Sensible discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls

Grandad

' However, those which resign their membership and then decide to return to the movement when "things are more to their liking" command no respect in my experience.'
----

Does that apply to those posters /returned Labour Members/ who also resigned and ' returned ' to Labour because Corbyn brought them back to the fold?

As for ' commanding respect ' that is exactly the reason why I stand up to those who continually try to belittle Anniebach, she has my respect because she gave her reasons why she altered her opinion on Corbyn, stood by her opinion and has done so whilst receiving some pretty vindictive personal attacks.

What is the widely used terminology used by many from various political persuasion these days:-

' I have not left the party, the party left me'.

I have never in all the years I have been on Gransnet seen such a continued personal attack on any poster who said they stopped being a Labour Member because of Blair but it has been noticeable when it is a mirror image then such a move is fair game.

It is not.

In regard to anniebach, and by way of her post of 21:49 today, I rest my case.

I apologise to other posters for bringing it up again, but in my defence , if 1945 can be brought up so can 1966.

granddad43 do get off your soap box , do not tell me how
a party member should remain in a party.

I remained in the Labour Party even after the treatment of the
bereaved of Aberfan and the betrayal of the unions keeping a liar in his job. I don’t regret staying, the village were finally repaid the money.

If a Tory government made the tenants of Grenfell Tower pay
towards the removal would you support this as you did in a post support taking the Money from my village to remove the tip.

Applaud your unions, when Lord Robens kept his job, some
miners took their lives. They were union members , true union members.

And whilst I am speaking of the Aberfan disaster I will never
forgive you for saying the men who worked in the pit were
partly responsible because they dug the stuff up.

And I don’t give a damn if anyone complains I have brought up Aberfan again.

You can reply with another pompous post and bore many, I shall ignore you, you are not worthy of my attention.

Grandad, I gave up my membership 18 months or more after Corbyn became leader. I could no longer be part of the party. My choice, not for others to tell me what I should do.

And then you gave up your membership anniebach when you should have retained that membership to fight for what you then believed was wrong.

For that is Labour tradition, a movement born out of challenging all that was seen as wrong.

Fingers crossed Annie. Starmer is leading in the polls, if the ridiculous voting protocols don't deny him.

Thank you Iam, I did argue in his defence , I really believed
him a man of honour ,yes I was distressed when I learned the truth and openly said so and apologised to those I had disagreed with, they were right, I was wrong.

Anniebach, I remember disagreeing with you about Corbyn when you believed him to be the right choice as leader. I also remember your growing distress as you began to agree with those of us who always believed he would be a bad leader.

It reminds me of marching in opposition to the invasion of Iraq. There’s no pleasure in being proved right. For what it’s worth, I’m another who agrees with POGS about Annie

As I have already started in this thread that it is a very strong tradition in the Labour Movement that when situations are of not to a members liking, that member remains in the movement and fights for change.

In the above, that member builds respect from others for such actions. However, those which resign their membership and then decide to return to the movement when "things are more to their liking" command no respect in my experience.

The question that is always to be asked of those that "gave up" is how did they expect such changes to their satisfaction to come about if it was not for those who remained in membership to bring those changes about.

I voted for Corbyn in the first leadership contest, I thought he was a decent man, I didn’t look into his background as I should have, he isn’t decent or honourable.

I second what POGS says and hope the posters who gave
Anniebach a hard time with all the ‘closet Tory’ nonsense
Now realise that she was right all along and that Corbyn as LOTO has seen the LP defeated royally!

growstuff in regard to your post @20:22 today, Len McCluskey will not have a majority in anything in the upcoming vote for the Parliamentary Party Leader. That ballot will be held on the basis of one member one vote both in those who hold direct membership of the Labour Party and also those who are affiliate members of the party by way of their Trade Union membership.

Therefore I will as an affiliate member receive a ballot paper in exactly the same postal manner as will direct members of the Labour Party.

Len McCluskey can recommend to Unite Union members as that unions General Executive Council agree to recommend. However, it will be for each individual member entitled to vote to decide if they wish to accept that advice or decide for themselves.

Simple as that.

Well said, POGS

There is quite a difference between criticism of a politician and criticism and personal attacks on an individual poster.

Grandad

With all due respect my post to Anniebach mentions ' posters' not poster but I know from my past experience with Anniebach she did at one time argue with myself and others over Corbyn whom she was all for at one time. It is not the case the history on Gransnet can be whitewashed.

Anniebach was always understood to be a resilient Labour supporter / activist but altered her position because of the Leader and I have no doubt Anniebach will do as others have done over time and ' return' to Labour as a member if the right Leader for her is elected. As happened when many ' returned ' to Labour when they saw Corbyn as Leader.

I use the term same old, same old because the record is stuck on the personal abuse Anniebach has received by the same old, same old posters who have had the same old, same old response from the likes of myself.

As GracesGranMK3 said previously :-

" However, I am sure she is a big girl now and can fight her own battles if that is what this is."

Yes she can and yes she does but to be frank as an observer of how many times she is ' called out' by those who continue to try and belittle her gets to the point where I don't feel like staying quiet and prefer to tell the truth as I know it.

Enjoy the rest of your holiday.

Yes but! I would have to drink both in the next couple of days and DH isn't drinking!

Tempted though, perhaps at the weekend
I also won a very suspect bottle of fizzy stuff, it looks as if it's done the rounds of the raffles for a few years. It could be worth a fortune or make good toilet cleaner.

Callistemon Open both, do a blind test and come back with the results.

Lovetopaint I agree with you, but I'm sitting on the sidelines. McCluskey doesn't have a majority, even amongst the unions, and I'm hoping that the unions will vote rationally.

trisher
There was a thread on Prosecco -v- Cava

Apparently Cava is more upmarket
We have a bottle of each somewhere, plus some NZ sparkling wine which I won.

You chav! I went the whole hog years ago and became teetotal. Having said that, I can honestly say that the water in the North West is more palatable than the stuff we have coming out of our taps in the South East.

Iam64

Sometimes nothing else fits the bill

I am worried about the voting of the unions. They “did” for David Milliband and they will probably do the same for Keir Starmer. It is McCluskey who is the real disaster for the Labour Party. Unfortunately Alan Johnson is no longer in main politics as he would have been our choice. He was a union leader but a really good one and was liked and respected for his leadership of the Post Office Union.

I've always fancied being champagne socialist, unfortunately I have to make do with Prosecco!

I doubt very much if the Labour Party would have ever got anywhere without "champagne socialists". These were people, who despite being wealthy themselves, did actually care about people less fortunate than themselves. The UK's political system would have meant that the wealthy would have continued to look after themselves, if an increasing number of "champagne socialists" hadn't fought for universal franchise.

Even today, there are a few very wealthy people who appreciate the opportunities they had and would like to make those opportunities available to all people. I certainly don't begrudge them the odd magnum of champagne or even a fast car, if it's been earned honestly and they pay taxes.

Those people who care about social democracy need to think beyond "pure socialism" and "working class" as meaningful concepts.

I am sorry you failed the 11+ grandad43,

I certainly don’t expect labour supporters to wear sack cloth and ashes, and there have always been ‘champagne socialists’ your choice