Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
Well, I suppose the accusation that he's shown his antisemitism by standing up for a while during the debate rather than sitting down, is a little less laughably desperate than accusing him of antisemitism for going to Passover with the wrong kind of Jews..... but not much.
Don’t be obtuse.
The fact that he has not bothered to speak, the great passionate campaigner, militant fighter against racism, he called himself recently, in a Parliamentary debate on this very topic is a rather more telling criticism.
Not that he is an anti-semite but that he simply does not understand the importance of showing real moral and politicsl leadership on a subject which is causing distress to an ethnic minority and to a significant number of his own MPs and some decent Labour supporters, as well as others.
Far easier to pretend that it’s all about him and misdirected and non-existent, eh!
When did the Labour party turn into a narcissistic Corbyn fan club?
When Corbyn stood to be leader...and the likes of Margaret Becket, Jo Cox, Sadiq Khan helped provide his ideological grouping a platform through some misguided means of having some kind of debate...
As happened with Cameron over Brexit and the Republicans with the Tea Party...you show these ideologues a titillating taste of a bone, and they whack your arm off, and then your'e fucked......
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
Because Corbyn was an old, ineffectual duffer...I would have voted for him too as a Centrist Burnhamlite Labour MP, just to see something different for the couple of months of debate.....JesusH though with a capital J and H...you could not have predicted that they resurrected Frankenstein who takes a kicking and keeps on ticking....
Corbyn’s leadership isn’t the first time the party has been morally questionable. That was also the case with Blair and the Iraq War. The real question is why does a party that in theory should be a moral crusdade keep on having these issues?
Well, I suppose the accusation that he's shown his antisemitism by standing up for a while during the debate rather than sitting down, is a little less laughably desperate than accusing him of antisemitism for going to Passover with the wrong kind of Jews..... but not much.
Again with the gaslighting. Were his Passover antics the most egregious example of Labour antisemitism? Plainly not, compared to his invitations to blood-libellers and references to honoured friends who happen to want to 'exterminate the Zionists'.
But the notion that when accused of harbouring racism and prejudice against a group as a whole, you can refuse to meet the representative bodies of the vast majority of that group, and then go to a
The Passover seder was of course after 25th March.
Bit difficult to criticse him for not meeting people who didn't want to meet him so he meet a different group.
Well I say difficult but when did carefully constructed propaganda designed to create a narrative need to be true....
Onto which I should point out the people jailed for Luciana Berger have been neo-nazi's (at least the ones I've found) who started a campaign against her before Corbyn even became leader. One of the people jailed in one of his abusive tweets called her a communist something.
I assume this is still Corbyn's fault though, as I guess the idea behind the debate was people would talk about their experiences with anti-semitism, some people would call out Corbyn and then the two could be linked in some people's minds even when they are not.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
She made it clear*, she wasn't the one I was criticising.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Jeremy Corbyn has a problem with the Jews. Thats not new.
You could not possibly say that if you had seen today's shocking debate in the HOC
He's just a political David Koresh. Its a cult that surrounds him and anything that has the smell of a inward looking inflexible cult is automatically suspect.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
Absolutely agree and you will see I have been furious over this issue and Amber Rudd should have dealt with it when it landed on her desk some months ago. I am confident this will be dealt now while I have no confidence in Corbyn dealing with his problems
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I rather fear we get the politicians we deserve.
In any case its not going to get any better as the social media effects will discourage more sensible people from getting involved in politics.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
And I hope there will be swift and generous compensation as well.
I do as well. I really hope the government sorts this one out.
Well, I suppose the accusation that he's shown his antisemitism by standing up for a while during the debate rather than sitting down, is a little less laughably desperate than accusing him of antisemitism for going to Passover with the wrong kind of Jews..... but not much.
Except Danny that wasn't what he was criticised for.
Eh? The thread header literally is criticising him for "leaving the chamber" (aka: standing behind the Speaker's Chair rather than sitting down).
Tom Peck (of the tweets in the header, and a parliamentary sketch writer familiar with the conventions of the HoC) says a."he left the chamber," b. he then returned for a "lengthy, curious spell standing with his hands in his pockets behind the Speakers chair," then c. returned to the front bench. Your attempt to conflate a. and b. with "aka" is transparently dishonest (unless you have been misled by Dr Palmer at his most exuberantly Panglossian). Corbyn left the Chamber because he's a coward. He is also incontrovertibly tolerant of all forms of anti-semitism in his own party: you can't get round the fact that Livingstone has not been expelled from the party. Whether he is himself in his heart of hearts anti-semitic is unknowable by you or me (although the fact that you are peddling the almost infallible anti-semite-indicator "some of his best friends are Jewish is pretty telling), and irrelevant.
I didn't watch the debate, so I'll happily admit if I'm wrong on how long Corbyn was absent for; the posts I've read on Twitter have suggested it was for only a few minutes, which if true would make the claims that he was "ducking the debate" look very feeble indeed.
