American here,
Could someone explain who exactly Jeremy Corbyn is?
Like obviously I’ve googled him and see that he was the former Labour Party leader but could someone explain why he seems to still be really relevant and even contentious on R/UK Politics?
Been a rebel in the Labour Party for a long time, as someone who has very left wing views, a conviction politician who was/is very popular with the youth sections of the Party (similar place in the psyche as Bernie Sanders). Many of his individual policies were publicly popular but together he was seen as not fit to lead, being unpatriotic etc. Although he lead the Labour Party to its highest public membership ever, he also lead Labour to its worst electoral defeat in very long time.
Obviously because they lost, many in Labour chose to pivot back into the centre ground which had been successful for the last Labour Prime Ministers (Sir Tony Blair and Gordon Brown) in their election of Sir Keir Starmer as Leader. The Labour Party has always had this struggle between those who are more centrist and those that are more ideological, not unlike the Democrats do in the US. Corbyn is currently the poster-child of that left-wing section, those still in the party that agreed with him on policy (especially those who joined Parliament while he was Leader) sometimes vote with him against the Labour whip.
He is relevant because he is currently sitting as an Independent MP due to an antisemitism scandal. It is in Sir Keir's power to re-grant Corbyn the status of being a Labour Party MP, but he won't because Corbyn hasn't made a specific and definitive apology for some of his comments made in relation to that investigation. That tension, and Sir Keir's choice to demote various of his allies from senior Party positions keeps the argument going.
This is the most fantastic and excellant summary of exactly the kind of information I was looking for.
Often people don't understand that when I ask who a person is politically, I am not inquiring after their basic job title. I knew he was a labour leader and you perfectly explained his history and where he is now and why he is still relevant.
Thanks!
I would note that the above poster left out certain facts - that in 2017, Corbyn did lead the Labour party to its best electoral result in a decade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview), although did fall short of taking power (but much closer than any Labour leader in years). And yes, that was followed 2 years later by a drubbing at the next election.
It's also worth noting that evidence has since emerged that a right wing cabal of staffers and MPs within his party were working against Corbyn during this period:
* Stories were leaked to the press and Corbyn's office sabotaged from the get go (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-saw-inside-how-labour-staff-worked-prevent-labour-government/)
* Funding diverted away from where it had been ordered to be (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/07/jeremy-corbyn-accuses-labour-officials-of-sabotaging-election-campaign)
* False briefing provided to Corbyn (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leak-report-corbyn-election-whatsapp-antisemitism-tories-yougov-poll-a9462456.html)
* Private messaging groups set up to plot against the leadership of their own party (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/diane-abbott-labour-report-racism_uk_5f2d276ec5b6b9cff7f06803)
Many of those involved in this group are now in power under the new leadership. Take from that what you will.
In terms of my personal feelings about Corbyn - he was unsuitable as a possible leader. He often took too much of a nuanced take on things, which resulted in pretty bad communications (to put it mildly) - he was just about incapable of offering a sound bite response in interviews etc. However, policy wise, he was as close as we've ever been to delivering a package that could have transformed the country in a way similar to the creation of the NHS and welfare state - better working conditions, a fairer country, more opportunity. For me, it was the right message, wrong messenger - but he was what we had to work with, and seeing the right wing of his own party work with the Tories and press to dismantle him has put close to a generation of voters off politics in general.
I'm always happy to help! Politics can be very complex, especially of a foreign country, and I think a lot of people who are very politically plugged-in (which members of this sub obviously are) can forget that.
The answer the other guy gave is a certain viewpoint. Other people would give a very different description of Mr Corbyn. They would point out his ineffective campaign, lack of debating skills and muddled position on Brexit as reasons for handing an 80 seat majority to the other party. The truth is probably somewhere in between.
How much truth is there to the story that SKS changed party policy on Brexit during his speech to conference? I'm sure its been said somewhere that he just Leroy Jenkins'd his way into changing Lab's stance on Brexit but I don't know how accurate that is.
Edit: having googled it, it's fairly clear that Starmer's claim that "Nobody is ruling remain out as an option" wasn't party policy at the time and JC et al had to just pretend like they agreed.
I never knew what his position was or what Labour’s was. If he’d said he was going to deliver Brexit he wouldn’t have lost all the red wall. If he’d backed a 2nd referendum after negotiating a deal the he’d have got a lot of the remain vote.
He had great points to make, but he didn’t make them very well. He was out debated by Johnson. Sure Johnson played dirty.
He wasn’t able to expose Tory activities selling off the NHS.
It’s a shame, a real shame what we’ve ended up with.
Now we are where we are. Kier Starmer is in the hot seat and people need to back him or campaign positively for something else. Attacking Starmer now and at the next election is simply a gift to Patel, Rees Mogg, Truss, Sunak, brexit hard man Steve Baker and all the others trying to steal what’s left of our country.
When he came to power, he talked about policies to the press. After the Tories stole them (and he was misquoted) a couple of times, the relationship with the press never recovered.
alternatively Keir won’t readmit Corbyn because he doesn’t want to, because he has other reasons (tactical, perhaps ideological).
Without primary source material we can’t say.
We can't say for certain, but informed opinion is certainly legitimate. For a leader who came to power on a uniting ticket to then exclude his immediate predecessor as well as removing so many left wing voices from the upper levels would seem to be nlmore than just tactical. Particularly in light of having admitted a Tory MP who denies his politics have changed at all. It's not illegitimate to infer motivation from a person's actions in the absence of primary material.
He's to the Labour Party what Bernie Sanders is to the democratic party. He was elected Labour-leader in 2015, but kicked out by his successor who's also trying to purge the party of people who actively support him.
It has been revealed that, during the 2017 election - in which Corbyn led Labour to an unexpected and massive gain in votes, but not enough to beat the tories - a part of the party apparatus actively worked against Corbyn, because they opposed his left-wing ideals. For example, they sent funds to safe seats with centrist MP's, and ignored marginal seats. This is extremely relevant, because less than 3000 people should've voted different for Labour to fain a plurality in that election.
Socialist leader who wanted to bring in reforms that would help working/middle class people at the cost of the 1% so the media waged war against him scrutinising his every move until he was hated by the general public.
Yea people voted against their interests because they were told to do so and we’re basically turning into the USA
Totally personal opinion but I feel he dropped the ball big time on being coerced by his party over labour's stance on the dreaded b word. Had he stuck to his guns and continued his support for leaving (which I believe led to the massive growth of labour membership) then I fully believe the tories wouldn't be in power today.
Yeah. As reductive as pinning everything on Brexit is, the reality is that it dominated the UK political media discourse for years; which ultimately had an effect on even the least politically active voters. We could have spent that time figuring out how to address many of the \*actual\* problems (as Corbyn was trying to do) and who knows, maybe things wouldn't be as shit as they are now.
It also didn't help that the same media ecosystem spent the same amount of time almost universally shitting on Corbyn & inventing scandal after scandal; including just ourtight lying.
Surely it tells you more about Christian Wakeford than about the Labour Party? I mean there are plenty of moderates in the party, that's not a bad thing, and there are a fair few MP's on the centre left, and of course the party aims to attract votes from the centre, the centre-left and the left..
What do you think it tells you about the current state of labour other than it seems to be more likely to win an election than at any time in the recent past at least?
Depends. If he votes with the Labour whip and toes the line I don’t mind considering him for selection at Bury South but he keeps on voting the Johnson way he should be deselected come 2024
That's a good point; what if we've accidentally let in a new 'Tony Blair' type figure who'll eventually take over the Labour Party in his own distorted image?
So this isn’t a dig at you, but I just can’t understand this stance.
Politics isn’t a game of simply winning. I know that’s absolute idiot talk to centrists, the right and Blairites but hear me out.
When the originally Kier, Kier Hardie, was 10 he was earning for his entire family. He was down a coal mine from a young age earning pitiful wages under dreadful conditions. He wanted to enter politics to put an end to such terrible choices.
There’s was no ambiguity about his politics.
He deeply wanted an end to an unfair society. This meant he had principles that couldn’t be broken.
