Beginning to distrust Jeremy Corbyn

This is not your thread, Annie.
You can stop commenting on what I say whenever you want. You can stop attacking me whenever you want. You are getting far too personal. I care about the vulnerable as much as you do.
How dare you suggest otherwise!

I happen to think that Michael Crick is a very good investigative journalist. If Corbyn had been militant, he would have found out. He's been researching since 1984. However, I do not expect you to buy the book. It will not support your prejudice.

Anniebach - "I do not support Smith, he has no more chance of winning a general election than Corbyn , we are not going to win the next election with Corbyn as leader."

So what do you conclude? What is the solution? Is there one? Is the Labour party finished? I sincerely hope not.

I am not a political animal, and by my own admittance I'll blow with the wind, going for fairness, common sense, and yes, perhaps selfishly, for policies which I agree with and may benefit me. As I said in my last post, there are whole sections of society Labour left behind, forgot about and didn't help. Society is a mixed bag, always has been. We have very wealthy people in the UK, and very poor ones too.

If we are saying Labour is the party of the poor, are we saying Conservatives are the party of the rich, because those divisions just don't ring true an more if many working class people would rather have a Conservative government than a Labour one?

I think we have to recognise that Labour voters do not have a monopoly on compassion and the party must appeal to many people striving to better themselves too, no matter where on the income scale they find themselves. The Militant element of Labour equates income with selfishness and greed, and would do a Robin Hood on workers and so lose a sector of people who are neither selfish or greedy but rightly believe they have worked hard to earn the perks they enjoy and have also paid their dues into the system too. Why do any of us strive if not for reward?

All government needs a strong opposition. I suspect that Labour is now so fractured it will probably have to break and reform. Corbyn has the support of many, but many on the left don't want Corbyn. (I am of the view he should have been supported and that many Labour politicians, wanting a coup, are to blame for the situation now.) Corbyn may well have steered the party to the right place if he'd been given time and wholehearted support. We'll never know now, because he is likely to become leader of a party which doesn't back him and the future for Labour is grim. I sincerely hope I am wrong and that he'll be able to turn things around. I think he is a decent, well-meaning man who like many of us, abhorred what Labour had become.

Doesn't alter theocracy Corbyn led a campaign to get Militants back into the party, do expect me to believe it was because he didn't like snyone being left out? This isn't about Crick or his po,iit all views or his books, it sbout Corbyn dupporting the likes of Hstton and campaigning to get them bsck into the party. Diverting yo Crivk doesn't work, I saw the leaflet , Corbyn supported Militsnts in full knowledge of the harm he had done to the party. I don't think you care about the party Jen, only having Corbyn as leader no matter the cost to the party or the country and above all the vunerable. Your post which is all about Crick is proof you have no intention of debating the continuation of the lsbour party,nyou sent the Corbyn party and sod the good MP's he plans to have deselected. Best we no longer discuss this,you have a closed mind

Corbyn and militant.

'The troublemaking political journalist Michael Crick first published Militant in 1984, when the still-infamous leftwing sect was approaching the peak of its notoriety. In 1986 he produced an updated version, with the reds-under-the-bed title The March of Militant. Thirty years on, he has updated it again, with a foreword and afterword that seek to connect the sometimes startling, often caricatured history of Militant to Corbyn, both back in the 80s and now.
The connections feel a bit oversold. “This is the story,” writes Crick, “of the Marxist, Trotskyist group whose presence inside the Labour party Jeremy Corbyn tried to defend.” Yet Crick has to concede early on that “Corbyn was never anywhere near being a member of Militant”. What’s more, his 80s opposition to what he called an anti-Militant “witch-hunt” was widely shared on the Labour left. In the divided, feuding party of the time, purges and stopping purges were a preoccupation for many factions, as they sought to build useful alliances or weaken those of their enemies.
Similarly, the relative cordiality towards Corbyn from Militant’s current, less scarily named incarnation, the Socialist party – which sometimes calls him “Jeremy” in its newspaper, and hailed his election as leader as a “victory for the left” – may not be as significant as it seems. This approval has yet to solidify into cooperation, according to Crick: the Socialist party has “decided to see how Labour evolves”. Corbyn-bashers may find this book a disappointment.'

weownit.org.uk/evidence/why-railways-should-be-public-ownership

They are now trying to sell off stations, so anyone disabled will have less access.

weownit.org.uk/blog/why-network-rail-needs-public-stations-deliver-disabled-passengers

Jalima as I said the East Coast Line was profitable between 2009 and 2015 untill it was sold to Virgin
"Before that, the route was run by a subsidiary of Directly Operated Railways – the company formed by the Department for Transport to run the franchise when it was ‘handed back’ by National Express on 14 February 2009.