And I don't disagree that Ken Livingstone (and others like him) should be expelled, and that it doesn't reflect well on the Labour "powers that be" that he hasn't been. But getting that sorted is inevitably going to be much harder when right-wing commentators are making it seem like the whole thing is a concerted campaign against Corbyn, when they criticise him for things like the Jewdas seder. As I said, I could see the sea-change in Labour members' attitudes on Twitter after that story broke -- when the criticism against a party starts to become self-evidently ridiculous, that party's members are always going to "close ranks" rather than confront their own weaknesses (which was starting to happen before the Jewdas story).
There was nothing right wing today. It was labour at war with itself
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
The Windrush children are just the dress rehearsal for a much bigger group to be targeted in May's Hostile Environment.
Well, I suppose the accusation that he's shown his antisemitism by standing up for a while during the debate rather than sitting down, is a little less laughably desperate than accusing him of antisemitism for going to Passover with the wrong kind of Jews..... but not much.
Don’t be obtuse.
The fact that he has not bothered to speak, the great passionate campaigner, militant fighter against racism, he called himself recently, in a Parliamentary debate on this very topic is a rather more telling criticism.
Not that he is an anti-semite but that he simply does not understand the importance of showing real moral and politicsl leadership on a subject which is causing distress to an ethnic minority and to a significant number of his own MPs and some decent Labour supporters, as well as others.
Far easier to pretend that it’s all about him and misdirected and non-existent, eh!
When did the Labour party turn into a narcissistic Corbyn fan club?
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
Because Corbyn was an old, ineffectual duffer...I would have voted for him too as a Centrist Burnhamlite Labour MP, just to see something different for the couple of months of debate.....JesusH though with a capital J and H...you could not have predicted that they resurrected Frankenstein who takes a kicking and keeps on ticking....
Corbyn’s leadership isn’t the first time the party has been morally questionable. That was also the case with Blair and the Iraq War. The real question is why does a party that in theory should be a moral crusdade keep on having these issues?
Possibly because it’s nowhere near as moral as it likes to think it is.
Paradoxically, a belief that you are a good person or good organisation can lead to a dangerous complacency. It’s not what you call yourself that matters; it’s what you do. Labour’s actions have never been quite as wonderful as their propaganda claims.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
Absolutely agree and you will see I have been furious over this issue and Amber Rudd should have dealt with it when it landed on her desk some months ago. I am confident this will be dealt now while I have no confidence in Corbyn dealing with his problems
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I rather fear we get the politicians we deserve.
In any case its not going to get any better as the social media effects will discourage more sensible people from getting involved in politics.
With social media in the next years we’ll see even more stories of the silly things politicians in their younger years said or did. I think it’s going to be issue within society more generally, as employers will also be able to see the stupid thing their employees may have said or done. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it affecting people’s job opportunities.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
Absolutely agree and you will see I have been furious over this issue and Amber Rudd should have dealt with it when it landed on her desk some months ago. I am confident this will be dealt now while I have no confidence in Corbyn dealing with his problems
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I think we can agree on that but TM is the serious politician at present and she does apologise and deal with matters when she sees a wrong. Think the Syrian air strikes demonstrated that
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
The xenophobic lies began with "the locals aren't willing to do the work".
@a the Apocalypse.... Anyhow...I'm Green now. I don't give a flying fuck about the Labour Party, it's machinations. the utter stupidity of Corbyn and his 1970's throwback to something that didn't exist. I've got a Labour Board out for the locals, and if it wasn't so warm, I'd mash it up and burn it in my log burner
I genuinely think I despise the Labour Party and Tory party in equal measures...but I do still care about killing badgers, fracking, and rampant use of pesticides and climate change.
Well, I suppose the accusation that he's shown his antisemitism by standing up for a while during the debate rather than sitting down, is a little less laughably desperate than accusing him of antisemitism for going to Passover with the wrong kind of Jews..... but not much.
Again with the gaslighting. Were his Passover antics the most egregious example of Labour antisemitism? Plainly not, compared to his invitations to blood-libellers and references to honoured friends who happen to want to 'exterminate the Zionists'.
But the notion that when accused of harbouring racism and prejudice against a group as a whole, you can refuse to meet the representative bodies of the vast majority of that group, and then go to a
The Passover seder was of course after 25th March.
Bit difficult to criticse him for not meeting people who didn't want to meet him so he meet a different group.
Well I say difficult but when did carefully constructed propaganda designed to create a narrative need to be true....
Onto which I should point out the people jailed for Luciana Berger have been neo-nazi's (at least the ones I've found) who started a campaign against her before Corbyn even became leader. One of the people jailed in one of his abusive tweets called her a communist something.
I assume this is still Corbyn's fault though, as I guess the idea behind the debate was people would talk about their experiences with anti-semitism, some people would call out Corbyn and then the two could be linked in some people's minds even when they are not.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
She made it clear*, she wasn't the one I was criticising.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Talk is empty without action - after today Livingstone should be out of labour by the weekend
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
The Windrush children are just the dress rehearsal for a much bigger group to be targeted in May's Hostile Environment.
