this post was submitted on 24 May 2024

47 points (100.0% liked)

UK Politics

3068 readers

314 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

Corbyn confirms he will stand against Labour (www.bbc.co.uk)

submitted 5 months ago by thehatfox@lemmy.world to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] sirico@feddit.uk 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's their doing fair play

[+] theinspectorst@kbin.social -13 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I mean, is it? Under his leadership the Labour Party broke the law in relation to racism within the party - that was the finding of the independent Equalities and Human Rights Commission investigation. It found that on Corbyn's watch, the culture of the Labour Party 'at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it'. He was the leader, he is accountable. That was his doing.

He then chose to put out a statement rejecting this and dismissing the evidence of racism suffered by Labour members as exaggerated - as a result of which he was suspended. That statement was his doing too.

And now he has chosen to stand against the Labour candidate in an election - this choice was also his doing.

So which part of this is 'their doing'?

[–] sirico@feddit.uk 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

He established the Chakrabarti Inquiry The Forde report concluded that they basically ate themselves over the issue, so to answer your question rather than add to the downvotes yes he was a polarising leader who should have made a lot more of an effort unionising the party, but Labour as a party failed hard during that period a point where they were constantly handed big W's by the cons. They made sure he knew he wasn't a Labour leader so it's not surprising he has no issue running against them as an indie.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

reminder that the media only found anti semitism in labour under the definition from israel that any criticism of the government is anti semetic

[–] theinspectorst@kbin.social 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Reminder that the Equality and Human Rights Commission is not 'the media'. It's a non-governmental public body created by a Labour government in 2006 to promote and enforce equality legislation introduced by said Labour government.

[–] Mrkawfee@feddit.uk 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Good for him. Labour are continuity Tories.

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 11 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Isn't it a bit more nuanced than that?

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 16 points 5 months ago

A bit.

Because at the end of it. His constituents have chosen him multiple times. Labour has no right to deny them the chance to do so again.

So if they refuse to offer his direct voters the same options. He likely feels he has a duty to let them choose between him and some Labour parachute accident.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nothing is nuanced on the internet

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 7 points 5 months ago

I guess we're bringing that Reddit trait over here too.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Only in the same way that Coke and Pepsi are differnt

As Orwell pointed out way back then, they're both sides of the neo liberal coin.

If you want Tory vote Tory or Labour, if you want chnage Vote Green.

Nothing chnages if voters don't

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 6 points 5 months ago

I'd argue that certain welfare reforms under the previous Labour government wouldn't have been considered under a Conservative one. Equally, a lot policies that affect numerous people would have been very different in the last few years if we had a Labour government.

Are the Greens really much different from your broad perspective?

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Neoliberalism didn't exist yet when Orwell was alive.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

as he should he's represented his constituency well and they still want him. labour will try and parachute someone into the seat and risk losing a solid labour constituency because of it

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 months ago

Labour have actually selected a local councillor, not someone parachuted in.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I wish he wouldn't, but can't really blame him for trying. He might well win, after all.

EDIT: There's precedent for this, it turns out! Last time an incumbent, independent former Labour MP in Islington North ran for re-election was in the 1983 GE, when some guy called Jeremy Corbyn won easily for Labour. I don't think there's much read-through to the current situation because, firstly, the incumbent in 1983, Michael O'Halloran, obviously didn't have Corbyn's national recognition and, secondly, O'Halloran not only had defected (not been expelled), but had effectively defected twice: from Labour to the SDP, then from the SDP to 'Independent Labour' (in reality, just him) when he wasn't selected to fight the seat for his new party.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has confirmed he will stand against the party he once led.He will contest his Islington North seat, which he has held since 1983, as an independent candidate in the general election on 4 July.Speaking to his local Islington Tribune newspaper, he said he would be "a voice for equality, democracy and peace".Mr Corbyn was suspended from the parliamentary Labour Party in 2020 - when in response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report into the party’s handling of anti-Semitism complaints, he suggested that the scale of the problem had been "dramatically overstated" by opponents.Labour will announce its candidate to replace Mr Corbyn in his north London seat on 1 JuneA shortlist of two was drawn up by party officials rather than local members.

Mr Corbyn did not declare his intention to stand as an independent until that process had got under way.He wanted to make it clear that he was being forced out and not willingly leaving the party he led until four years ago.His campaign is likely to provide a focus for those on the left disillusioned with Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.The BBC understands Mr Corbyn will endorse policies rejected by his successor, including lifting the benefits cap and nationalizing energy and water companies.His supporters are hopeful he can continue to represent the seat he has held for 40 years.But his decision to stand as an independent might, in one respect, be helpful to Sir Keir.

He has argued that he has changed his party and, as if to symbolise this, his predecessor is now likely formally to be expelled from Labour.

The original article contains 269 words, the summary contains 269 words. Saved 0%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!