At that time, the government’s intention was not to permanently renationalise the line, though trade unions had called for that, but to return it to the private sector in December 2013. Instead, the process took until February 2015.

By all accounts, East Coast did a good job. Customer satisfaction was high, and the company paid £1 billion back to the government over the course of its franchise.

There was controversy surrounding the letting of the franchise to Virgin, with some elements calling for the train company to remain nationalised, citing the one billion repayment as an example of how a railway could be run with no ‘fat cats’ creaming off the profits."
Just think 1billion in around 6 years. How much is Virgin making? It can be done.

Yes .beam he was right, and those glaring Militants are the very same Corbyn fought yo get back into the party and eho eill now get bsck into the party, we have a member fir leader

So true Jalima

Kinnock was right

I believe in a publicly run rail network which is efficient, reasonably priced and profitable (Which can be done as demonstrated by the East Coast franchise sold on after it had been brought into profit)
Well, I believe that is an ideal too, trisher but the fact is we never had one that was efficient, reasonably priced and profitable when it was in public ownership and we don't have one now.
To be reasonably priced and profitable it would have to be subsidised. To be efficient they would have to get rid of the militant union leaders who are busy sunning themselves and giving the finger to the stressed commuters.

It is not that I do not believe in strike action when conditions are dire for the workers, but this present strike has more to do with what is going on in the undermining of the Labour Party than any altruistic motives on behalf of the workers.

For those who were not there ,

youtu.be/bWLN7rIby9s

All I ask is listen for two minutes

The Overton window has moved to the RIGHT, making Corbyn's ideas radical,if not outdated.

Jen,u do not expect anyone to agree with me , I post my opinions as you post yours , so best you calm down and carrying on praising Corbyn, I will carry on condemning him because he is a militant .i didn't need to go to Damascus to realise what a hypocrite Corbyn is , I read - not newspapers, I talked and listened to labour politicians , to political historians , I have an open mind so don't have a problem with saying I was wrong when I learn I was in the wrong, you wouldn't understand this Jen

Corbyn or Smith will not win a general election, when looking at a battle always look at both sides , Corbyn v May

2015 Conservatives won 331 seats, labour 232. Next election add 37 seats Labour will,lose with boundery changes ,add the seats UKIP will take from labour . Corbyn is going to win?

I agree that many disadvanted groups of people have been further disadvantaged by the current government. That's why we need an effective opposition, with at least the possibility of either a labour government or a labour/others coalition. Jeremy is so far behind in the polls it doesn't seem either of those are possibilities.
Labour hasnt been an effective opposition for a number of years. I liked ed but it was clear within six months he wasn't a future pm. The Labour Party doesn't have a track record of ditching leaders.
To have 80 percent of MPs vote no confidence in their leader is something I've never seen. I don't deny the groundswell of support shows people want more than the tories offer. I remain convinced we're heading for years of conservative rule. Incidentally, jc claims credit for various issues where the government have back tracked. Min truth, the work leading to that has been from good Labour MP's now facing the prospect of deselection. Jess Phillips for example.

