Beginning to distrust Jeremy Corbyn

What would you consider a `militant` is ? all these words which are being bandied about are not helpful , anyone who supports Corbyn is being labelled as a Trots ,a thug,a fan ,a cult member ,a groupie, a Nazis to name a few!
. Billy Bragg was misquoted unsurprisingly , read his Twitter page , he has refuted not supporting Jeremy Corbyn .

Not true, not everyone who supports Corbyn are.militants , trots, communists or Larry if s cult. I do think singing you are the wind beneath my wings to a leader shows some
acting as one expect cults to act.

I posted earlier today that Bragg still supports Cirbyn but believes his politics are 29th century.

No point in trying to explain militisism, communism etc to someone who not been in the party for over thirty years, I think one has to hsve experienced the extent of their need to control to understand

If you admire, Hatton, Taffe, Scsrgill etc you know anyway

Anniebach - "Corbyn cannot expect MP's to get behind him as leader when he led s campaign to get militants bsck into the party when the then leader and NEC had expelled them?"

This is a bit of a two edged sword to my way of thinking.

One thinks "Militant - uber left, looking to overthrow the establish, bring on the revolution , etc." However, when I worked in the Midlands I had the utmost respect for one of the Militants then expelled from the Labour party, Dave Nellist. His views were too far left for my liking, but there was something about his integrity and heart-on-sleeve desire for a better Britain for everybody that I liked. He seemed a decent man, and took only the wage of a Midlands car factory worker, saying he represented them and had little in common than most (it has to be said) self-serving MPs.

One of the things I detest about many MPs is the way they collect the perks of the job, fiddle as much money from expenses/the taxpayers as possible, live the high-life, indulge in nepotism, again at the taxpayer's expense, and forget to represent those who elected them. They become removed from their constituents.

Labour MPs, many of them, became as bland as fat cats, making the odd sound-bite and appearance when elections were on the horizon. True of Conservatives too.

Many who enter politics do it to feather their own nests. That could not be said of Nellist, a Militant, who probably did more for his constituents out of real altruism than many who've had long careers in politics. It pays very nicely, after all.

I haven't read it properly yet, but something has just come up in my news feed about Corbyn sitting doing his paperwork on the floor of a train, like many other regular commuters. It was a three hour journey. He is quoted as saying why should he have the privilege of a seat when so many who need the railways to get them to work/around the country, have to suffer that overcrowding every single day. To stroll into first class, take a seat and enjoy the perks of position wasn't for him.

Now, may people might think he is a wazzock, or worse, to give up a comfortable journey, but in my working life I have always followed those who've lead by example. They've been the best line managers and when I had teams to lead I'd never ask anyone to do anything I wouldn't be prepared to do myself. I think you earn the respect of others. It's not granted.

I can fully agree that the very word 'Militant' isn't likely to be a vote winner, but perhaps the other side of Militancy is a desire to have politicians understand and truly serve those who give them office? Perhaps it's a stance against the career politician who lacks integrity and a work ethic? I look at Owen Pfizer Smith and have no trust in him at all. Labour did need a good shake up, and politics does too. MPs are there to work for their constituents, to fight for them, to understand their battles and grievances and to be honest, I'd rather see five Corbyns in any future Labour cabinet than five of the Smith ilk.

Nope, I am not a 'Trot', a Commie or any other far left groupie, but I loathe hypocrisy and feel it's a shame that integrity is viewed with suspicion. Caring is one of the characteristics I'd like my representative in Parliament to have, as well as the energy and commitment to stand up for me and to fight any corruption in Westminster. That fight is long over-due.

Tue 16-Aug-16 09:54:38
I thought the interview with Margaret Hodge was very interesting Annie. I have admired her work as chair of the public accounts committee and am sorry she decided not to continue.

Tue 16-Aug-16 09:15:31
Trisher, I agree that posters shouldn't make personal remarks but I do think members could stick to an equally useful rule too, particularly on political threads. Posters really annoy other posters when they post as if all they say is fact. It makes them sound arrogant and unwilling to discuss. On political threads there can be a real lack of 'I think' or 'it's my opinion'.

So he sat in the floor if a train, thst will guarantee votes. Pity he hadn't put effort into the Brexit campaign, , he chose a holiday , why not be honest and say he wanted out , he has for years

It was interesting Grscesgran , she Certsintly didn't avoid ordinal questions, I admire people who say - I made mistakes

Also irritating is links which just give opinions of the writer , means nothing

PS: Apologies for writing so much! I do get a bit carried away sometimes.

No apology needed in my opinion, I like to read and learn

Tue 16-Aug-16 17:56:58
Nope, sorry Annie but I can't see links in the same way. The "I know I'm right" syndrome is a problem on all forums but surely we are taught our opinions should be backed by our sources so links seem quite acceptable to me. I like a quote from the text or a personal opinion to tell me why the link is being offered but it is only an offer and we can ignore it whereas someone telling you that x is y or the world will end tomorrow if z happens, with no softening of I think, I believe, etc., is far more annoying in my view and likely to have someone coming back with a comment that is more about the person saying such things than the comment itself - just my opinion of course

Yes Gracesgrsn, your opinion and my opinion on some links is my opinion , I repeat some not all links

This is interesting, an email from labour councillors on Lambeth asking anyone to join the labour party so they can defeat Corbyn.
I do not find that acceptable. I think they should be asked to leave the party.

medium.com/@georgenturner/blairite-entryism-251dfce4f128

Difficult, I underststand their fear,i share it . Not easy to forget the power of the unions and the winter of discontent , pickets blocking hospital entrances , in Liverpool - with Hatton - the grave diggers went on strike so families couldn't bury their dead

What I don't understand is they are labour councillors yet don't know new members are vetted and if they belong to another party are rejected . Perhaps it isn't true, I think I will wait for the press to report it.

