UKC

Veteran Labour MP Frank Field has quit the party's group in Parliament, saying the leadership is becoming "a force for anti-Semitism in British politics".

The Birkenhead MP also blamed a "culture of intolerance, nastiness and intimidation" in local parties.

Horses' mouths.

perhaps, I wonder how much this move has been driven by his disagreement with the party line on brexit as well?

Frank Field out to pasture?... Hay, these things happen!

thank god its friday

Too right. It can lie fallow over the weekend.

He's just hedging his bets, he was going to get turfed out by his constituency party anyway and it may provide a gateway to new opportunities in the longer term.

Are you trying to tell me that the grass is always greener elsewhere?

That's a rye comment!

The problem for Field was that many within the Labour Party didn't like his stile and unless that hurdle could be cleared it is likely that a fence could be taken.

Corbyn's got to be worried about how many others fallow his lead.

Mr Field is calling for two "major changes".

"First, the current excuses for its blatantly racist toleration of anti-Semitism must cease and we need to regain our position as being the leading force against racism in this country," he wrote. 

"Second, the party must recognise the culture of intolerance, nastiness and intimidation that it has allowed to grow unchecked and expel local members whose public conduct is simply disgraceful."

Hopefully, labour will wake up and get rid of the dangerous buffoon Corbyn now, but somehow I doubt it.

He overstated the antisemitism and understated the cultish thuggery. 

It looks like the main reason you started this thread was as an excuse for a rather simplistic attack on Corbyn. Field has always been a maverick and is easily ignored by the party, so there won't be any more likelihood of Labour 'waking up' than before. The dominance of the party by Momentum and the far left will continue, as will the 'vitriolic' culture. There are more interesting potential outcomes from this, like perhaps an increased chance of a Labour split. 

The wishy-washy party and his electorate's shifting position, I think that probably accounts for a lot of the animosity he's experiencing.

Seems to me he's jumping before he's pushed, his views on the all consuming and most divisive issue of the day don't seem to chime with his constituency party nor his electorate so his choices are limited.

jk

Labour party splits have an unfortunate history... I don't know if circumstances have changed enough, and I don't see anyone in the current party taking the initiative at the moment. 

Field is a bitter old sod who was somehow surprised to get a vote of no confidence from his local party after voting with the Tories to continue with his Brexit dream which will shaft the most vulnerable of his constituents. His anti-Semitism claims are so obviously overblown and motivated by spite that they can basically be ignored.

Not sure his Brexit dream is much different from Corbyn's.

I think he'll just be ploughing his own furrow

Corbyn campaigned for remain, he was pretty useless but I doubt that'll come as much surprise.

His 'jobs first brexit' is dishonest or perhaps delusional tosh but it's also a pragmatic holding position for the party which he's able to move away from if and when the time comes for Labour to do what they were actually elected to do: represent their constituents' interests and oppose the government.

jk

I had a look online to find Frank Field's letter. I found these two which despite being largely similar have quite a few differences -

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/exclusive-frank-field-e...

and

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/97...

Dave

Despite being a conservative I have nothing but admiration for Mr Field.

He has represented his constituency for many years and has never been afraid to go his own way.

He represents a constituency that voted to leave and he has a huge majority.

He will, if necessary, stand as an independent candidate and will undoubtedly retain his seat.

The Labour Party and all other parties could do with more people with Mr Field’s integrity.

Plain spoken marking of a message.

To be honest he is one of the few who has had the courage to publicly work across the party boundaries.

What do you mean, "Despite being a conservative"? He appeals to you because many of his attitudes and pronouncements are essentially conservative. I've wondered for a long time why he was in the Labour Party at all. It's fashionable amongst many current Labour Party supporters to misapply the term 'Red Tory' to anyone they disagree with, but if there's anyone it could be applied to it's Frank.

Yes, although he does have a reputation of being a bit of an egomaniac.

Mr Field represents a constituency with a huge labour majority.

If there’s such a thing as a safe seat it’s Birkenhead.

He represents a seat with more than its fair share of deprivation and poverty.

The idea that Mr Field is anything approaching a Tory is laughable.

The biggest swings in support away from brexit have been in the Liverpool area including Field's constituency. His constituency as a whole and his Labour inclined voters specifically appear to no longer support his views on the merits of leaving the EU. Good luck to them in selecting a pro-EU Labour candidate.