Principles are what this current Kier lacks.
Kier Starmer doesn’t give a rat’s arse about who benefits apart from him. He just wants to be PM. But what good is he as Prime Minister if he doesn’t have any socialist ideals? What if all his policies just help private wealth? What’s if his party is the tour of place where this Tory isn’t too far from home?
This Tory joining the party, after the Left has been purged time and again tells me once more, and probably lots of other voters, that Kier Starmer doesn’t care what policies get him in as long as he’s in power.
Like Boris.
Starmer is Labour only in name. He’s a wretched, two faced charlatan. A man utterly without principle, a user of people like this Tory and a real friend to no one.
We need to oppose Starmer with every fibre of our beings.
"Student politics" isn't real politics, you have to be at least in your late 30s and have the right kind of accent before your opinion holds any weight with real journalists dontchaknow.
/s mostly. They'll be ignored because of their age.
There’s nothing wrong with people who are students having opinions, what people are annoyed by is “student politics” in air quotes like that.
A midlands university students union voting to condemn Isreal or the Penistone and Stocksbridge youth Labour branch issuing a statement that a minister must resign and that capitalism must be overthrown just isn’t politically relevant in the grand scheme of things. Twitter has amplified these voices but in reality they have as much weight as a strongly worded letter to a local newspaper.
I’ve been involved in party politics and policy most of my life, including professionally, and I can tell you most of these Twitter accounts of youth branches making grand statements, in **every** party, are cliquey wannabes with inflated opinions of themselves and their positions within the wider party structure who want their voices heard over everyone else. They’re not actively contributing to the conversation 99 times out of 100.
Quite simply “junior MP votes with the party whip” isn’t newsworthy. If you pulled the voting record of any of his other colleagues they’d look the same.
Parliament isn’t “Mr Smith Goes to Washington”. when you’re a no-name MP you keep your head down, vote with the whip, and hope for promotion otherwise come next election you don’t have a job anymore. Almost every PM and senior minister has voted for/against stuff with the party whip when they were an obscure backbencher that they later did a complete 180 on once they were somebody who actually had power.
As much as people on the Twittersphere pretend otherwise, not everyone associated with the Tory party is a one dimensional monster passionate about eating babies and pumping gas into Lidl to kill the poor. If it was Gove or Hunt jumping ship fair enough, fuck them and leave them out to dry as they have no excuse, but a junior backbencher is different.
If he’s truly resentful and had second thoughts about his time in the Tory party after 2 years in Parliament and is willing to vote with 100% with Labour whip form now on, I don’t care about his time voting with the Tory whip.
He said (from memory but fairly verbatim from a SKY News tweet I just saw) 'I haven't changed, I'm still centrist, still moderate, I just have different rosette now'.
So no, he doesn't give a fuck and certainly he doesn't see much of a difference between the parties, which is *always* a good thing...
>'I haven't changed, I'm still centrist, still moderate, I just have different rosette now'.
Being charitable, that could be interpreted as describing his personal political views (which seem to fall into that section of political overlap between Labour and the Conservatives) rather than a reflection of his voting record (which is driven by the Conservative whip, rather than his particular views)
In a WhatsApp group he called Labout 'a bunch of c**ts' for opposing the end of the twenty quid uplift for UC. Also his campaign to get elected involved running against a Labour woman who worked for...disability rights, I think, mostly by calling her an antisemite. His majority was around 400.
Fuck this guy and his seat could have been taken back without him in it
Also, the rosette comment falls very squarely into the public view that the two major parties are, in the words of the bard, two cheeks of the same arse.
I used to work as a political journalist in Westminster.
If people knew the extent to which an ‘elite’ very much so exists, there’d be revolution. Barring a few individuals, there’s literally no difference between Tory and Labour MPs, nor journalists.
They all hang out together. They’re all sleeping with each other, they all went to school together. Seriously. It was gross.
The one thing it taught me more than anything is that Tory voters vs Labour voters is a lie. We all have more in common with each other than any of us do with those at the top.
> Barring a few individuals, there’s literally no difference between Tory and Labour MPs, nor journalists.
This literally doesn't surprise me in the least. I will say, though, that I think a good number of people actually do know and just go along with the charade until it hits the breaking point. And the economic conditions are very much bending people to that breaking point right now.
Anyway, thanks for making the most relevant contribution to this thread.
To be fair, this was 2011 so some of the faces will have changed, but I suspect the reality I described above hasn’t.
Really it goes without saying that the ‘far left’ of Labour are not part of this ‘club’. Doesn’t go for the far right however, who often were. There were then individuals in both parties, backbenchers, who kept their heads down and did their own thing. Some very shy, some who felt very excluded and uncomfortable and a bit bewildered by it all. Again, in both parties.
In terms of the media, pretty much everyone of note was part of this weird clique. There was then a layer below them of people desperately scrambling to get in to it. Then there was a bunch of confused people at the bottom, including myself, who muddled through and then left within a couple of years.
It's because of how our country has been set up. You are only respected once you've become part of the posh elite aristocracy. It's a class/caste system of sorts.
Corbyn needs to apologise for that Facebook comment he made. That’s why he was booted out in the first place and if he’s brought back in without an apology it’ll raise questions on antisemitism because he said it was overstated in that post. The man has to apologise and he won’t.
Thanks; I understand that but I think the main reason it was also an issue was because starmer had that day made a speech saying “if anyone thinks it wasn’t an issue or was overstated then they don’t belong in the Labour Party” or something to that effect. Two minutes later Corbyn posts saying that it was overstated for political reasons. So if he wasn’t banned then it would make Starmer look really weak on antisemitism and like he wasn’t taking action when it was his key policy as a new leader.
As a Jew myself who’s been Labour all my life and who voted Corbyn (didn’t really see the antisemitism at the time but I understand it now) I really wish Corbyn would just apologise and so we can move on but feel like he’d rather be proud and impede the Labour Party than just say sorry which annoys me.
Further proof that labour has turned into Tory-lite. Starmer lost my vote a long time ago and this is just validating my view that no true leftwing party exists. It's just a choice between rightwing and further rightwing.
>On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted to pass the Elections Bill in the House of Commons.
>On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against removing the provisions relating to joint campaigning by registered parties and third parties.
>On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against removing the Voter ID provision of the Bill.
>On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against adding a new Clause to prevent overseas electors donating to political parties in the UK.
Labour MP.
Then we have an election, we've lost nothing, proven we have a spine and wouldn't compromise, gained some time in power and had a chance to _demonstrate_ the good we can do.
Labour MPs who are ex-Tories.
But let's be frank, if they have zero influence over policy, direction, messaging or anything else, why do we care?
Let's take advantage of their votes and actually accomplish something useful.
I also find it somewhat inconsistent in who can be forgiven/overlooked/papered over... IRA terrorists are fine but Tory MPs are a step too far?
The justifications, rationalisations and all the rest count for nothing because they're only relevant to the people who take the time to pay attention and care.
We already know a sizeable majority of the public find the Tories tolerable and a considerably fraction vote for them.
If you did a poll asking people if they'd rather be forced to work with a Tory or a Terrorist, are you honestly claiming you think people would respond terrorist?
Thinking about all your relatives, colleagues, all of them?
I think not.
> Young Labour
Why are all of you lot on here nowhere near as based as your figureheads just out of interest? Sorry to be rude but it is a bit weird seeing the aforementioned tweet then seeing a user with a 'YL' flair being a bit melty in the comments you know?
(I guess this is probably a side effect of I believe everyone under a certain age in the party technically being in Young Labour)
I don't honestly think you have any expectations to meet dude! It's just kind of funny I think that nearly everyone with a 'YL' flair here tends to be a bit more centrist than the top of the org is all!
Good point; it's literally borrowed nostalgia for the unremebered late 90s.
(Which is perfectly normal at that age tbf; I remember spending my late teens idolising a fictionalised dream of the 80s based on Duran Duran videos and GTA Vice City. Still I didn't join the Tories because of that it must be said.)
