| Is anyone else concerned by this? 15:31 - Jul 26 with 14946 views | Darth_Koont |
We’ve just had the Forde Report corroborating one of the worst political scandals in modern times, certainly the most detailed and widespread. And yet our media couldn’t be less interested – bar the fact that many of them immediately copied the Labour spokesman who spun it as a problem with Corbynism that is now over.
But the key findings of the report remain:
– An unelected bureaucracy in one of the two parties that can effectively form a national government worked against their elected leader and the democratic mandate from members of the party.
– These senior staff, whose job and purpose is to support the leader and members the party represents, secretly and as Forde points out wrongfully diverted over 100K of electoral funds to the seats of anti-Corbyn MPs. It wasn’t their money nor had they the election nor democratic brief to do so. They allege it was to protect seats but these weren’t the seats at most risk. This is also in the 2017 election where a hung parliament was on a knife edge and May barely squeaked in with the support of the DUP. So beyond the utter moral failure and democratic abuse here, these efforts may have had repercussions for the whole country and its future. I’m not saying it definitely did or would have but this is why democratic abuse like this can’t be ignored.
– Antisemitism was being weaponised by the Labour right. And, as Forde also points out, the premise for the big debate in the media and beyond (including the Panorama hatchet job) was wrong and “evidence” that Corbyn had got involved a) unbidden by the HQ staff themselves and b) to block investigations and expulsions was entirely misleading. Forde didn’t use the words “attempts to frame Corbyn that overall succeeded” but he’s a lawyer and much more careful. But I’ll certainly put that out there as a question that those involved need to answer.
– The Labour HQ staff were leaking information and briefing “friendly” journalists at every step. So, in the fight against Corbynism (a fight against social democracy and change if we’re being honest), the unelected staff decided early on to take sides against the leader and the wishes of the members. In this way, they mirrored the PLP and prominently vocal MPs who also decided to act against the party’s own internal democracy.
– The culture within the Labour Party is toxic, not just with the unprofessional and undemocratic behaviour of far too many senior staff but also with sexism and racism. Forde received many, many complaints during the evidence gathering and submission phase (plus a few legal warnings from those who knew that the Labour leaks document was true and damning). Forde, coming through loud and clear despite his lawyerly and careful language, is evidently disgusted by a lot of these internal messages and communications. And he points to an organisation that is deeply flawed and toxic.
As I say, most of these issues have been relatively common knowledge and certainly discussed but were dismissed by factional MPs and their media lackeys as allegations. Yet the Forde report absolutely corroborates them and shows that the accepted narrative of the Corbyn years was just that – a narrative people accepted.
Now, that it’s out and independently corroborated where is the media response? How can we trust a media that painted a picture that it either knew was false or that it didn’t bother to investigate?
That’s serious and worrying enough. But what do we also say about a democratic party (the opposition and only alternative, as people are always keen to remind me) that’s been hijacked by genuine rightwingers who will monster and sabotage anyone elected by members to push the case for more equality, justice and a better life for the most vulnerable and ignored in society. What gives these people the right but also the conviction that they’re there to serve other unelected interests??!
For anyone who says this is over now so no use lamenting the past, think again. The Labour Right has total control of the party now – the internal and the political organisation. It’s amended the rules and taken power from the membership to avoid a repeat of someone from the left getting elected. It’s carried on the same purge that Forde describes when staff went around “trot hunting” (instead of dealing with antisemitism cases by the way) and where a “trot” was described as “anyone left of Gordon Brown”. It’s stood by and clapped along to the most dishonest leadership campaign in UK history where Starmer has misrepresented his values and views (as pledges FFS) to then backtrack on the whole programme and the social democratic platform he himself was committed to before and after the 2019 election if you believe his frequent speeches and statements.
If Boris and his government was a democratic scandal and a sign of dysfunctional party politics (it certainly was) then this saga is the same.
So why can I only see a lack of concern in the limited coverage and almost non-existent responses? Do people really think this doesn’t matter?
[Post edited 26 Jul 2022 15:35]
|  |
| |  |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:20 - Oct 9 with 1214 views | Darth_Koont |
The Media Lens report is a good summary of AJ’s investigative journalism based on the leak of primary source evidence.