Good luck to him. I doubt he's as sure of that as you are.

Yes. I don't doubt his integrity. I do question the merit of his policy toward the EU particularly as it impacts on his working class support base, those least able to absorb shocks and those who will be hit hardest by a weak pound and lower inward investment into jobs.

jk

Certainly agree with you about the laughable 'Jobs first Brexit' idea. Embarrassing fence-sitting really. Corbyn is clearly a Brexiter for ideological reasons, which is why he was a useless campaigner for Remain. 

It's always time for an opposition party to oppose the government. They actually get money for being the official opposition. 

If you don't think Frank is anything approaching a Tory you could try reading this:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/03/frank-field-labour-mp...

My guess is only a small minority of MPs are not egomaniacs!?

While I hate to doubt the results of a poll I live in Birkenhead so I'll take my personal experience over a sample any day.

Experts eh.

jk

I totally agree, there was a dollop of frustrated irony in that comment which may have been lost to poor writing.

jk

An interesting article but one that fails to understand the people of Birkenhead.

They might vote labour but they aren't the loony left.

There's a huge resentment of the 'toerags' that the article claims is an insult to the unemployed of the town.

People might be unemployed but they know a scally when they see one unlike the Guardian

Mr Field has defended those who deserve it while not pandering to those who think all people are angels.

The people know this and that's why he's been an MP for so long.

Birkenhead would have a huge Labour majority whoever stood. The vast majority of people vote for the party, not the individual MP (cue some pedantry no doubt).

Frank Fields views are authoritarian and socially conservative, typical of working class conservatives before the 80s. He was a Conservative party member, but was kicked out because he opposed apartheid in South Africa.

What's that supposed to mean?

You don't think that somebody who has lived and worked in a town for 60 years and with no hidden agenda to pursue might know more than a random poll of a limited number of people?

Come to think of it, does my experience make me an expert?

Mr Field represented Birkenhead in the early 1980's when even mentioning the fact that you were a tory was liable to get you a good kicking.

And yet the good people of Birkenhead elected a Tory?

That your anecdote while interesting does not serve as a critique of the methodology which produced the poll results we saw last week. Perhaps you could attempt that critique but you haven't as yet.

You have a very clear pro-brexit agenda, that it isn't hidden does not mean it doesn't influence how you see the world and it is likely to be shaped by and influence those who you choose to interact with and the opinions you value. You are biased, as we all are.

On your lived experience, yes.

jk

Pretty insulting to the people of Birkenhead....... silly too, the Tories polled higher in the 80s there than they do now.

Nobody said that. People are trying to explain that he is on the right-wing fringe of the Labour party, it's not even controversial.

This all may be true but doesn't affect the argument that Frank has more in common with the Tories than Labour. Being popular with working class people certainly isn't a counter-argument - working class Tories have been a feature of the British electorate for a long time. One of the arguments for Frank from a Labour point of view is that at least he's kept the seat safe for Labour for a long time when it might otherwise have gone Tory. If he does stand down and trigger a by-election it will be fascinating. 

You won't know more.  It won't be random sample but, as far as possible, a representative one. The pollsters will attempt to remove bias from questions and their method. You (indeed anyone), by contrast will meet a biased selection of the electorate, will have your perceptions coloured by all sorts of biases and preconceptions etc.

You don't have a hidden agenda: you have an overtly right wing agenda. Should we still trust you?

Frank Field--- right wing of the Labour Party--- you have to be kidding.

Does that mean Tony Benn is on the right wing because he was a staunch Eurosceptic?

That's just rhetoric, as you probably know. Positions on Europe don't match left-right divisions. And nobody to my knowledge has ever suggested Frank is anything but right wing. 

Try his Wikipedia entry: 

"In May 2008, he said that Margaret Thatcher "is certainly a hero" and that "I still see Mrs T from time to time – I always call her 'Mrs T', when I talk to her."[17]"

And:

"In 2008, Frank Field was named as the 100th-most-influential right-winger in the United Kingdom by the Daily Telegraph.[42] "

If something is overt you should know where you stand.

My overt conservatism means I don’t have a horse in the Frank Field saga but I do admire his stated values wherever they fit into the political spectrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Field_(British_politician)

 You might be getting mixed up because he nominated Corbyn but he didn't do it because he supported him or thought he would win..... he's been a vocal critic of Corbyn. And this isn't about Europe.