This is interesting.

www.opendemocracy.net/uk/f-h-pitts/can-corbynism-claim-centre-ground

Corbyn's legacy could be New Tory, with compassion.
I do not believe it; it's all lies, as someone said upthread, but it's a compelling idea.

rosesarered I said
They have messed up education, the NHS and the rail network. They are punishing the disabled, the mentally ill and have things in the system to punish the elderly. Unfortunately they do it very quietly and some people are completely conned by them.
I can provide evidence for all of these- for example the money taken from state primary schools and given to Free schools which has resulted in larger classes and children being unable to get into schools. It is an unpleasant post but because of the unpleasant things that have been done, not because of me.
If you can show me a way in which these people have not suffered under the Conservatives- and I include those who voted this government into power- I will withdraw my remarks

Iam, thank you. Reading your post I can understand why you want a labour government . Sadlay it is not now acceptable for lsbour supports to doesk the good done during Blairs years as PM, rather like John Cleese and 'don't mention the war'
Don't mention the minimum wage - the Tories voted against on the grounds it would bring high unemployment - employment went up, Sure Start, tax credits , so many good policies. I wonder if we were on the same march, I did Cardiff and London.

I csn take the flack Iam, yes it hurts at times , but nothing like the hurt of being s young widow with two ,little ones under the Thatcher regime, that was poverty with a capital P. I learned to take flack , a labour supporter in a Tory town surrounded by country estate. I think my greatest claim to taking the flack was being voted off the Church PC , didn't matter because I was in the right and they were in the wrong as time proved

Annie, what do you want? Who can give you what you want any more than Corbyn can?
You say labour is unelectable whether it's Corbyn or Smith, so what's the point of all the aggravation and splitting the party?
By the next election there will be 50 fewer MPs, most of them labour.
Why are the labour members so intent on destroying the party rather than getting behind its chosen leader?
After Kinnock won against Benn, members didn't then say right that's it, I'm not going to support the man with the most votes.
All these new members who have been denied a vote are not all momentum members. Many of them might have voted for Smith.
Momentum is only a small group compared to the labour party as a whole, but so many people think it's okay to smear everyone. The labour party will lose out by it.

Another way you are wrong, Annie, is in saying that all those who support Corbyn, me in particular, just want to stay in opposition rather than have a labour party in power.
Can you tell me how many new votes you think you have gained by ranting on here the way you do? By telling longstanding labour supporters that they are trots, or worse?
Until you had your Damascene conversion about Corbyn, you agreed with me on many things. I have not changed my views, but you seem to think everyone should follow you, now you've seen the light. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

My post is answering your previous post.

What a very unpleasant post by you trisher and the sweeping statements also about Conservatives ( of which there are many, and some very caring ones too) and if you meant a Conservative Government ( and not just Conservatives) then even that is an iffy statement that they don't care about anybody, ditto the Lib Dems, it is not only Labour that wants to do fair by people in this country, although they all have differing ways of how they see it being accomplished.
Nobody is using annieb's dislike of Corbyn for their own ends ( don't think any of us is that Machiavellian on here) and various people including myself have said that they wish to see a strong Opposition, because that is how things work best for the good of the country.

I do believe as do many political commentators that the Overton window is moving to the left because of the circumstances many middle class people and the younger generation in particular find themselves. You have to realise that there is now a large group of people who have grown up with right wing policies as the accepted norm. They have no personal experience of state run industries, but know the rail system is in chaos, they have personal experience of housing problems and know homelessness is on the increase and just a step away. They want policies and politicians that show another way forward. An opposition needs to offer real alternatives, if all it does is debate the number of angels who can stand on a pin head it is wasting its time.

Jen, you are content to have a labour opposition who will get a few things watered down, I am not , I want a labour government , this is the difference between us, you choose to support Corbyn and his couple of watered down policies ,I want a labour government who will put labour policies into action,

Why you bring smith into this is at worse extremely crafty , at best naive

I do not support Smith, he has no more chance of winning a general election than Corbyn , we are not going to win the next election with Corbyn as leader.

I agree Iam64 - so much was done for children and now SureStart centres are closing and the answer is grammar schools!! Knowing it ensures that the disadvantaged have a minute chance of getting one, but the advantaged can avoid school fees! And it is supposed to give social mobility! ( when all evidence shows it never ever did).

Excellent post Iam64. You echo much of my own experience and I saw how much the Blair Government did in London to enhance the lives of children in schools. AB does speak from the heart but I think she is a lady who can give as good as she gets. Her credentials certainly are far superior to mine in the Labour field.
Day6, excellent post too which I enjoyed reading and it did give much food for thought.

Love not live.