As well as a damning indictment of the resulting media silence. “Omertà ” is a fairly accurate term. Like the mafia, it’s a silence to protect criminal levels of self-interest.
| |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 14:10 - Oct 9 with 1100 views | gazzer1999 |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:20 - Oct 9 by Darth_Koont |
The Media Lens report is a good summary of AJ’s investigative journalism based on the leak of primary source evidence.
As well as a damning indictment of the resulting media silence. “Omertà ” is a fairly accurate term. Like the mafia, it’s a silence to protect criminal levels of self-interest.
|
This really sums up politics in this country, rotten to the core on both sides. As Blair once said if its a straight left v right you always get the same result a right victory. Seems like Starmer is suppressing everything to get elected and as Oborne said racing to the bottom to get votes.
Unsure why this is not being debated more in the mainstream. |  | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:33 - Oct 9 with 1064 views | backwaywhen |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:37 - Jul 26 by Cotty |
I'm far more annoyed about what the Tories have done to this country while everyone in the Labour Party has been distracted by factional infighting. But there we are. |
Is it all the Tories fault that we have had a world pandemic and Putin decided to play war games , get a grip man ! |  | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:37 - Oct 9 with 1056 views | XYZ |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:33 - Oct 9 by backwaywhen |
Is it all the Tories fault that we have had a world pandemic and Putin decided to play war games , get a grip man ! |
Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014.
The tory party continues to accept donations from Russians.
Boris Johnson suppressed the Intelligence Select Committee report on Russian interference in UK politics and ensured that evidence was never looked at.
Add that lot to the charge sheet. | | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 16:09 - Oct 9 with 1038 views | jeera |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:33 - Oct 9 by backwaywhen |
Is it all the Tories fault that we have had a world pandemic and Putin decided to play war games , get a grip man ! |
The way you've pumped that out with no regard to the way this party has handled the country over the past several years suggests it isn't he who needs to get a grip.
Anyone still trying to defend this mess has to be delusional in the extreme.
Edit: English isn't my first language apparently.
[Post edited 9 Oct 2022 16:13]
|  |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 16:22 - Oct 9 with 1024 views | monytowbray |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:33 - Oct 9 by backwaywhen |
Is it all the Tories fault that we have had a world pandemic and Putin decided to play war games , get a grip man ! |
Why does the use of spaces before punctuation remind me of a former poster?! |  |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 19:23 - Oct 9 with 972 views | noggin |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 15:33 - Oct 9 by backwaywhen |
Is it all the Tories fault that we have had a world pandemic and Putin decided to play war games , get a grip man ! |
lol. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 08:33 - Oct 10 with 866 views | Darth_Koont |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 14:10 - Oct 9 by gazzer1999 |
This really sums up politics in this country, rotten to the core on both sides. As Blair once said if its a straight left v right you always get the same result a right victory. Seems like Starmer is suppressing everything to get elected and as Oborne said racing to the bottom to get votes.
Unsure why this is not being debated more in the mainstream. |
Because mainstream politics and media doesn’t represent mainstream interests. It represents its own interests along with the interests of rich owners, donors and lobbyists.
If you propose or even just write about redistributive policies to address systemic inequality in the UK (wealth, age, regional, gender, racial) then you’ll be outside mainstream politics and media. Or at least a token “balance” of one or two lone voices that can be treated and dismissed as some quirky extreme.
People wonder why things in the UK have been getting worse and more precarious for ordinary people. Well, it’s simple – their interests (and the job of representing them) haven’t been taken seriously enough for decades. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 08:38 - Oct 10 with 859 views | thebooks |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 08:33 - Oct 10 by Darth_Koont |
Because mainstream politics and media doesn’t represent mainstream interests. It represents its own interests along with the interests of rich owners, donors and lobbyists.
If you propose or even just write about redistributive policies to address systemic inequality in the UK (wealth, age, regional, gender, racial) then you’ll be outside mainstream politics and media. Or at least a token “balance” of one or two lone voices that can be treated and dismissed as some quirky extreme.