I admire him for his stance of child poverty, his willingness to take on the like of PG in the Debenhams debacle and his take on social benefits etc. He will have helped more people on the poverty line in his constituency than the likes of you and me will ever do so.

A 40 year Labour person who has probably done far more and tried lots of different ideas to try and address poverty.

I doubt you'll care either way. What would you have to moan about?

I think his maverick nature appeals to some, but it also means he has never had much influence, no matter who's in government.

I don't agree with him on many things (like his anti-abortion stance) but recognise his good points. He has never been an easy fit with Labour, but he's been a useful reminder that at its best Labour is a 'broad church', something that seems to have been lost now.

MP who kept the Tories in power quits because Labour no longer represents *him*

I'm sad to see him go to be honest, though voting with the government recently pissed me off a bit.

He was good with Green, but his admiration for Thatcher, is hard to square with Labour values.

For someone with no influence he made the top 100 influential right winger list - thanks Bob Kemp for the link - due to his influence on conservative party thinking.

So what that he talked to and respected Thatcher? Heaven forbid talking to your political opponents , whatever next.

I see you have accepted he is a right winger.

I don’t think that he fits into any particular pigeonhole.

He certainly isn’t a left winger and definitely not a right winger (despite having made the top 100 list once - at number 100).

He like most people is probably in the centre of politics ( - if there’s such a political animal).

In that he and many labour and conservatives voters share similar values but often disagree on how to achieve and maintain those values.

At the moment Mr Field is a voice of moderation in a field of very vocal but not very able politicians.

FTFY

I don't think there was much to respect about Thatcher, and I'm not sure anyone with socialist ideals would see much to respect either.

What about that Mussolini eh? Got the trains running on time!

As for Adolph, he knew how to dress an army.

Sort of useless comparison comment which gets nobody anywhere.

Field was at least grown up enough to talk to her.

Do you find it hard to square Corbyn's admiration for Gerry Adams and others closely associated with terrorism with Labour values?

It was Corbyn afterall who said we need to talk to people we disagree with, not that Corbyn has done much of that.

He's a clapped out has been.
Voted for the Iraq war, voted with the Tories.  Local electorate don't like him.
Shuffle on geezer.

Bring on some fresh young blood.

Local electorate don't like him?
Or, the local Momentum bully boys want him de-selected? 

A snivelling 25000 majority! 

Nicely put. Illustrates the hypocrisy. 

Nicely put. Illustrates the hypocrisy. 

You can shoot the messenger but the message doesn't change

Tom Watson, Labour MP (Deputy Leader)

"serious loss to the party" which "reflects both the deep divisions in the party and the sense of drift engulfing us. It is a major wake up call. We cannot afford to lose people of such weight and stature."

David Blunkett, Labour Peer

"His actions (Frank Field) need to be seen as a catalyst for seismic change and a rethink of the so-called ‘Corbyn project’.

“The commitment to Labour as a ‘broad church’, which motivated some of those who nominated Jeremy, has been thrown back in their faces and demonstrated that the so-called ‘new style of politics’ is anything but."

Wes Streeting, Labour MP

"It would be a terrible mistake to cheer Frank’s departure from the Labour party. The two issues he raises in his resignation letter – antisemitism and the toxic political culture in too many parts of the party – must urgently be addressed to prevent the crisis facing the Labour party becoming an existential one. The fundamental cultural issue is that there is little, if any, good faith left in the party"

Karen Buck, Labour MP

"Labour is and must remain a broad church. Most importantly, whatever one thinks about his decision, he is absolutely right about the need to push back against the toxicity in our politics and urgently lance the boil that is antisemitism."

Mary Creagh, Labour MP

"Frank Field gave 40 years service to Labour, got £280m off Philip Green for BHS pensioners, fights child poverty & hunger. That his local party want to deselect him speaks volumes about the state of our Party."

Jess Phillips, Labour MP

"Can we not just take his words in good faith and try to improve things? Saying "he was gonna be deselected anyway" is part of the problem, not a reason to shrug. If an atmosphere is so hostile there is no point trying to stay why would you be chuffed to have created that"

There is deep discontent within the Labour party over Corbyn's "leadership" which cannot be wished away by his disciples.

You can trash Frank Field all you like, but he isn't the problem and you can't sweep it under the carpet.

Corbyn's Labour, the new nasty party.