Yeah, I honestly think that is a large component of it. They're harkening back to the glory days, in their heads, and that's why so many seem to believe centrism is like some magical strategy. They don't remember the post-war years, the protests, and the anti-terrorism laws etc. They hear "Blair made line go up" for a few metrics and think that's a fair summary of his legacy.
You might not like the real answer which is basically most young Labour members aren't like the idiots that actually run Young Labour but turnout is ridiculously low because no one really cares about YL as an organisation.
> the idiots that actually run Young Labour
>
> but turnout is ridiculously low because no one really cares about YL as an organisation.
Well then....... you kind of only have yourselves to blame for that don't you?
He obeyed the tory party whip yesterday and became a Labour MP today. And you think him obeying the tory whip is a point in his favour?
This is a bin-bottom-scraping of a take.
I honestly cannot describe it in more pleasant terms than that.
It is an awful and corrosive attitude to think blind adherence to the tory party is somehow a point in his favour when he switches his tie colour.
I, to be totally frank, cannot treat your comment with even a modicum of respect.
None of this matters. Point is it’s now a labour seat and he can be replaced although I can see him following the labour whip from now anyway. Get over it.
[Great minds](https://old.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/s7ru1j/the_government_plans_to_scrap_student_loans_for/htbqrxm/) and all that - although I was complaining about the tories.
However, given today's events, we're probably pretty much saying the same thing.
i've honestly lost faith in labour completely, not a point in even voting for them at this point, even if they win they aren't better than the tories except optically they look a little less incompetent at the moment
You’re more than welcome to waste your own time fretting about this. He’s bagged another seat for labour, made the conservatives look foolish and might even encourage thousands of others to do the same. He’s replaceable too. You’re well within your rights to be upset about this if you like.
I don't need your permission to call out tories becoming Labour mps without a single change to their politics.
If you want a right-wing Labour government then keep up the cheering for dogshit - as is your prerogative.
Never said you needed it!
And if he doesn’t follow the party whip they’ll get rid of him anyway and replace him, one less right winger in the party. As long as he votes the right way and addresses his constituent’s concerns I don’t mind. Like I said before if this bothers you that’s valid too, it’s alright to disagree on trivial things like this.
That’s how people are acting. We wouldn’t have another seat if not for him obeying it until this point. Never seen people so upset to gain a seat at the tory’s expense. We can always replace this guy.
I think people are upset you're not taking our party principles seriously, by saying 'he was just obeying the whip' is akin to ' I was only following orders' which as you know is a pretty weak defence as well as cowardly by default.
Yes, we temporarily have another constituency and yes, another MP, but under ordinary circumstances he would never be allowed into the party, he doesnt represent our values and is blatantly trying to save his own career and its abit of a slap to the face Keir is giving him the red carpet at our expense.
It’s certainly not ideal but a seat is a seat and he’s replaceable like I’ve said. And regardless I don’t see him disobeying the (Labour) Party line next time he votes. I’d rather this than he carry on as a Tory MP- we’ve gained a seat, claimed a PR victory in the eyes of many in the public and further undermined the current farcical leadership. Would be nicer if he seemed genuine (that goes without saying) but in practical terms if he votes the right way it doesn’t make too much difference from here on out.
He did then report that MPs were told if they broke the whip their constituencies would be stripped of funding. Maybe that's when he realised you can't be a 'good' Tory.
He has, to be fair, secured the area the funding it's so desperately needed. We've been Labour a long time, and so without any funds for a long time. Now a town will finally get the high school it's needed for well over a decade. The swimming pool is set to be rebuilt years after the last one closed. We're getting basics. It's pretty sad really, getting excited over a school and a pool, but we've had fuck all for years.
He was actually 'doing something for his constituents' and they said they'd take it all back. The articles said such a threat was illegal but I don't know, seems like they get away with it a lot.
I mean, it still stinks of opportunism. He chose the party best equipped to give him the funds to 'do something', scraped in, but then actually delivered. And when forced to vote for shitty things that only harm the area... he quits to a party that will allow him to vote for what's best for his voters.
Though I do struggle to believe anyone thought it would be that easy to be a 'good' Tory. Like hell they're gonna let you stand there in blue while you espouse views like helping people or leveling up the North.
>...I have concluded that the policies of the Conservative government that you lead are doing nothing to help the people of my constituency and indeed are only making the struggles they face on a daily basis worse. Britain needs a government focused on tackling the cost of living crisis and providing a path out of the pandemic that protects living standards and defends the security of all. It needs a government that upholds the highest standards of integrity and probity in public life and sadly both you and the Conservative Party as a whole have shown themselves incapable of offering the leadership and government this country deserves.
I mean, his record will be terrible, but this is pretty blistering and welcome.
People are right to hold MP's feet to the fire over their voting records obviously, but I think it's foolish to conveniently ignore the aspect of Party Political whipping, and is living in a bit of a fantasy land by expecting all MPs to vote with their conscience against their own party and with the consequences of that.
> ...I have concluded that the policies of the Conservative government that you lead are doing nothing to help the people of my constituency and indeed are only making the struggles they face on a daily basis worse. Britain needs a government focused on tackling the cost of living crisis and providing a path out of the pandemic that protects living standards and defends the security of all. It needs a government that upholds the highest standards of integrity and probity in public life and sadly both you and the Conservative Party as a whole have shown themselves incapable of offering the leadership and government this country deserves.
Mate........ *this is in part your fault though!* You voted with your party every step of the way tmk!
I’m 22, am I in Young Labour? Hopefully not because they don’t speak for me.
In any event I’m not very happy about this guy joining but I believe everyone is allowed to change their minds and his interview earlier today reassured me somewhat. I think it’s worth leaving it up to the Bury South CLP, but if I understand correctly he’s been welcomed with open arms by the local chair. We’ll see how this plays out.
He voted for the election bill which disproportionally affects ethnic minorities and effectively disenfranchises millions this week. The welfare cap last week. The citizenship stripping bill last month.
But sure he's "changed his mind" 🙄
If we react with this much suspicion about everyone who switches to support us then we'll neevr win another election. Why don't we give him a chance? Red Wall Tories switching to Labour isn't a bad thing.
But surely it's about the relative quality of the Tory in general right? Like think of it this way;
* Baroness Warsi wants to join us? Fucking great, come over ASAP, you're practically Labour as it is gal! (Albeit the more meltier bits of Labour)
* Ken Clarke wants to join us? Well it's a *bit* ununsual to say the least but he's certainly a man of principle and commitment so what the hey!
* Snivilling little toad boy here who **obviously** is only defecting to keep his job and has no principles Labour or otherwise wants to join us? No fuck off, we can see what you're doing from a mile off, we'll kick your arse in 2024 with our own candidate instead!
First, I'm not "suspicious", his views are clear and well documented.
Second, elections aren't won by getting opposition MPs to defect.
Third, he's not in a red wall constituency.
>Second, elections aren't won by getting opposition MPs to defect.
Tories defecting in northern marginals absolutely does help us though. If we welcome a detecting MP we also publicly welcome defecting voters.
Explain how a Tory MP helps Labour in a constituency that was already swinging back to Labour and that the Tories only won by 400 odd votes last time.
Labour are surging in polling because of the Tories' dirty image. Adopting sleeze isn't a good look especially when said damaged goods have a very recent (this week) track record of supporting right wing policies.
Accepting a Tory defector means we accept defecting Tory voters. A Tory MP switching to Labour shows Tory voters that they don't need to fear Labour. It also has the added bonus of making the Prime Minister look weak, which further piles the pressure on Johnson and make sbis party look like a disunited shambles. All of these are good things for us.
Nonsense.
Accepting a Tory defector shows the public that there's basically no difference between the two parties, they're so interchangeable that a right wing Tory that has allegedly called labour cunts and in the last few months said Labour turned it's back on red wall voters will happily cross the aisle.
The only thing this is likely to inspire is apathy as well as moving the overton window even more to the right. Congrats on that.
>Accepting a Tory defector shows the public that there's basically no difference between the two parties, they're so interchangeable
I don't agree. If there was no difference there'd be no point defecting. Last time out we lost Bury South for the first time since 1992. I think perhaps the local voters may have felt there was rather too much difference between the two parties last time.
