againts labor in the last GE)

-Wont take a firm leadership role on Brexit, and continues to dither back and forth

-Is behaving, and endorsing a spoiling view of those MP's who left the party - 'They should run by elections'..

-Is not concentrating on 'why' they left, only that 'they left', and betrayed the party (not specific Corbyn Statement, but Labor Corbynites are essentially saying that)

I dont think it is in his skill set no, IMHO. Im a left Winger, and again its sad to say this, but Corbyn is exactly the right man, at precisely the wrong time..

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Interesting poll quoted on the Marr show today. Under Corbyn: Con 39% Lab 31%. Under a new leader: Lab 40% Con 37%.

Yeah it's all been a fight for the soul of the respective parties.

It's like a repeat of the PD's here. They were mostly people who left FF but took votes from FG.

In this case they are taking votes from the Lib Dems. So the Lib Dems would have to fight them in an election to stay relevant.

Labour have confirmed that they'd try to kill them at birth. I'd expect no less of the Tories. But both may stand back to let the Lib Dems be killed off at national level.

If only the UK had multi seat constituencies with a transferable vote.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah. But a national poll isn't a constituency poll. Chuka Umunna is not going to get 6% in his constituency.

I presume the poll was done on the basis that The Independent Group would have candidates in all constituencies, candidates who will largely be unknowns if they stand.

But in the past we've seen parties get 7.5 million votes (25.4% of the national vote) and 23 seats, and 3.88 million votes and 1 seat.

The Independent Group will be relying on personal votes to return any MPs at the next election.

Personal votes do exist in the UK, for example Corbyn has had a huge personal vote as an MP for years, and the likes of Stella Creasy and Caroline Lucas have big personal votes, but overall they're much less of thing than in Ireland.

Maybe Umunna does have a big personal vote who are willing to vote for him over a Labour candidate in sufficient numbers to re-elect him, but my feeling is that he probably doesn't.

Capt'n Midnight

liamtech wrote: »

-Wont take a firm leadership role on Brexit, and continues to dither back and forth

No.

Corbyn is firm on Brexit.

There could (maybe) be a second referendum (which could go either way) after Labour negotiate a new deal (EU has ruled out changes) after winning (not bloody likely) an election, (if there is an election) during an Extension of Article 50 (which wouldn't be granted for this).

And at heart Corbyn wants Brexit, but like most Brexiteers wants a different version of it with different Red Lines on some things. So YMMV

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said if his party won power he would renegotiate a Brexit deal with the European Union and could hold another referendum, as he comes under pressure to support giving the public another chance to stay in the bloc. [/QUOTE]

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

No.

Corbyn is firm on Brexit.

Apologies perhaps i wasnt clear. Yea i know Corbyn wants Brexit, he has consistently been against the EU. what i mean to say is he has not (in my memory anyway) actually stated that this time around - wasnt it 7/10? and 'technically' supporting remain.. and as you said, 'open' to possibilities of a 2nd ref

Capt'n Midnight

liamtech wrote: »

Apologies perhaps i wasnt clear. Yea i know Corbyn wants Brexit, he has consistently been against the EU. what i mean to say is he has not (in my memory anyway) actually stated that this time around - wasnt it 7/10? and 'technically' supporting remain.. and as you said, 'open' to possibilities of a 2nd ref

seven and a half out of ten

but that was just words sticking in his throat , if I find the Last Leg clip I'll stick it up someday

[Deleted User]

liamtech wrote: »

I dont think it is in his skill set no, IMHO. Im a left Winger, and again its sad to say this, but Corbyn is exactly the right man, at precisely the wrong time..

Unfortunately for Jezza, the right time was 1972