To be fair, the PLP has always had a problem with Corbyn’s leadership, at least he is being consistent, he has always supported the Palestinians and has always deplored Israel. I don’t happen to agree with him, but that’s irrelevant. The Labour Party activists (Momentum, if that’s the catch all you want to use) want to move the party towards a more socialist agenda, personally I hope they succeed and the Labour Party activists get the party they want.

Can't the Momentum people form their own party instead of hijacking the Labour Party.

They could give it a catchy name, like Militant.

It's much easier to parasitise an existing party if you want power with our fptp system. And the Tories are especially vulnerable to this given how few there are, and their average age (72 iirc)

Is that the average age of tory voters?

Of course as people get older they often change their political opinions and become conservatives.

Given the constant talk of an ever aging population the tories could be in power for decades!

Depends where you get your data from:

https://fullfact.org/news/how-old-average-conservative-party-member/

No.

My point was that there aren't that many members of the conservative party, so it needs fewer kippers or ex BNP / EDL types to push through far right policies (just like momentum)

Former director of child poverty action group, tireless campaigner against inequality, prepared to think the unthinkable on welfare and got shafted by Gordon Brown for his pains, survived endless Trot assaults on Murkeyside, Frank is only a maverick in the sense that he is independently mind in a party noted for its intolerance of those who fall out of line. His views on Brexit will earn him unjustified scorn from the bilious bigots on this site. Sadly, last of a breed. Dates to speak truth to power. 

Sorry, I misunderstood your post.

I'll try harder next time!  

How about precious old prima donna who passed up the chance of forcing an early general election and as a result earned to fury of his constituency Labour party and the majority of the party as a whole. Knows he is going to get deselected as a result and has decided to leave first using anti semitism as an excuse to hide behind thus earning further contempt from the party.

I prefer them taking the rest of Labour to the sunlight highlands of socialism. Give the voters a real choice.

That’s exactly what is happening, Leave EU is encouraging their supporters to join to have an influence on the next leadership election. It’s actually why I don’t have a problem with Momentum, they have showed the way and the right will follow, however as I stated on a previous thread the only way for May to survive is for the EU to offer a deal and guess what’s happening! Sometimes I think my crystal balls are amazing.

Sounds fair enough to me but where are all the ‘New Labour ‘ people going to go?

Conservative maybe?

Not the Liberals I’d guess. 

Maybe the Conservatives, but that relies on the economy, the leadership and party unity - so not a given. So I think the new labour vote will split, some (the majority) will stay with labour, others will shift to the conservatives. The winners should always be the conservatives if Scotland holds up, but that depends on the SNP continuing to hold sway and the conservatives being able to run a competent election campaign with a leader who has at least a modicum of charisma- so not a given at the moment.

The Left has a long tradition of opposing the  EU often tinged with an ugly streak of anti Semitism. 

Terrible that he can hide behind nasty streak  of anti senitism that the party leader is incapable of eradicating. Frank could be a prima donna. But so can most national politicians. It’s required on the CV. I suspect Frank has just had enough of the thuggery that passes for politics in Merseyside. An obscenity as Kinnock said all those years ago when the last entryist wave tried to kill the Labour Party. 

Poor effort John.

I agree parts of the left isn’t particularly keen on the EU, but the same can be said for the right.The anti semitism bit has completely caught me unawares and I’m pretty sure it’s driven by the increasing numbers of Muslim immigrants who have found a home in Labour and brought their anti Israel shibboleths with them and the anti Israel sentiment translates into anti Jewish, as I’ve never met a Jew who didn’t support Israel’s right to exist (even though they might not agree with some of the things Israel does).

What evs 

Nowt to do with him being up for reselection in the near future then..... 

Why was he up for de-selection is the obvious question here:
1. Because that's what the local voters wanted?
2. The Labour Party at a National level wanted him gone for not backing them in various votes, etc?
3. The Labour Party at a local level wanted him gone because he wasn't Left Wing enough?

If it's No.1 fair enough.
If it's No.2 or No.3, then isn't that an indicator and perhaps hypocritical of the Labour Party/Corbyn that they don't actually want a broad church of MP's within the Labour Party, but instead want MP's that only toe the current Labour/Corbyn line?
If it's No.2 alone, then Corbyn is definitely hypocritical because of his history of voting with his conscience as opposed to his Party's wishes and therefore should be tolerant of such MP's.

I'm guessing that it's mostly No.3 and that it's driven by Momentum who certainly don't seem to want certain types of people within the Labour Party.  