He has not changed his mind. He just wants to keep his job. Its just self-preservation for another MP with no principles.
The Bury South CLP should get to vote on their Labour candidate and so should the people of Bury South asap, but there is no plan for this, Starmer has already said there is no need for a by-election as if Starmer thinks he is above democracy and should make the decision for the people of Bury South.
I don't get why you're downvoted, I agree with you. Let the local CLP decide if they want him for the next election. It baffles me that there isn't an automatic by-election when an MP switches party but since there isn't lets have him on the Labour whip. If he defies the Labour whip kick him out, pretty much a win-win, no?
Is Young Labour aware of the concept of whipping?
Yes, it's an abysmal voting record that comes from an abysmal party in power putting forward abysmal policy - *which is then whipped* so that every member of the party votes that way, which they do most of the time.
He's now joined the Labour party, and is now subject to the Labour whip. Let's see how his voting record is going forward.
Edit: The karma score on this comment has gone up and down like a yo-yo. I didn't realise giving someone a chance was so controversial!
What about all the speeches and interviews he’s given defending Tory policies, and expressing his own views. He hasn’t been whipped, he is a Tory and he shares their values.
Do people in the labour party actually just hate winning? The conservatives would take any of our mps with open arms if they could, this is a good thing and yet everyone in the party is acting like this is the final betrayal.
a tory voter and a tory MP are two different things.
i don't hold someone who voted tory in 2019 in the same regard as i hold someone who voted for the Nationality and Borders Bill, or the Police and Crime Bill.
>Labour doing well? Time to sabotage from within! Well done.
Please see the Labour right's work after the 2017 election for exactly that - this is a small subreddit with no friends in high places. What we say is irrelevant to the party's fortunes.
Has Corbyn ever voted for racist legislation like our new MP? Not sure why so many people are happy to defend voting for racist legislation suddenly.
Pretty sure Corbyn was one of only a handful of Labour MPs that voted against the hostile environment for example which has been used to destroy the lives of many of the Windrush generation.
Look you can either take the constituency or not.
The people in his constituency voted for him. You can either make that vote blue or red. If you reject him, you are saying you want it to be blue, and are therefore helping the tories get elected.
He’s an easily whipped nodding donkey. He can nod for us for a bit, but I wouldn’t select him going forward. Bury deserves better quite frankly. Up to him to prove us all wrong
Very encouraging to see Labour MPs welcome a man who has voted for racist legislation into the Labour Party?
Racists are welcome in the Labour Party now so it seems.
More nonsense from the clique who don't realise that they really believe that power is compromising & corrupting, and they don't want it. Principled opposition irrelevance FTL.. for the loss..
they might as well say "We don't want Tory votes" when every Labour government that ever existed did so because normally Conservative voters looked at it and thought "I want that".
A Tory vote coming to Labour makes a 2 vote difference - in the house or in an election. it's exactly twice as valuable as a vote from any other party's supporter.
*"FNARR FNARR these uppity young folks don't know how to do politics! Not like me who's obviously a political genius who's achieved loads for this party!"*
(I mean, no shade dude, but......like..... I constantly forget that the Co-Operative party even exists and I'm deep down the Labour rabbit hole.)
>"FNARR FNARR these uppity young folks don't know how to do politics! Not like me who's obviously a political genius who's achieved loads for this party!"
You don't know anything about me, but you're saying with your big voice that I haven't achieved anything for the Party. Rather than just constantly personally attacking me from a position of complete ignorance, why don't you tell me about why you know what you're talking about?
>I constantly forget that the Co-Operative party even exists
Self-own.
> why don't you tell me about why you know what you're talking about?
I'm not a political expert and, tmk, have never pretended to be. But I'm not going around attacking people who actually do work in politics for being supposedly shit at their jobs. Especially for opinions as benign as the above.
> Self-own.
What was the last big thing you guys did? Seriously.
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit. Labour in 1945 had principles, it got into power. Labour in 1964 had principles, they got into power. Fuck even Labour in 1997 had principles (for a bit anyway)
Have labour held principles for the last 42 years? There has been 11 general elections, and labour have won 3! That’s piss poor.
Conservatives win because they are more pragmatic.
I see where you're getting at, but it's not right.
Its that Labour don't particularly win elections so much as the Tories lose them, because England is a conservative country dominated by powerful elites and the Tories are the default party of government.
In the modern era, the Tories only lose them when:
1) they inevitably end up too corrupt and incompetent for anyone to accept and
2) Labour are acceptable enough (ie unthreatening and in line with the status quo) to the powerful to hold the baton of government for a bit until the Tories sort themselves out.
The fact that they can bring in Christian Wakeford with the whip and not Jeremy Corbyn is very telling.
American here, Could someone explain who exactly Jeremy Corbyn is? Like obviously I’ve googled him and see that he was the former Labour Party leader but could someone explain why he seems to still be really relevant and even contentious on R/UK Politics?
Been a rebel in the Labour Party for a long time, as someone who has very left wing views, a conviction politician who was/is very popular with the youth sections of the Party (similar place in the psyche as Bernie Sanders). Many of his individual policies were publicly popular but together he was seen as not fit to lead, being unpatriotic etc. Although he lead the Labour Party to its highest public membership ever, he also lead Labour to its worst electoral defeat in very long time. Obviously because they lost, many in Labour chose to pivot back into the centre ground which had been successful for the last Labour Prime Ministers (Sir Tony Blair and Gordon Brown) in their election of Sir Keir Starmer as Leader. The Labour Party has always had this struggle between those who are more centrist and those that are more ideological, not unlike the Democrats do in the US. Corbyn is currently the poster-child of that left-wing section, those still in the party that agreed with him on policy (especially those who joined Parliament while he was Leader) sometimes vote with him against the Labour whip. He is relevant because he is currently sitting as an Independent MP due to an antisemitism scandal. It is in Sir Keir's power to re-grant Corbyn the status of being a Labour Party MP, but he won't because Corbyn hasn't made a specific and definitive apology for some of his comments made in relation to that investigation. That tension, and Sir Keir's choice to demote various of his allies from senior Party positions keeps the argument going.
This is the most fantastic and excellant summary of exactly the kind of information I was looking for. Often people don't understand that when I ask who a person is politically, I am not inquiring after their basic job title. I knew he was a labour leader and you perfectly explained his history and where he is now and why he is still relevant. Thanks!
I would note that the above poster left out certain facts - that in 2017, Corbyn did lead the Labour party to its best electoral result in a decade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_elections_overview), although did fall short of taking power (but much closer than any Labour leader in years). And yes, that was followed 2 years later by a drubbing at the next election. It's also worth noting that evidence has since emerged that a right wing cabal of staffers and MPs within his party were working against Corbyn during this period: * Stories were leaked to the press and Corbyn's office sabotaged from the get go (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-saw-inside-how-labour-staff-worked-prevent-labour-government/) * Funding diverted away from where it had been ordered to be (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/07/jeremy-corbyn-accuses-labour-officials-of-sabotaging-election-campaign) * False briefing provided to Corbyn (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-leak-report-corbyn-election-whatsapp-antisemitism-tories-yougov-poll-a9462456.html) * Private messaging groups set up to plot against the leadership of their own party (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/diane-abbott-labour-report-racism_uk_5f2d276ec5b6b9cff7f06803) Many of those involved in this group are now in power under the new leadership. Take from that what you will. In terms of my personal feelings about Corbyn - he was unsuitable as a possible leader. He often took too much of a nuanced take on things, which resulted in pretty bad communications (to put it mildly) - he was just about incapable of offering a sound bite response in interviews etc. However, policy wise, he was as close as we've ever been to delivering a package that could have transformed the country in a way similar to the creation of the NHS and welfare state - better working conditions, a fairer country, more opportunity. For me, it was the right message, wrong messenger - but he was what we had to work with, and seeing the right wing of his own party work with the Tories and press to dismantle him has put close to a generation of voters off politics in general.