People wonder why things in the UK have been getting worse and more precarious for ordinary people. Well, it’s simple – their interests (and the job of representing them) haven’t been taken seriously enough for decades. |
Indeed. And here's a pretty sober/depressing view of how Labour are just going to carry on supporting this:
https://newsocialist.org.uk/moving-on-again/ |  | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 08:56 - Oct 10 with 851 views | Darth_Koont |
Utterly damning – as the truth so often is. | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:38 - Oct 10 with 790 views | giant_stow |
Here's to electoral reform so the minority left can safely leave Labour, rather than trying to persuade the majority to change. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:48 - Oct 10 with 780 views | Darth_Koont |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:38 - Oct 10 by giant_stow |
Here's to electoral reform so the minority left can safely leave Labour, rather than trying to persuade the majority to change. |
The majority of Labour members voted for Corbyn and Starmer on a social democrat/democratic socialist platform.
You’re talking about an anti-democratic, authoritarian minority that’s blocking change. And refusing to offer a meaningful alternative to the UK population’s continued decline in socio-economic terms. | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:57 - Oct 10 with 763 views | thebooks |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:38 - Oct 10 by giant_stow |
Here's to electoral reform so the minority left can safely leave Labour, rather than trying to persuade the majority to change. |
The "minority left" probably reflects the wishes of most the party membership.
As the article says, Corbyn only got in because the party right misjudged how popular he'd be and let him on the ballot. They won't make that mistake again, so it's unlikely a similar figure will get anywhere near the leadership.
The problem with Labour shutting down all debate or different perspectives is that we end up with the same system we've had since the 80s. If the only aim is "anything but the Tories" you're not going to address the reasons for things like Brexit, the growth of the far-right etc. | | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:01 - Oct 10 with 762 views | leitrimblue |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:38 - Oct 10 by giant_stow |
Here's to electoral reform so the minority left can safely leave Labour, rather than trying to persuade the majority to change. |
Exactly, there can be no room in the labour party for Socialists or the working class...Labour need to stick to representing the otherwise unrepresented white middle class. While offering minimal chance of any social change. That's what the country needs at the moment.... |  | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:03 - Oct 10 with 754 views | itfcjoe |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:57 - Oct 10 by thebooks |
The "minority left" probably reflects the wishes of most the party membership.
As the article says, Corbyn only got in because the party right misjudged how popular he'd be and let him on the ballot. They won't make that mistake again, so it's unlikely a similar figure will get anywhere near the leadership.
The problem with Labour shutting down all debate or different perspectives is that we end up with the same system we've had since the 80s. If the only aim is "anything but the Tories" you're not going to address the reasons for things like Brexit, the growth of the far-right etc. |
Should party membership be listened to though? Speaking as someone who is a member - are these people the right people to choose leaders etc?
We've seen the Labour membership choose Corbyn and seen them absolutely wiped out in a General Election
We've seen the Tory membership choose Liz Truss and they are now polling 30 points behind Labour
The membership of major political parties are nowhere near representative of the general person in the electorate, and whilst they may have ideas and a platform for them, it's up to those in the party management roles to work out what they need to do to be elected. |  |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:10 - Oct 10 with 742 views | giant_stow |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:01 - Oct 10 by leitrimblue |
Exactly, there can be no room in the labour party for Socialists or the working class...Labour need to stick to representing the otherwise unrepresented white middle class. While offering minimal chance of any social change. That's what the country needs at the moment.... |
I'm not suggesting kicking out socialists boss, more suggesting that they want to leave, if they agree with the ooks' link that is. If that can be done in a way that the full spectrum of left of centre view cab be more accurately represented in a reformed parliament, then that can only be a win surely.
To address darth and thebooks'point above about the party membership, Labour's MPs had a different agenda to the party membership, in trying to reflect the wider electorates'wishes. There's nothing wrong with that, unless the plan is to always be a party of opposition.