Well on 3 if its momentunm people who want to remain which clashes with FF who wants out, then its a poor state of affairs for Labour.Just shows how split both Labour and Conservatives are on this issue.

From what I remember his constituency voted for Leave anyway.

Brian Wilson sums things up very nicely in this article.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/brian-wilson-anti-semitism-is-vile-bu...

Well since you're guessing, I suppose that's fine to make sweeping statements then!!

Have you read what you've just posted?

You can probably dig up a few more comments from people who tried to reverse the membership electing Corbyn twice, the fact they did this and have been working against the membership might speak volumes about the people you're putting forward as representing Labour.

The reason people in the Labour party are pissed off with him is because he voted with the tories and thus lost the party the chance of bringing down the government and forcing a general election.

So he’s supposed to abandon his ideals and ignore the wishes of his constituents in order to possibly defeat the government, possibly triggering a no confidence vote, possibly triggering a general election  which the Labour Party could possibly win?

In order to achieve what?

A Labour government for goodness sake!

Which is just what the country needs at this moment in time.

Which of the three options I listed do you think it is then?

Yes.
Why? Is there a spelling mistake?

What people in the Labour Party were hoping to bring down the Government and force a General Election?
Corbyn in his role as leader and therefore the person who says what happens regarding policy and strategy?
Or, other people such as Momentum, etc. ?

You need to deselect all of them and get your people in there, but you don’t seem to be making much progress with that.

Well almost all of them.

Given the chance of getting into government and reversing the destructive hard Brexit that is being forced upon this country by a small number of hard right butters in the tory party, if you were in the Labour party, what would you do?

It's not a difficult decision really.

OK, I got a bit carried away there!

But, just because he says anti-S is rife in the Labour party doesn't mean it's true.  It's just his opinion. Quite Frankly, I'm sick to death of this A-S bullshit from wealthy, positioned of power people in this relentless attack on Labour.  It's just another Establishment attack on Labour.

I just ignore it now, and, in my eyes, it doesn't make the Jewish community look very good. Beware the backlash.  It creates more resentment than whatever they're trying to achieve.

Everyone apart from the 4 mps who voted with the government. That's the thing, Field actually managed to unite the Blairites and the Corbynites in their annoyance at him. Same goes for Hoey ext. 

The backlash? You sound like a brown shirt facist from the 1930’s.

naubecthink of a better choice of words. 

You sound like someone who wants to shut someone else up but can't think of a decent argument with which to do so.

They might well have wanted to defeat the Government and give them a 'bloody nose', but is there any evidence that the Labour leadership wanted to 'Bring down the Government and force a General Election'?

I'm not putting anyone forward as representing Labour. These people were selected by the Labour party and elected by their constituents to represent Labour. Whether you like it or not, these people do represent Labour, Tom Watson is the deputy leader for goodness sake and elected as such by exactly the same membership that elected Corbyn. More to the point, these people are just the tip of the iceberg, how many more people who in many cases have served the party for decades are you going to trash before you wake up and realise the party is facing an existential crisis of Corbyn's making? Even bl**dy John Macdonnell is worried about it

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45382486

You and all the other Corbynistas are in complete denial.

Try listening to this interview with Margaret Prosser about the state of the party on this morning's BH programme, the relevant bit starts at 6 mins in.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/b0bgp7j7

But hey, what does she know, she's only a Labour peer, active in the party for nearly 50 years, and formerly the deputy general secretary of the T&GWU, president of the TUC, member of the Equal Opportunities Commission and Low Pay Commission and treasurer of the Labour Party. What's she ever done for the Labour movement eh?

Does that include Corbyn and the Labour leadership in general?
If not, then it isn't Labour policy and essentially worthless.

Did Corbyn decide to try and do it?
If not, then perhaps it was a difficult decision...
Further, if Corbyn really thought he had a chance of 'Bringing down the Government and forcing a General Election', then he could attempt to do so anytime he wished by calling for a Motion of No Confidence.  

No he couldn't.

The vote was on the Brexit bill and there were 14 IIRC tories voting against it. This was the chance Labour had of defeating the government on the only significant piece of legislation going through this parliament. A defeat would have left the government in limbo, leaving it with little alternative th as n to call a GE to settle the matter.

The numbers would not have worked that way in a simple no confidence vote.

Well that's 3 big 'ifs' and you've randomly picked one of them to run with.