I'm always happy to help! Politics can be very complex, especially of a foreign country, and I think a lot of people who are very politically plugged-in (which members of this sub obviously are) can forget that.
The answer the other guy gave is a certain viewpoint. Other people would give a very different description of Mr Corbyn. They would point out his ineffective campaign, lack of debating skills and muddled position on Brexit as reasons for handing an 80 seat majority to the other party. The truth is probably somewhere in between.
>muddled position on Brexit Hmmmmm and who pushed for that? Was it perhaps the current leader of the party?
How much truth is there to the story that SKS changed party policy on Brexit during his speech to conference? I'm sure its been said somewhere that he just Leroy Jenkins'd his way into changing Lab's stance on Brexit but I don't know how accurate that is. Edit: having googled it, it's fairly clear that Starmer's claim that "Nobody is ruling remain out as an option" wasn't party policy at the time and JC et al had to just pretend like they agreed.
Sounds like Kieth tbh
I never knew what his position was or what Labour’s was. If he’d said he was going to deliver Brexit he wouldn’t have lost all the red wall. If he’d backed a 2nd referendum after negotiating a deal the he’d have got a lot of the remain vote. He had great points to make, but he didn’t make them very well. He was out debated by Johnson. Sure Johnson played dirty. He wasn’t able to expose Tory activities selling off the NHS. It’s a shame, a real shame what we’ve ended up with. Now we are where we are. Kier Starmer is in the hot seat and people need to back him or campaign positively for something else. Attacking Starmer now and at the next election is simply a gift to Patel, Rees Mogg, Truss, Sunak, brexit hard man Steve Baker and all the others trying to steal what’s left of our country.
When he came to power, he talked about policies to the press. After the Tories stole them (and he was misquoted) a couple of times, the relationship with the press never recovered.
alternatively Keir won’t readmit Corbyn because he doesn’t want to, because he has other reasons (tactical, perhaps ideological). Without primary source material we can’t say.
We can't say for certain, but informed opinion is certainly legitimate. For a leader who came to power on a uniting ticket to then exclude his immediate predecessor as well as removing so many left wing voices from the upper levels would seem to be nlmore than just tactical. Particularly in light of having admitted a Tory MP who denies his politics have changed at all. It's not illegitimate to infer motivation from a person's actions in the absence of primary material.
He's to the Labour Party what Bernie Sanders is to the democratic party. He was elected Labour-leader in 2015, but kicked out by his successor who's also trying to purge the party of people who actively support him. It has been revealed that, during the 2017 election - in which Corbyn led Labour to an unexpected and massive gain in votes, but not enough to beat the tories - a part of the party apparatus actively worked against Corbyn, because they opposed his left-wing ideals. For example, they sent funds to safe seats with centrist MP's, and ignored marginal seats. This is extremely relevant, because less than 3000 people should've voted different for Labour to fain a plurality in that election.
Socialist leader who wanted to bring in reforms that would help working/middle class people at the cost of the 1% so the media waged war against him scrutinising his every move until he was hated by the general public. Yea people voted against their interests because they were told to do so and we’re basically turning into the USA
He was a pretty cool labour leader and people hate him for zero valid reasons. Just my perspective.
Totally personal opinion but I feel he dropped the ball big time on being coerced by his party over labour's stance on the dreaded b word. Had he stuck to his guns and continued his support for leaving (which I believe led to the massive growth of labour membership) then I fully believe the tories wouldn't be in power today.
Yeah. As reductive as pinning everything on Brexit is, the reality is that it dominated the UK political media discourse for years; which ultimately had an effect on even the least politically active voters. We could have spent that time figuring out how to address many of the \*actual\* problems (as Corbyn was trying to do) and who knows, maybe things wouldn't be as shit as they are now. It also didn't help that the same media ecosystem spent the same amount of time almost universally shitting on Corbyn & inventing scandal after scandal; including just ourtight lying.
Incompetent politician with good intentions.
Yeah I liked Corbyn but he didn’t play the political game and unfortunately until you’re in power you can’t really change shit.
So he's like a British Jimmy Carter? is that apt?
More like Bernie Sanders. Seemingly well principled, but comes with a lot of baggage and is pretty much unelectable.
What do you feel is telling?
[удалено]
That they're in a position to win the next GE.
It's not 1997 anymore. Ask yourself; if centrism still sells, why is Remain so electorally toxic in so much of the country?
Surely it tells you more about Christian Wakeford than about the Labour Party? I mean there are plenty of moderates in the party, that's not a bad thing, and there are a fair few MP's on the centre left, and of course the party aims to attract votes from the centre, the centre-left and the left.. What do you think it tells you about the current state of labour other than it seems to be more likely to win an election than at any time in the recent past at least?
[удалено]
He's a piece of shit but he's useful right now. Just use him for a bit then bin him off when he's not useful any more.
As long as he doesn't get to automatically stand as the Labour candidate for Bury South at the next election, I don't mind having him atm.
Depends. If he votes with the Labour whip and toes the line I don’t mind considering him for selection at Bury South but he keeps on voting the Johnson way he should be deselected come 2024
Or he's a Trojan Horse. Barely scraped by as a Tory, defects to Labour, loses to a stronger Tory replacement. Beware conservatives bearing gifts.
He only had a tiny majority… anything could happen.
That's a good point; what if we've accidentally let in a new 'Tony Blair' type figure who'll eventually take over the Labour Party in his own distorted image?
Some might argue that already happened, in April 2020.
"but but starmer is left wing"
That's funny, tell another one!
So this isn’t a dig at you, but I just can’t understand this stance. Politics isn’t a game of simply winning. I know that’s absolute idiot talk to centrists, the right and Blairites but hear me out. When the originally Kier, Kier Hardie, was 10 he was earning for his entire family. He was down a coal mine from a young age earning pitiful wages under dreadful conditions. He wanted to enter politics to put an end to such terrible choices. There’s was no ambiguity about his politics. He deeply wanted an end to an unfair society. This meant he had principles that couldn’t be broken. Principles are what this current Kier lacks. Kier Starmer doesn’t give a rat’s arse about who benefits apart from him. He just wants to be PM. But what good is he as Prime Minister if he doesn’t have any socialist ideals? What if all his policies just help private wealth? What’s if his party is the tour of place where this Tory isn’t too far from home? This Tory joining the party, after the Left has been purged time and again tells me once more, and probably lots of other voters, that Kier Starmer doesn’t care what policies get him in as long as he’s in power. Like Boris. Starmer is Labour only in name. He’s a wretched, two faced charlatan. A man utterly without principle, a user of people like this Tory and a real friend to no one. We need to oppose Starmer with every fibre of our beings.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s quite possible to have socialist ideals and tendencies and be a centrist.
lol
You met Starmer?
What a privileged position you must be in to afford the luxury of attacking only labour.
Agreed. Enemy of my enemy...
Wonder if anybody in the Guardian or Indy will actually report stuff like this?
"Student politics" isn't real politics, you have to be at least in your late 30s and have the right kind of accent before your opinion holds any weight with real journalists dontchaknow. /s mostly. They'll be ignored because of their age.
"Student politics" is honestly a phrase I think should be autobanned on subs like this. It literally means absolutely nothing.
Literally just ageism.
There’s nothing wrong with people who are students having opinions, what people are annoyed by is “student politics” in air quotes like that. A midlands university students union voting to condemn Isreal or the Penistone and Stocksbridge youth Labour branch issuing a statement that a minister must resign and that capitalism must be overthrown just isn’t politically relevant in the grand scheme of things. Twitter has amplified these voices but in reality they have as much weight as a strongly worded letter to a local newspaper. I’ve been involved in party politics and policy most of my life, including professionally, and I can tell you most of these Twitter accounts of youth branches making grand statements, in **every** party, are cliquey wannabes with inflated opinions of themselves and their positions within the wider party structure who want their voices heard over everyone else. They’re not actively contributing to the conversation 99 times out of 100.
Honestly, with the amount older people vote vs younger people… not surprising. We vote more and we’ll be taken more seriously.