No, a split, enabled by voting reform would be a good thing all round, leaving everyone with their views being represented. Maybe the new socialist party would even overtake the rump of Labour in time and you guys would win the argument! [Post edited 10 Oct 2022 10:11]
| |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:21 - Oct 10 with 713 views | thebooks |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:03 - Oct 10 by itfcjoe |
Should party membership be listened to though? Speaking as someone who is a member - are these people the right people to choose leaders etc?
We've seen the Labour membership choose Corbyn and seen them absolutely wiped out in a General Election
We've seen the Tory membership choose Liz Truss and they are now polling 30 points behind Labour
The membership of major political parties are nowhere near representative of the general person in the electorate, and whilst they may have ideas and a platform for them, it's up to those in the party management roles to work out what they need to do to be elected. |
This managerialism is part of the problem, though. It only represents the interests of a narrow part of society. It's no more "representaive" than members (less so).
You're also assuming that, say, a Starmer, PLP-led, anti-Brexit Labour party would have done significantly better than Corbyn, as well as ignoring the 2017 gains.
Truss is PM, elected by a tiny number of Consdervatives - that is a democratic problem. Corbyn was elected to represent Labour's members, not PM. | | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:25 - Oct 10 with 710 views | thebooks |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:10 - Oct 10 by giant_stow |
I'm not suggesting kicking out socialists boss, more suggesting that they want to leave, if they agree with the ooks' link that is. If that can be done in a way that the full spectrum of left of centre view cab be more accurately represented in a reformed parliament, then that can only be a win surely.
To address darth and thebooks'point above about the party membership, Labour's MPs had a different agenda to the party membership, in trying to reflect the wider electorates'wishes. There's nothing wrong with that, unless the plan is to always be a party of opposition.
No, a split, enabled by voting reform would be a good thing all round, leaving everyone with their views being represented. Maybe the new socialist party would even overtake the rump of Labour in time and you guys would win the argument! [Post edited 10 Oct 2022 10:11]
|
But how do you know they were representing "the wider electorate's wishes"? The wider electorate's wishes were to "get Brexit done", as far as I can tell.
Agree about electoral reform, though. Not a hope in hell of that under Starmer. | | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:36 - Oct 10 with 694 views | itfcjoe |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:21 - Oct 10 by thebooks |
This managerialism is part of the problem, though. It only represents the interests of a narrow part of society. It's no more "representaive" than members (less so).
You're also assuming that, say, a Starmer, PLP-led, anti-Brexit Labour party would have done significantly better than Corbyn, as well as ignoring the 2017 gains.
Truss is PM, elected by a tiny number of Consdervatives - that is a democratic problem. Corbyn was elected to represent Labour's members, not PM. |
I don't think any party has got themselves into a better position since taking the leadership vote away from the MPs and giving it to the members - those who work alongside them know who is competent, electable, honest and everything else required
And the Genie is out of the bottle now | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:16 - Oct 10 with 645 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 09:57 - Oct 10 by thebooks |
The "minority left" probably reflects the wishes of most the party membership.
As the article says, Corbyn only got in because the party right misjudged how popular he'd be and let him on the ballot. They won't make that mistake again, so it's unlikely a similar figure will get anywhere near the leadership.
The problem with Labour shutting down all debate or different perspectives is that we end up with the same system we've had since the 80s. If the only aim is "anything but the Tories" you're not going to address the reasons for things like Brexit, the growth of the far-right etc. |
This is true. But given that the Tories have implemented most of Hitler 1934 Enabling Act, it is critically important that they don't get another term.
Electoral Reform, and the reversal of the above and other abuses (sidelining of Parliament, granting of law-writing powers to ministers, politicisation of the police, removal of the right to protest, failure to investigate foreign interference in elections, cash for honours, a man with KGB connections elevated to the Lords which gives him access to high level Confidential briefings on eg the economy, defence and foreign affairs, internment and deportation for Asylum Seekers, removal of the ability of courts to over-rule Ministerial decisions, political appointments to the Board of the BBC, placing of the Electoral Commission under direct Ministerial control, election of the Prime Minister by Party members for the third time in a row, wholesale sidelining of the Electoral Manifesto by new PM, and moves towards leaving the European Court of Human Rights) are the most important issues in UK politics.