It was written by an investigative journalist who lives in Lambeth and is not and never has been a member of the labour party.
He wrote the article because he was sent the email, as you will find out if you read the article.
Which press will you trust to report it accurately?

any newspaper , if not true the councillors can say, and the sender of the email found, I find it odd only one person has spoken of it and released it on line , perhaps all the others who allegedly received thrm will speak out

He has said in Twitter Tory party members received the email, they wouldn't have been accepted

The councillors still sent the emails out to anyone in Lambeth that they could find email addresses for, asking them to pay £25 to sign up to the labour party and support Smith.
Do you think that is acceptable?
You criticised Momentum for doing the same, but you seem to say it's okay for labour councillors to send emails to members of other parties.
The senders of the email were the three councillors. Their names are on the emails.
The journalist has no axe to grind. He was just saying it, because he gets fed up of all the anti-Corbyn stuff about entryism, and nothing on the other side.

'Indeed, they seem to have sent the e-mail to anyone who they could get hold of an email address for. Former Liberal Democrat councillors and council candidates received it. Local members of the Conservative Party received it. It appears that anyone who had previously corresponded with them about anything received the email.

To be clear the three Labour councillors were asking people who they knew were not Labour voters, indeed who they knew to be members of other political parties, to join the Labour party; not because they believed in the party, but for the sole purpose of assisting them to get rid of their leader.'

Is this acceptable?

I did not say it was acceptable ,p or not acceptable, I did say I share their fear but now I wonder . Surely they haven't broken any rules ? Should councillors be asked to leave the party for canvassing? Very militant attitude

I was hoping you would think it wasn't acceptable for labour politicians to send messages to tory politicians asking them to join the labour party to try and destabilise it.
Obviously you think it is okay to try anything to get what you want. I prefer a bit of integrity in the labour party.
You have said that you do not think these £25 members should have a vote. So why is it acceptable for these councillors to canvas in this way?
You must agree the email was not normal canvassing.

Initially I wondered whether it was a genuine e-mail sent by these councillors or some kind of spoof. My thinking was that surely councillors wouldn't do such a thing. But George Turner appears to be part of the reputable organisation known as the Bureau of Investigative Journalism - which, as I understand it, is a group of independent journalists who often tackle issues that the mainstream media prefers not to examine. (He has also put other material on line under the title Finance Uncovered, which, from a brief look, appears to be about corruption in Africa and the use of the up and coming tax haven Mauritius where companies shift their money in order to avoid paying tax in the source countries.)

A copy of the same e-mail was also inserted in something called Brixton Buzz which seems to be an online news resource for Brixton, part of the London Borough of Lambeth. There has been much unhappiness and protest in Brixton recently because the Council has approved, amongst other unpopular demolitions and re-developments, re-development of the railway arches, which apparently means that local traders will face a tripling of their rents, putting many of them out of business.

anniebach I don't know if they have broken any rules or indeed if their actions are legal. I'm perplexed though at your reaction. Had an e-mail been distributed by Momentum to all residents of a particular borough, urging them - regardless of their current political affiliations - to join Labour in order to vote for Jeremy Corbyn so that Owen Smith might be defeated, I wonder if you would be so willing to try and see their side of things.

If these councillors genuinely did send out this e-mail, it is, in my view, an abuse of their position as councillors as surely it would require use of a council database to access e-mail addresses and perhaps require staff time to set up and process the multiple mail shot? Wouldn't use of such a database be strictly limited to allowing vital communications with residents and not for any sort of political canvassing?

Seven out of ten of the current Lambeth Council cabinet are members of Progress. Progress has already been warned about its actions in suggesting that disaffected Labour members be contacted to ask them to re-join the party in order to vote for Smith - doing this by using membership databases to identify members who left the party after Corbyn's election. The Information Commissioner's Office contacted the Labour Party requesting “written assurances that measures will be put in place to prevent unsolicited direct marketing, including in internal elections.”

Jen, with respect I don't understand how you can say you want a bit of integrity in the party yet are supporting the breakup of the party .

Was Corbyn showing integrity when he led a campaign to bring in militants the party had expelled .

You have no idea of the fear in the party, threats of deselection , militancy etc, or you do know and it's what you too want.

You can relax, Corbyn will win the leadership contest, you have no need to trawl the net for far left links to support him.

I may be naive here but it seems both sides in this awful split are doing all they can to defeat the other. I don't like it but its seems that's where we are.

Jess Phillips MP said yesterday that if JC wins the leadership election she will leave the LP. She talked about the level of threat and animosity directed at her by supporters of JC on social media. One included a mock up a a womans body with a spear through her heart, the body had Jess's head imposed on it. She has been threatened with rape, and death. Her view is that whilst JC speaks to condemn such behaviour, nothing happens to prevent it continuing. The Labour Party can't afford to lose MP's like Jess.

Iam, I am so saddened that we will lose good labour MP's . I cannot condemn those councillors they are fighting to save the party from militancy and a weak leader

So lack of integrity is ok in some circumstances. Like being a little bit corrupt or a little bit dishonest. Not ok in my world AB