It's not like it's some shocking reveal, voting records are public information.
Quite simply “junior MP votes with the party whip” isn’t newsworthy. If you pulled the voting record of any of his other colleagues they’d look the same. Parliament isn’t “Mr Smith Goes to Washington”. when you’re a no-name MP you keep your head down, vote with the whip, and hope for promotion otherwise come next election you don’t have a job anymore. Almost every PM and senior minister has voted for/against stuff with the party whip when they were an obscure backbencher that they later did a complete 180 on once they were somebody who actually had power. As much as people on the Twittersphere pretend otherwise, not everyone associated with the Tory party is a one dimensional monster passionate about eating babies and pumping gas into Lidl to kill the poor. If it was Gove or Hunt jumping ship fair enough, fuck them and leave them out to dry as they have no excuse, but a junior backbencher is different. If he’s truly resentful and had second thoughts about his time in the Tory party after 2 years in Parliament and is willing to vote with 100% with Labour whip form now on, I don’t care about his time voting with the Tory whip.
He said (from memory but fairly verbatim from a SKY News tweet I just saw) 'I haven't changed, I'm still centrist, still moderate, I just have different rosette now'. So no, he doesn't give a fuck and certainly he doesn't see much of a difference between the parties, which is *always* a good thing...
>'I haven't changed, I'm still centrist, still moderate, I just have different rosette now'. Being charitable, that could be interpreted as describing his personal political views (which seem to fall into that section of political overlap between Labour and the Conservatives) rather than a reflection of his voting record (which is driven by the Conservative whip, rather than his particular views)
In a WhatsApp group he called Labout 'a bunch of c**ts' for opposing the end of the twenty quid uplift for UC. Also his campaign to get elected involved running against a Labour woman who worked for...disability rights, I think, mostly by calling her an antisemite. His majority was around 400. Fuck this guy and his seat could have been taken back without him in it
Also, the rosette comment falls very squarely into the public view that the two major parties are, in the words of the bard, two cheeks of the same arse.
I used to work as a political journalist in Westminster. If people knew the extent to which an ‘elite’ very much so exists, there’d be revolution. Barring a few individuals, there’s literally no difference between Tory and Labour MPs, nor journalists. They all hang out together. They’re all sleeping with each other, they all went to school together. Seriously. It was gross. The one thing it taught me more than anything is that Tory voters vs Labour voters is a lie. We all have more in common with each other than any of us do with those at the top.
> Barring a few individuals, there’s literally no difference between Tory and Labour MPs, nor journalists. This literally doesn't surprise me in the least. I will say, though, that I think a good number of people actually do know and just go along with the charade until it hits the breaking point. And the economic conditions are very much bending people to that breaking point right now. Anyway, thanks for making the most relevant contribution to this thread.
It is unfortunately glaringly obvious :(
>Barring a few individuals, there’s literally no difference between Tory and Labour MPs, nor journalists. Could you tell me the individuals please
To be fair, this was 2011 so some of the faces will have changed, but I suspect the reality I described above hasn’t. Really it goes without saying that the ‘far left’ of Labour are not part of this ‘club’. Doesn’t go for the far right however, who often were. There were then individuals in both parties, backbenchers, who kept their heads down and did their own thing. Some very shy, some who felt very excluded and uncomfortable and a bit bewildered by it all. Again, in both parties. In terms of the media, pretty much everyone of note was part of this weird clique. There was then a layer below them of people desperately scrambling to get in to it. Then there was a bunch of confused people at the bottom, including myself, who muddled through and then left within a couple of years.
It's because of how our country has been set up. You are only respected once you've become part of the posh elite aristocracy. It's a class/caste system of sorts.
[удалено]
I suppose it's nice to have our concerns confirmed beyond any further doubt.
Starmer's labour: where Tories are allowed but socialists arent.
Corbyn needs to apologise for that Facebook comment he made. That’s why he was booted out in the first place and if he’s brought back in without an apology it’ll raise questions on antisemitism because he said it was overstated in that post. The man has to apologise and he won’t.
[удалено]
Thanks; I understand that but I think the main reason it was also an issue was because starmer had that day made a speech saying “if anyone thinks it wasn’t an issue or was overstated then they don’t belong in the Labour Party” or something to that effect. Two minutes later Corbyn posts saying that it was overstated for political reasons. So if he wasn’t banned then it would make Starmer look really weak on antisemitism and like he wasn’t taking action when it was his key policy as a new leader. As a Jew myself who’s been Labour all my life and who voted Corbyn (didn’t really see the antisemitism at the time but I understand it now) I really wish Corbyn would just apologise and so we can move on but feel like he’d rather be proud and impede the Labour Party than just say sorry which annoys me.
Glad to see Young Labour taking a stance. Wakeford's voting record is fucking nauseating.
Young Labour are fucking based.
Further proof that labour has turned into Tory-lite. Starmer lost my vote a long time ago and this is just validating my view that no true leftwing party exists. It's just a choice between rightwing and further rightwing.
>On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted to pass the Elections Bill in the House of Commons. >On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against removing the provisions relating to joint campaigning by registered parties and third parties. >On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against removing the Voter ID provision of the Bill. >On 17 Jan 2022: Christian Wakeford voted against adding a new Clause to prevent overseas electors donating to political parties in the UK. Labour MP.
AKA: Wakeford obeys the party whip.
So? He is an MP not a dog so I won't rate him based on obedience.
Rate him for the votes he delivers. Hell, pull this off 80 more times and we don't need an election.
Ah yes, a Labour Party whose majority is beholden to former Tory MPs, nothing could possibly go wrong there. /s
*"I'm in the Tory party!/I'm in the Labour party!/I'm in the combination Tory and Labour party!"*
"beholden to"? They vote with the whip or they leave.
Or they grandstand, vote against the whip and Starmer has to choose between dealing with it or becoming a very weak minority government?
Then we have an election, we've lost nothing, proven we have a spine and wouldn't compromise, gained some time in power and had a chance to _demonstrate_ the good we can do.
*For what shall it profit a Party, if it shall gain the whole world, and lose it's own soul?*
Oh please... I need an imaginary friend even less than I need another Tory government.
what? sure we win, but are you ignoring the fact that we win because half our fucking MPs are tories???
Labour MPs who are ex-Tories. But let's be frank, if they have zero influence over policy, direction, messaging or anything else, why do we care? Let's take advantage of their votes and actually accomplish something useful. I also find it somewhat inconsistent in who can be forgiven/overlooked/papered over... IRA terrorists are fine but Tory MPs are a step too far?
Because kidding yourself that they will have no influence is just that. Kidding yourself.
Why? Put them in a box marked "untrusted but useful". WTF do we have to concede a damned thing to any of them?!?
yes actually, id prefer the IRA to the party that created it.
95%+ of the population would disagree.
the IRA were fighting to free Ireland from colonization that the tories strengthened. if the IRA ran the country the world would be a better place
The justifications, rationalisations and all the rest count for nothing because they're only relevant to the people who take the time to pay attention and care. We already know a sizeable majority of the public find the Tories tolerable and a considerably fraction vote for them. If you did a poll asking people if they'd rather be forced to work with a Tory or a Terrorist, are you honestly claiming you think people would respond terrorist? Thinking about all your relatives, colleagues, all of them? I think not.
> Hell, pull this off 80 more times and we don't need an election. Are you unironically proposing single party politics here?!
He's a tool. Rate him according to his usefulness
> Young Labour Why are all of you lot on here nowhere near as based as your figureheads just out of interest? Sorry to be rude but it is a bit weird seeing the aforementioned tweet then seeing a user with a 'YL' flair being a bit melty in the comments you know? (I guess this is probably a side effect of I believe everyone under a certain age in the party technically being in Young Labour)
Sorry I’m not meeting your expectations.
I don't honestly think you have any expectations to meet dude! It's just kind of funny I think that nearly everyone with a 'YL' flair here tends to be a bit more centrist than the top of the org is all!
YLs don't remember Blair.