Labour's membership have spoken on that. If it doesn't happen then I will have to vote "Most effective Not Tory in my constituency" but with a very heavy heart, because I know that unless the above is repealed then the next time the Tories get in they will finish the job. | | | |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:18 - Oct 10 with 644 views | Darth_Koont |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 10:25 - Oct 10 by thebooks |
But how do you know they were representing "the wider electorate's wishes"? The wider electorate's wishes were to "get Brexit done", as far as I can tell.
Agree about electoral reform, though. Not a hope in hell of that under Starmer. |
Indeed.
The Tories also say they’re the party of the working man, common sense and fiscal responsibility. And people in their millions fall for that too.
They’re not as far to the right as the Tories but Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues.
It’s only the two party system that’s letting them jockey for position on the right and yet pretending they’re an answer. PR would sort that out or at least get them lining up with the Rory Stewarts and David Camerons who they are ideologically aligned with on a majority of issues.
But as you say, that electoral reform is not going to come from Starmer et al who most like the idea of a power-share with the Tories representing the establishment’s interests. | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:35 - Oct 10 with 607 views | itfcjoe |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:18 - Oct 10 by Darth_Koont |
Indeed.
The Tories also say they’re the party of the working man, common sense and fiscal responsibility. And people in their millions fall for that too.
They’re not as far to the right as the Tories but Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues.
It’s only the two party system that’s letting them jockey for position on the right and yet pretending they’re an answer. PR would sort that out or at least get them lining up with the Rory Stewarts and David Camerons who they are ideologically aligned with on a majority of issues.
But as you say, that electoral reform is not going to come from Starmer et al who most like the idea of a power-share with the Tories representing the establishment’s interests. |
"but Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues."
You think my views are broadly right wing, but everyone I speak to about politics is miles to the right of me, I'm seen as some rabid leftie by most I speak to about it whilst I'm very aware of fact I'm a centrist Dad.
I just don't think the population is close to where you think it is, economically especially. | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:49 - Oct 10 with 580 views | lowhouseblue |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:18 - Oct 10 by Darth_Koont |
Indeed.
The Tories also say they’re the party of the working man, common sense and fiscal responsibility. And people in their millions fall for that too.
They’re not as far to the right as the Tories but Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues.
It’s only the two party system that’s letting them jockey for position on the right and yet pretending they’re an answer. PR would sort that out or at least get them lining up with the Rory Stewarts and David Camerons who they are ideologically aligned with on a majority of issues.
But as you say, that electoral reform is not going to come from Starmer et al who most like the idea of a power-share with the Tories representing the establishment’s interests. |
"Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues"
this is one of your main problems. you have absolutely no idea whatsoever where the uk population is. you rarely look outside your little bubble, and when you do it's to sneer at people who don't agree with you. if you believe the corbynites are representative of the population you really do need to get out more. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:56 - Oct 10 with 557 views | noggin |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:49 - Oct 10 by lowhouseblue |
"Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues"
this is one of your main problems. you have absolutely no idea whatsoever where the uk population is. you rarely look outside your little bubble, and when you do it's to sneer at people who don't agree with you. if you believe the corbynites are representative of the population you really do need to get out more. |
Which of Corbyn's policies were the population so opposed to? | |
| |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 12:01 - Oct 10 with 552 views | thebooks |
| Is anyone else concerned by this? on 11:35 - Oct 10 by itfcjoe |
"but Labour are still to the right of the population on most social and economic issues."
You think my views are broadly right wing, but everyone I speak to about politics is miles to the right of me, I'm seen as some rabid leftie by most I speak to about it whilst I'm very aware of fact I'm a centrist Dad.
I just don't think the population is close to where you think it is, economically especially. |
Hard to tell, and probably quite volatile what the public thinks.
Generally, though, on stuff like nationalisation the public's pretty clear, and has been for a while. Johnson was smart enough to recognise this and ditched a lot of the swivel-eyed Truss approach.
With Truss there's probably an opportunity for Starmer to make some hay by taking on a few of the Corbyn manifesto promises. He'd bring the left back back on board a bit more as well. I fear he's just too defensive, though; still living in 1994. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