How about "because voting to back the government and save Teresa mays bacon over her brexit proposals,  possibly in the process saving her from an early general election" severely pissed off a whole bunch of people, not even limited to the labour party. Bit naughty really

Who are these people?
Corbyn and other prominent members of the Labour Party?  I certainly don't remember any sharpening of the knives by Corbyn at the time.
Maybe it was wishful thinking from certain factions that thought such a vote would bring about the downfall of the Government, etc. and sought someone to blame when that didn't happen?
Anyway, Field did a Corbyn and acted on his conscience as that is what he believed was right and therefore put that above mere inter-party politics.
As Corbyn would say, what British Politics needs is more Politicians that stand by their values and don't get bullied into voting as per Party orders.

Ohfurfusxake.

Five people have told you the same thing but you just can't accept it.

Why not write to Labour's chief whip and ask him, would you believe him?

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10069/nick_brown/newcastle_upon_tyne_east

All that's been said is that a General Election would have been forced upon May if the likes of Field had voted the 'right' way.  Even that is questionable, as there was no guarantee that May would have folded at such a narrow minority.
I'll repeat, who are these people that effectively told Field to vote in a certain way so as to bring about the downfall of the Government and when he didn't, was to blame for it not happening?
Corbyn and the Whips?
They might well have directed their MP's to vote in a certain way to give the Government a humiliating bloody nose and perhaps steer Brexit in a direction more akin to their liking.  However, I don't recall Corbyn ever stating/hinting that he wanted a General Election in the case of a Tory minority.
There's also the very real possibility that Corbyn doesn't actually want to be PM at the moment as he would have to deal with the shit fest that is Brexit.  By far better to stand in the wings and pick up the pieces after the dust has settled.

 

No, you came up with 3 possibilities then chose the one that most suits your agenda, without any evidence to back it up, other than you've thought of it.

Here's mine:-

1. he's been a closet Tory all his life and often dresses up in Mrs T's old dresses which he bought of Ebay.

2. He's jealous of Corbyn's affiliation with home-made jam and is off to start his own, "Field's of Jam" empire.

3. He's tired of politics and would like to spend more time honing his Drag Queen act.

I'm choosing 2, because it's just a valid and your No.3

4. He knows Corbyn will deselect everyone who he disagrees with, leaving Labour with 10 electable MPs as the rest will start their own party slightly right of Corbyn/momentum.

Corbyn is probably doing UK politics a favour. The break up of Labour and the birth of a more central party could even end two party politics. Of course Labour won't ever win a majority government, but that's a small price he considers worth paying. Go Jezza. 

I don't recall Corbyn ever stating/hinting that he wanted a General Election

Did you see the 10:00 news last night? The bit where Jeremy said that if the Government can't make a decent Brecit deal they should let someone else have a go?

Deselect by what mechanism?

jk

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45389424

Ie. Remove the anti Corbyn mps by not allowing them to run as Labour candidates. 

Because that would require positive leadership?

 Corbyn as usual. Criticism of others, but offering nothing better in it's place other than the vague Labour will do what is best for jobs, which is what exactly? Remain, Brexit, customs union, efta etc.. ? Anyones guess. 

Or "democratic vote", as it's known elsewhere.

Well we could ask all the people who'd never vote Labour if their lives depended on it, who they would like.

Or we could simply keep everyone the membership votes for, after all this is what would have happened if the PLP had they had their way.

Rightio but that's not Corbyn deselecting anyone is it. It's a motion which may not yet be presented to conference let alone passed to allow constituency parties to democratically chose a candidate (effectively deselect a sitting MP without a qualified majority no confidence vote).

You might not like that but it isn't really what you presented it as.

jk

Time will tell how 'democratic' it might be.

You are right it's not Corbyn. It is a very small number of individuals on a committee deciding who gets to run, ie Corbyn supporters. It will destroy Labour as they will likely deselect some of the most competent individuals in the party. 

Maybe, maybe not.

It's funny just how selectively you favour democracy

jk

No, it will be local members.

I've had the misfortune to run into my local Labour Party committee. They're nothing but a control-mad bunch of extremists, whose attitude to anybody else having a view they disagree with is much the same as the members of the English Defence League (or the National Front). The two groups may (theoretically at least) be at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but in practice both are nothing but extremist thugs.