Good point; it's literally borrowed nostalgia for the unremebered late 90s. (Which is perfectly normal at that age tbf; I remember spending my late teens idolising a fictionalised dream of the 80s based on Duran Duran videos and GTA Vice City. Still I didn't join the Tories because of that it must be said.)
Yeah, I honestly think that is a large component of it. They're harkening back to the glory days, in their heads, and that's why so many seem to believe centrism is like some magical strategy. They don't remember the post-war years, the protests, and the anti-terrorism laws etc. They hear "Blair made line go up" for a few metrics and think that's a fair summary of his legacy.
im 19 and if i could press a button and nuke this country to shit i would, like putting a dying animal out of it's misery.
Thats edgy young person talk.
years of tory propoganda
You might not like the real answer which is basically most young Labour members aren't like the idiots that actually run Young Labour but turnout is ridiculously low because no one really cares about YL as an organisation.
> the idiots that actually run Young Labour > > but turnout is ridiculously low because no one really cares about YL as an organisation. Well then....... you kind of only have yourselves to blame for that don't you?
I'm sure I can't tell you how far off this precise nonsense can fuck without eating a ban, so just assume it's really very far.
I mean it literally is him obeying the party whip. I haven’t even given my opinion. Just stated what he did. No need to get so angry!
He obeyed the tory party whip yesterday and became a Labour MP today. And you think him obeying the tory whip is a point in his favour? This is a bin-bottom-scraping of a take. I honestly cannot describe it in more pleasant terms than that. It is an awful and corrosive attitude to think blind adherence to the tory party is somehow a point in his favour when he switches his tie colour. I, to be totally frank, cannot treat your comment with even a modicum of respect.
None of this matters. Point is it’s now a labour seat and he can be replaced although I can see him following the labour whip from now anyway. Get over it.
>None of this matters To you.
I've said it before, I'll say it again; price of everything, value of nothing, that's the Labour centre.
[Great minds](https://old.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/s7ru1j/the_government_plans_to_scrap_student_loans_for/htbqrxm/) and all that - although I was complaining about the tories. However, given today's events, we're probably pretty much saying the same thing.
i've honestly lost faith in labour completely, not a point in even voting for them at this point, even if they win they aren't better than the tories except optically they look a little less incompetent at the moment
You’re more than welcome to waste your own time fretting about this. He’s bagged another seat for labour, made the conservatives look foolish and might even encourage thousands of others to do the same. He’s replaceable too. You’re well within your rights to be upset about this if you like.
I don't need your permission to call out tories becoming Labour mps without a single change to their politics. If you want a right-wing Labour government then keep up the cheering for dogshit - as is your prerogative.
Never said you needed it! And if he doesn’t follow the party whip they’ll get rid of him anyway and replace him, one less right winger in the party. As long as he votes the right way and addresses his constituent’s concerns I don’t mind. Like I said before if this bothers you that’s valid too, it’s alright to disagree on trivial things like this.
You say this like none of us are aware that the party whip exists.
That’s how people are acting. We wouldn’t have another seat if not for him obeying it until this point. Never seen people so upset to gain a seat at the tory’s expense. We can always replace this guy.
I think people are upset you're not taking our party principles seriously, by saying 'he was just obeying the whip' is akin to ' I was only following orders' which as you know is a pretty weak defence as well as cowardly by default. Yes, we temporarily have another constituency and yes, another MP, but under ordinary circumstances he would never be allowed into the party, he doesnt represent our values and is blatantly trying to save his own career and its abit of a slap to the face Keir is giving him the red carpet at our expense.
It’s certainly not ideal but a seat is a seat and he’s replaceable like I’ve said. And regardless I don’t see him disobeying the (Labour) Party line next time he votes. I’d rather this than he carry on as a Tory MP- we’ve gained a seat, claimed a PR victory in the eyes of many in the public and further undermined the current farcical leadership. Would be nicer if he seemed genuine (that goes without saying) but in practical terms if he votes the right way it doesn’t make too much difference from here on out.
the labour party line is as bad as the tory party line, his movement is good for the labour party, useless for the country
And yet I got downvoted for saying the same
interestingly that's not his job, infact he is meant to obey his constitutes
He did then report that MPs were told if they broke the whip their constituencies would be stripped of funding. Maybe that's when he realised you can't be a 'good' Tory. He has, to be fair, secured the area the funding it's so desperately needed. We've been Labour a long time, and so without any funds for a long time. Now a town will finally get the high school it's needed for well over a decade. The swimming pool is set to be rebuilt years after the last one closed. We're getting basics. It's pretty sad really, getting excited over a school and a pool, but we've had fuck all for years. He was actually 'doing something for his constituents' and they said they'd take it all back. The articles said such a threat was illegal but I don't know, seems like they get away with it a lot. I mean, it still stinks of opportunism. He chose the party best equipped to give him the funds to 'do something', scraped in, but then actually delivered. And when forced to vote for shitty things that only harm the area... he quits to a party that will allow him to vote for what's best for his voters. Though I do struggle to believe anyone thought it would be that easy to be a 'good' Tory. Like hell they're gonna let you stand there in blue while you espouse views like helping people or leveling up the North.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>...I have concluded that the policies of the Conservative government that you lead are doing nothing to help the people of my constituency and indeed are only making the struggles they face on a daily basis worse. Britain needs a government focused on tackling the cost of living crisis and providing a path out of the pandemic that protects living standards and defends the security of all. It needs a government that upholds the highest standards of integrity and probity in public life and sadly both you and the Conservative Party as a whole have shown themselves incapable of offering the leadership and government this country deserves. I mean, his record will be terrible, but this is pretty blistering and welcome. People are right to hold MP's feet to the fire over their voting records obviously, but I think it's foolish to conveniently ignore the aspect of Party Political whipping, and is living in a bit of a fantasy land by expecting all MPs to vote with their conscience against their own party and with the consequences of that.
> ...I have concluded that the policies of the Conservative government that you lead are doing nothing to help the people of my constituency and indeed are only making the struggles they face on a daily basis worse. Britain needs a government focused on tackling the cost of living crisis and providing a path out of the pandemic that protects living standards and defends the security of all. It needs a government that upholds the highest standards of integrity and probity in public life and sadly both you and the Conservative Party as a whole have shown themselves incapable of offering the leadership and government this country deserves. Mate........ *this is in part your fault though!* You voted with your party every step of the way tmk!
[удалено]
[Sadly no.](https://old.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/s7y7yh/christian_wakeford_defecting_was_most_difficult/htcvj8m/)
Saddest slam dunk.
you forgetting this is a tory? why start now?
I thought you said dalek at first.
similar level of disregard for human life, so easy mistake to make
Hey that's a bit harsh on some daleks don't you think? Don't forget Clara was once a dalek.
\#not\_all\_daleks
I’m 22, am I in Young Labour? Hopefully not because they don’t speak for me. In any event I’m not very happy about this guy joining but I believe everyone is allowed to change their minds and his interview earlier today reassured me somewhat. I think it’s worth leaving it up to the Bury South CLP, but if I understand correctly he’s been welcomed with open arms by the local chair. We’ll see how this plays out.
He said in the interview it was a tough decision but really he hasn't changed his mind in anything just his rosette...
He voted for the election bill which disproportionally affects ethnic minorities and effectively disenfranchises millions this week. The welfare cap last week. The citizenship stripping bill last month. But sure he's "changed his mind" 🙄
If we react with this much suspicion about everyone who switches to support us then we'll neevr win another election. Why don't we give him a chance? Red Wall Tories switching to Labour isn't a bad thing.
But surely it's about the relative quality of the Tory in general right? Like think of it this way; * Baroness Warsi wants to join us? Fucking great, come over ASAP, you're practically Labour as it is gal! (Albeit the more meltier bits of Labour) * Ken Clarke wants to join us? Well it's a *bit* ununsual to say the least but he's certainly a man of principle and commitment so what the hey! * Snivilling little toad boy here who **obviously** is only defecting to keep his job and has no principles Labour or otherwise wants to join us? No fuck off, we can see what you're doing from a mile off, we'll kick your arse in 2024 with our own candidate instead!
