[Tubby Isaacs]

The article that this attack is based on is complete bollocks. Any old shit v the Labour Government, eh?

[Tubby Isaacs]

Oh fucking hell, top UK News story. Government authorizes 8 allotment sales, some of which were derelict and some of which are being replaced.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... allotments

[The Weeping Angel]

The article that this attack is based on is complete bollocks. Any old shit v the Labour Government, eh?

But rich of Josiah as he was more than happy to spread this story yesterday.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Yeah, though he did add the clarification, to be fair to him. Jez won't.

[The Weeping Angel]

I'm still annoyed at him for not checking it out in the first place.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I now see he’s doing the old “nothing I said was wrong”.

[mattomac]

I see the national allotment Society have criticised the article.

https://pressat.co.uk/releases/national ... RiScN7kexw

[satnav]

Does Corbyn keep the magic money tree on his allotment?

[Boiler]

Does Corbyn keep the magic money tree on his allotment?

That'll be the "Moneymaker" tomatoes.

[Abernathy]

I’ve been thinking about Corbyn/Sultana and their nascent new political party. One question that keeps popping into my mind is this : In launching (at last) their own new party, are Corbyn/Sultana being basically honest? In other wards, are they admitting that essentially, when they were part of the Labour Party ( In Corbyn’s case, less so that of Sultana, you might reasonably observe that it has taken him far too long (about 40-odd years) eventually to admit that much, and that he has spent most of that time actively undermining rather than supporting Labour, for the answer to be yes).

If we assume that yes, they are being basically honest, then how do we feel about it ? Other than the fact that the new party is likely to take votes from Labour and conceivably lead to a Reform UK government , I’d theoretically credit the pair of them for doing this, since, in theory, I actually agree with much of its policy objectives : greater equality, wealth redistribution, public ownership of utilities and transport, and so forth. Theoretically, it’s a brave & honest thing that they’re doing. But that “theoretically” is a massive, massive stumbling block for me. Theoretically, I’d love the Labour Party to be able to espouse all of those things, but I know that government isn’t that simple, and that it’s going to take time to turn around 14 years of Tory neglect, incompetence, and sheer destructive malice.

I also know that Sultana and Corbyn are only setting up their new party because they both voted against key Labour government policies and lost the whip, and both basically expelled themselves from the party by setting themselves in opposition to Labour. They wouldn’t be doing it if that hadn’t happened. So, in that respect, what they are doing with this new party could be said to be essentially dishonest.

My conclusion? I think that they are both wrong, and both fundamentally dishonest.

Debate ?

[davidjay]

She was happy enough to fight the election as Labour, him less so, and neither can be surprised by the government's actions since then. I think everything about them should be judged against that

[Andy McDandy]

Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven and so on.

I agree about the policies - they're a left wing wish list. And they have to get over the hurdle that there are a lot of selfish bastards out there, and their votes are worth the same as all the nice people's. "How can any reasonable person object to this?", they ask; and I have to say that there are plenty of people who simply don't care about anything that doesn't directly affect them. They're not bad people per se, just swamped. Yes, if we could go back and start all over again, I dare say we could come up with a better way to run society, but let's be honest. The system we have has given us some pretty cool shit, and we're all cunts at times.

Corbyn may have been biting his tongue for all those years, waiting for his moment to shine. He blew it though, and now knows he'll never have a shot at the top job again. So what better than to become a lefty Fargle and hope to drag the Labour party further to the left lest it lose more supporters to him?

[Tubby Isaacs]

None of this lot have any interest in private business. Growth happens because the government makes it happen by spending lots of money. Markets are supposed to respect their electoral mandate. If Universal wants to build a theme park in a not particularly affluent part of Bedfordshire, they complain it should be in County Durham. And it probably shouldn’t be a theme park, because the jobs don’t pay enough. It should be top end tech. Except not built by a top end tech firm, because they all have links to Israel. And anyway, foreign investment is all bad, because the profits leave the country. So it should be a British firm, but owned by Unite members.

[Tubby Isaacs]

And no area of public spending, apart from Defence, can ever be cut. Defence can be cut even while Russia invades European allies. And policy in every area should be "accountable" to Labour Party members and trade unions (provided the unions are run by their mates). Anybody with direct experience and expertise is a "vested interest".

[Crabcakes]

They’re 2 sides of the same coin: Jez hasn’t changed his ideas since 1960-odd and cannot accept he isn’t right. His time in charge has reinforced that rather than introduced doubts, as by surrounding himself with sycophants he no doubt believes he was sabotaged. It also gave him a taste for exposure he seems to enjoy very much. Zarah hasn’t had a chance to get set in her ways yet but is of the same ‘all issues are black and white’/west = bad style that isn’t compatible with functional democracy, and no doubt being snubbed for a government role (or at least being seen as snubbed in her eyes) has led to a conviction that she was excluded because her ideas were too radical rather than the fact they’re the same unworkable, simplistic slop that Corbyn has trotted out for decades.

They’ve also both had virtually no real world experience and went straight from being a student politician to a politician. But they also both like attention, both like being told that they are wonderful by audiences that don’t challenge them, both get shirty when pushed, and both like to be able to criticise with the luxury of never having to give a fully formed solution of their own.

But surprisingly, because of that I think they weren’t dishonest by being in Labour, because they both probably assumed that Labour would eventually come round to their way of thinking because they can’t countenance that they’re not right. Hence I think it’s just the end result of arrogance. The same arrogance that saw Jez supporters claim the voters were wrong when they didn’t win elections rather than anything being wrong with the offer.

Sultana once said: "I have to stand up for what I believe are the true values of the Labour Party and in doing so I've made difficult decisions in terms of defying the whip”, though equally Jez could have said it. It sums it all up though for both of them - “I know what you want better than you do”.

[davidjay]

I don't think any of us would object in principle to their policies. It's the dogmatic idiots who would implement them that are the problem.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Very noticeable that Jez got no business support at all in 2019, despite running against the "fuck business" pro-Brexit Bozo. They probably think the lack of business support was a positive thing.

[Tubby Isaacs]

They’re 2 sides of the same coin: Jez hasn’t changed his ideas since 1960-odd

His "principles" haven't changed since then, but I note that the wealth tax which wasn't in the manifesto in 2019 is now a source of easy money from other people.

[Crabcakes]

They’re 2 sides of the same coin: Jez hasn’t changed his ideas since 1960-odd

His "principles" haven't changed since then, but I note that the wealth tax which wasn't in the manifesto in 2019 is now a source of easy money from other people.

In 2019 he knew he’d have to do it if elected. Now he knows he’ll never be elected so can say what he likes.

His core principle has stayed exactly the same - say what earns him the most leftie points but only when there’s no danger of having to put your money where your mouth is.

[Andy McDandy]

All things must be voted on, because democracy. Except when the executive votes on something that ignores the wishes of the grassroots members. Or the local branch holds the vote while the group was not quorate*. Or the entryists skewed the result. Look, basically Jeremy will put a proposal to us, and we'll all vote on how brilliant it is.

*Not quorate covering anything from I was on holiday to I was still at the bar ordering drinks.

Sultana once said: "I have to stand up for what I believe are the true values of the Labour Party and in doing so I've made difficult decisions in terms of defying the whip”

There's a frequently reposted letter from one of the big papers, from a guy who lists the things he believes in, and notes that in the 1960s he was on the right wing of the Tories, but is now viewed as a quasi-Socialist despite not changing a single opinion.

The "true Labour Party", rather than being the people who currently make up its membership, seems to be "what the old folks remember". And apologies to any present, but thick older C2DEs full of nostalgia and bitterness is kind of why we're in the shit right now.