The sooner that anyone who is, or ever has been, a member of Momentum is banned for life from the Labour Party, the sooner it can return to being a democratic socialist party that accepts varying views, rather than continuing on the path to becoming a "National Socialist Party".

Didn't the NF roam the streets beating with sticks and boots those they 'disagreed with'. Sounds like you had a lucky escape, it must have been terrifying!

jk

Like the may day riots where some sections of society seem to think smashing up shops and businesses is a acceptable, just because they are anti capitalist. 

Did you call the coppers?

oh dear, that doesn’t sound good. 

When do you expect the gas chambers are going to be up and running?  

No, they left the pub.

The landlord apologised to my group for their behaviour - don't know whether they were banned or not.

When one person comes over to your table in the pub and harangues you at high volume, whilst another 8 or 10 are standing around it is a bit worrying - you should try it some time !

When you put nutters in charge of a country, no matter how democratic it was before, you can expect that they will stretch the boundaries of what they can do legally, up to the point where what they do is really illegal. But by then they have too much power.

Trump is doing it already, and look what's happening in Turkey - both examples where the definitions of "security" and "terrorism" has been stretched beyond normally accepted bounds and used to push through extremist policies against anyone who disagrees with them.

Frankly, looking at what the Corbynistas are doing where they do have control at present, I shudder at the idea they could ever have the key to number 10.

Ok. So you reckon if we get a Corbyn government, next stop is military expansionism and a Final Solution to the Jewish ‘problem’...?

Nope, there could be a wave of cash grabs from a few sectors of society to fund all those unfinanciable election promises to start with. Plenty of his cronies believe in seizing assets from anyone they deem haven't earn it etc.. They'll basically plunder society in a fit of jealousy. 

Well, maybe, though that in itself is just speculation 

but Fred’s comment was about Labour “continuing on the path to becoming a "National Socialist Party". That appears to be an allusion to the Nazis, and to imply that they will go on to share characteristics with the Nazi party.

well, the defining characteristics of the Nazis weren’t a tendency to seize assets or to stretch the bounds of legality. They were military subjugation of neighbours and genocide. 

Does anyone really believe that is a possible outcome of a Corbyn premiership? If not, picking a more relevant comparison point than the Nazis would be better.

Which is probably anti-Semitic now we've signed up to IHRA.

Did you complain to anyone or only posted on here?

As I was then a regular at said pub, I never saw them again so believe that they were either banned or moved on anyway - cannot be certain which. Rather a poor example to set for the Committee of the local Labour Party don't you think ?

Not likely (at least at first).

However if I was Jewish I would probably find myself feeling considerably less safe and secure than now.

And private businesses would be in in deep doo-doo when business rates got doubled (or tripled) to pay for their idealistic schemes. Same would apply to anyone who'd got off their backsides and worked for a living - increased taxes so that JC and his fans can be generous to their friends. Government or Union reps would be forced onto companies as "Directors" - with no knowledge or expertise to run a business, but with one instruction - increase pay and decrease productivity.

The country would be run into the ground, and the next government would have to reduce or eliminate so many things to pay for it that they'd be made to look the baddies - not the idiots who'd frittered away the resources.

I'd rather Citizen Smith was in charge of the Labour Party.

"Power to the People !"

You and summo are really knocking the evidence-free paranoid flight-of-fancy out of the park today. Kudos.

Debatable. All we have is your assertion you were 'harangued' which I'm presuming wasn't entirely out of the blue (unless those reds can smell dissent) so what we have is presumably a disagreement between two adults, likely in drink which while by your account heated remained verbal... hardly out of the ordinary if not exemplary behaviour. It's quite a significant leap from there to Corbyn supporters are Nazis in red tee-shirts.

jk

"I was a regular." how long ago are we talking here?

If it was them then yes, I don't understand why you don't complain though, complaints will be logged and possibly investigated, at the moment you telling us you had a problem with some people, who you think are the Committee of the local Labour Party.

Is this based on any fiscal policy or simply DM headlines?

You probably would, but 500,000 members don't agree with you thankfully. And without the 2 year long smear campaign against Corbyn, he's still there.

To right power to the people, what would you prefer power to the toffs?

..and you'd just been sitting there with your pals, just chatting amongst yourselves and minding your own business...

Do you think I zip up the back?

So in fact you *do* envisage a possible scenario where Corbyn, if elected prime minister, would annex a neighbouring country, and then build gas chambers to begin a genocide against Jewish people.

well, that’s a pretty fringe position to hold, but it does help us understand where you are coming from. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us, Fred.