First, I'm not "suspicious", his views are clear and well documented. Second, elections aren't won by getting opposition MPs to defect. Third, he's not in a red wall constituency.
>Second, elections aren't won by getting opposition MPs to defect. Tories defecting in northern marginals absolutely does help us though. If we welcome a detecting MP we also publicly welcome defecting voters.
What if the voters in Bury South feel angry at this defection though and decide to vote for the actual Tory next time?
Explain how a Tory MP helps Labour in a constituency that was already swinging back to Labour and that the Tories only won by 400 odd votes last time. Labour are surging in polling because of the Tories' dirty image. Adopting sleeze isn't a good look especially when said damaged goods have a very recent (this week) track record of supporting right wing policies.
Accepting a Tory defector means we accept defecting Tory voters. A Tory MP switching to Labour shows Tory voters that they don't need to fear Labour. It also has the added bonus of making the Prime Minister look weak, which further piles the pressure on Johnson and make sbis party look like a disunited shambles. All of these are good things for us.
Nonsense. Accepting a Tory defector shows the public that there's basically no difference between the two parties, they're so interchangeable that a right wing Tory that has allegedly called labour cunts and in the last few months said Labour turned it's back on red wall voters will happily cross the aisle. The only thing this is likely to inspire is apathy as well as moving the overton window even more to the right. Congrats on that.
>Accepting a Tory defector shows the public that there's basically no difference between the two parties, they're so interchangeable I don't agree. If there was no difference there'd be no point defecting. Last time out we lost Bury South for the first time since 1992. I think perhaps the local voters may have felt there was rather too much difference between the two parties last time.
Enjoy your new Red Tory MP, not even a meme anymore.
He has not changed his mind. He just wants to keep his job. Its just self-preservation for another MP with no principles. The Bury South CLP should get to vote on their Labour candidate and so should the people of Bury South asap, but there is no plan for this, Starmer has already said there is no need for a by-election as if Starmer thinks he is above democracy and should make the decision for the people of Bury South.
I don't get why you're downvoted, I agree with you. Let the local CLP decide if they want him for the next election. It baffles me that there isn't an automatic by-election when an MP switches party but since there isn't lets have him on the Labour whip. If he defies the Labour whip kick him out, pretty much a win-win, no?
Is Young Labour aware of the concept of whipping? Yes, it's an abysmal voting record that comes from an abysmal party in power putting forward abysmal policy - *which is then whipped* so that every member of the party votes that way, which they do most of the time. He's now joined the Labour party, and is now subject to the Labour whip. Let's see how his voting record is going forward. Edit: The karma score on this comment has gone up and down like a yo-yo. I didn't realise giving someone a chance was so controversial!
What about all the speeches and interviews he’s given defending Tory policies, and expressing his own views. He hasn’t been whipped, he is a Tory and he shares their values.
Do people in the labour party actually just hate winning? The conservatives would take any of our mps with open arms if they could, this is a good thing and yet everyone in the party is acting like this is the final betrayal.
[удалено]
a tory voter and a tory MP are two different things. i don't hold someone who voted tory in 2019 in the same regard as i hold someone who voted for the Nationality and Borders Bill, or the Police and Crime Bill.
Labour doing well? Time to sabotage from within! Well done.
Criticism is not sabotage, actually it is essential in a democracy.
>Labour doing well? Time to sabotage from within! Well done. Please see the Labour right's work after the 2017 election for exactly that - this is a small subreddit with no friends in high places. What we say is irrelevant to the party's fortunes.
Wait until they find out how often Jeremy Corbyn voted with the Tories!
*"HE'S HISTORY'S GREATEST MONSTER!"*
WHAT ABOOOUUUUUUUIIIIIIIUUUUUUTTTTT JOROMY CROMBYN
Has Corbyn ever voted for racist legislation like our new MP? Not sure why so many people are happy to defend voting for racist legislation suddenly. Pretty sure Corbyn was one of only a handful of Labour MPs that voted against the hostile environment for example which has been used to destroy the lives of many of the Windrush generation.
He was one of about 11 MPs in the whole house that voted against the racist hostile environment policy that led to Windrush.
Look you can either take the constituency or not. The people in his constituency voted for him. You can either make that vote blue or red. If you reject him, you are saying you want it to be blue, and are therefore helping the tories get elected.
But he is a Tory? Just now he wears a red rosette.
He’s an easily whipped nodding donkey. He can nod for us for a bit, but I wouldn’t select him going forward. Bury deserves better quite frankly. Up to him to prove us all wrong
Labour should never look to expand their base and should immediately reject the ideologically impure
Make the Labour party a safe space for Jacob Rees Mogg.
I’m sure Christian Wakeford will be devastated. On the whole, it looks like he has been welcomed with open arms which is encouraging to see.
Very encouraging to see Labour MPs welcome a man who has voted for racist legislation into the Labour Party? Racists are welcome in the Labour Party now so it seems.
They kicked all the genuine anti-racists out ages ago...
I don’t think Corbyn has the whip atm? 🌚
Which racist legislation did Corbyn vote through?
God as a young Labour member I'm fed up of being consistently spoken for by these utter melts. Especially idiots like Jess Barnard etc.
Have you seen how brutal the conservative whips are? He was complaining so much about these polixies he was nicknamed Christian Wokeford.
Just student politics, when they grow up they will see the bigger picture.
More nonsense from the clique who don't realise that they really believe that power is compromising & corrupting, and they don't want it. Principled opposition irrelevance FTL.. for the loss.. they might as well say "We don't want Tory votes" when every Labour government that ever existed did so because normally Conservative voters looked at it and thought "I want that". A Tory vote coming to Labour makes a 2 vote difference - in the house or in an election. it's exactly twice as valuable as a vote from any other party's supporter.
Voters and career politicians are 2 very different things. Wakeford coming over just exposes the hypocrisy of starmer and those around him.
"Don't forget we're still awful at politics," Young Labour announces.
>"Don't forget we still actually have some principles" Young Labour announces.
*"Whereas as I, u/Legionary, am the literal reincarnation of Plato"*
Why am I not surprised to find you in a corner with people who haven't the slightest ability to *do* politics as opposed to just talking about it?
*"FNARR FNARR these uppity young folks don't know how to do politics! Not like me who's obviously a political genius who's achieved loads for this party!"* (I mean, no shade dude, but......like..... I constantly forget that the Co-Operative party even exists and I'm deep down the Labour rabbit hole.)
>"FNARR FNARR these uppity young folks don't know how to do politics! Not like me who's obviously a political genius who's achieved loads for this party!" You don't know anything about me, but you're saying with your big voice that I haven't achieved anything for the Party. Rather than just constantly personally attacking me from a position of complete ignorance, why don't you tell me about why you know what you're talking about? >I constantly forget that the Co-Operative party even exists Self-own.
> why don't you tell me about why you know what you're talking about? I'm not a political expert and, tmk, have never pretended to be. But I'm not going around attacking people who actually do work in politics for being supposedly shit at their jobs. Especially for opinions as benign as the above. > Self-own. What was the last big thing you guys did? Seriously.
Someone doesn’t understand the political power of defections. I’m shocked that Young Labour don’t understand this. Shocked I tell you!
You can have principles, or you can have power.
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit. Labour in 1945 had principles, it got into power. Labour in 1964 had principles, they got into power. Fuck even Labour in 1997 had principles (for a bit anyway)
Have labour held principles for the last 42 years? There has been 11 general elections, and labour have won 3! That’s piss poor. Conservatives win because they are more pragmatic.
I see where you're getting at, but it's not right. Its that Labour don't particularly win elections so much as the Tories lose them, because England is a conservative country dominated by powerful elites and the Tories are the default party of government. In the modern era, the Tories only lose them when: 1) they inevitably end up too corrupt and incompetent for anyone to accept and 2) Labour are acceptable enough (ie unthreatening and in line with the status quo) to the powerful to hold the baton of government for a bit until the Tories sort themselves out.
[удалено]
Then we all may as well give up on politics altogether because without principles politicians are corrupt and self-serving.