Now go and think about what you've just said.....

The landlord felt the need to come over and apologise for their behaviour - do you need any more evidence than that. (Incidentally he was behind the bar at the time of said incident).

Of course you only have my "assertion" that I even exist - if you wish to be pedantic.

Actually yes we were. The two of us noted (during our conversation) that whilst both of us came from staunch Labour backgrounds, neither of us voted Labour because of the way the party had gone. Cue the ensuing incident.

And yes, because of your comment, maybe I do now think you "zip up at the back".

So you started an argument in the pub and that's why Labour's gone to the dogs?

I do not believe such a scenario could possibly exist - though it does show how far you wish to stretch my poor view of Corbyn to try and ridicule it. I do however believe that if he did become PM, that the overwhelming majority of Jews in this country would feel as worried (and indeed scared) as do the current Jewish MP's.

The problem with democracy is that it is far too easy for extremists to infiltrate an organisation and then destroy it from within. This is being done (or has been done already) to the Labour Party. Momentum is not committed to democracy, and their members should never have been allowed to join in the first place - in the same way that the Conservatives would not entertain NF members.

As for all these persons who joined the Labour Party for the price of a pint of beer - are they really Labour persons, or are a good number of them some combination of anarchists, Momentum members and even right-wingers bent on the destruction of the Labour Party ?

Does the group above include you ?

For a "staunch Labour supporter" you're extremely willing to believe the worst caricatures of the party peddled by the Tories and the right wing press. 

"Momentum is not committed to democracy" - evidence please.

I joined for the price of a pint of beer.

I'm not a Momentum member though I don't share your fear of and disdain for them.

I'm not really 'Labour' either (whatever that means) though I have voted for them of late and occasionally leafleted for the LibDems. I'd say I'm broadly a social democrat who is forced by FPTP to pick and choose my weapon. I've voted red (good candidate, only pro EU candidate with a hope on the paper), orange (electoral reform) and green (everything but their nuclear power position really) over the years. The greens have my heart I suppose but I have to vote with my head in any given cycle.

I'm certainly not an anarchist though again I don't share your apparent instinctive revulsion, it's an idea which clearly can be and is made to work in limited circumstances at limited scale. It's not a good way to organise (seems the wrong word really) a unit the size and complexity of a modern nation IMO.

I'm not a right winger by any meaningful definition of the term.

I joined because a succession of centrists had left Labour apparently standing for little distinctive, merely shadowing the conservatives on their drift to the right in search of UKIP's votes in the aftermath of the 2008 crash. I thought we deserved a more distinctive choice, a more vibrant debate rather than petty point scoring as they all fought for the same ground. I thought the ideas of socialism deserved to be given some light, advocated and available to voters on the ballot paper. I think people deserve real choice.

As it happens Corbyn has been pretty shit at doing this, in large part because brexit has eaten up all the bandwidth but also because he's tended toward gimmicks and has been pinned down by wave after wave of personal attacks.

You decide.

jk

I'm of a similar voting disposition, and tend to agree with most of what you say, particularly the bit above. I just have a much more cynical view of those behind Corbyn and more importantly, their motives.

Momentum didn't exist until the PLP tied to reverse the membership voting for Corbyn for leader.

You could say Momentum is a result of people trying to subvert democracy.

i'm not stretching anything, Fred. If you don't think Corbyn has genocidal tendencies, why did you say that Labour were 'continuing on the path to becoming a "National Socialist Party" '? And then when i explicitly asked whether Corbyn planned a 'Final Solution' for the  Jews, reply "not likely (at least at first)"-  i.e. you were not ruling it out at some point?

I'm not putting words in your mouth; they're your own words.

In the end, it would have probably better if you had just admitted that the Nazi allusion you made in the post that i originally replied to was tasteless hyperbole. Because if you are concerned about Jewish people feeling worried by Corbyn, making absurd implications that his party is on  its way to becoming Nazis is hardly going to act as a reassurance to them. 

It's not his party, it's Momentum's.

The leaders of that are the real problem.

What do you say to Jewish people who have joined Labour because of Jeremy Corbyn?

You seem to be lumping ALL Jewish people with the attitude and thoughts, rather dangerous if you ask me.

More fool them.

Leaders like Jon Lansman, the Jew?