With the way the Windrush children have been dealt with, I did wonder how on earth are they going to manage all the EU migrants here - an even bigger group than Windrush - when the time comes. If they don’t get rid of their hostile environment policy I wouldn’t be surprised to see some very troubling stories in the media in several years time.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Is that literally the bar now? He hasn't said out loud that racism is OK by him, so we don't have a problem?
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
This is the other thing I don't get. What exactly do people want Corbyn to do about people posting on Twitter, if they're not Labour Party members? He doesn't have any power over people who simply *support* him, no power to take their Twitter access away or to prevent them from sending hate-mail. It seems to me that the people holding Corbyn personally responsible for every foul Twitter post by a supporter of his are either being touchingly naive about how the internet works, or they're disingenuously setting a bar that they know it's impossible to meet.
Should we hold Theresa May personally responsible for every Tory supporter (not member) who abuses Diane Abbott? I saw tons of people on Facebook last year posting vile stuff about her (including one which had a picture of a gorilla with the caption "forget the London look, get the Diane Abbott look!"), in between sharing some of the Conservatives' content, but it would never have occurred to me to expect Mrs May to take responsibility for that or to stand up and name and shame every person who'd done it.
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
Absolutely agree and you will see I have been furious over this issue and Amber Rudd should have dealt with it when it landed on her desk some months ago. I am confident this will be dealt now while I have no confidence in Corbyn dealing with his problems
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I rather fear we get the politicians we deserve.
In any case its not going to get any better as the social media effects will discourage more sensible people from getting involved in politics.
With social media in the next years we’ll see even more stories of the silly things politicians in their younger years said or did. I think it’s going to be issue within society more generally, as employers will also be able to see the stupid thing their employees may have said or done. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it affecting people’s job opportunities.
Re the impact on politics I see a couple of possibilities - either we end up with a lot of bland automatons in post (I have no twitter account, so I should be a good pick there) as normal people will be scared off standing, with a sprinkling of extremist wackos who get away with crazy social media pasts because they are in safe seats so don't care. Or societal attitudes will actually change, and we'll become less judging of stupid things said when younger on facebook, so it won't have as big an impact as thought.
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
Absolutely agree and you will see I have been furious over this issue and Amber Rudd should have dealt with it when it landed on her desk some months ago. I am confident this will be dealt now while I have no confidence in Corbyn dealing with his problems
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I think we can agree on that but TM is the serious politician at present and she does apologise and deal with matters when she sees a wrong. Think the Syrian air strikes demonstrated that
Sorry BigG but I don’t have the greatest opinion of TMay right now.
@a the Apocalypse.... Anyhow...I'm Green now. I don't give a flying fuck about the Labour Party, it's machinations. the utter stupidity of Corbyn and his 1970's throwback to something that didn't exist. I've got a Labour Board out for the locals, and if it wasn't so warm, I'd mash it up and burn it in my log burner
I genuinely think I despise the Labour Party and Tory party in equal measures...but I do still care about killing badgers, fracking, and rampant use of pesticides and climate change.
I’ll probably vote Green in the locals as well. Watching Labour right now is very sad. I’m happy to vote for a left wing leader, but not with all of the baggage and problems Corbyn brings.
With social media in the next years we’ll see even more stories of the silly things politicians in their younger years said or did. I think it’s going to be issue within society more generally, as employers will also be able to see the stupid thing their employees may have said or done. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it affecting people’s job opportunities.
I'm sure it already costs people jobs, and they almost certainly don't get told it's why they get no interview or offer.
We may never see something like this from the UK government, but I wouldn't be surprised if in the future such systems operate on the quiet.
As of February 2018, no comprehensive, nation-wide social credit system exists, but there are multiple pilots testing the system on a local level as well as in specific sectors of industry.[20] One such program has been implemented in Shanghai through its Honest Shanghai app, which uses facial recognition software to browse government records, and rates users accordingly.[21] Some reports have stated that the ratings may use information gathered from Chinese citizens' online behavior.[1]
In March 2018, Reuters reported that restrictions on citizens and businesses with low trustworthiness Social Credit ratings would come into effect on May 1st.[22]
The Passover seder was of course after 25th March.
Bit difficult to criticse him for not meeting people who didn't want to meet him so he meet a different group.
Well I say difficult but when did carefully constructed propaganda designed to create a narrative need to be true....
Onto which I should point out the people jailed for Luciana Berger have been neo-nazi's (at least the ones I've found) who started a campaign against her before Corbyn even became leader. One of the people jailed in one of his abusive tweets called her a communist something.
I assume this is still Corbyn's fault though, as I guess the idea behind the debate was people would talk about their experiences with anti-semitism, some people would call out Corbyn and then the two could be linked in some people's minds even when they are not.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
She made it clear*, she wasn't the one I was criticising.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Just listen to yourself.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
Do you really think Corbyn "speaking out" would magically make racists stop being racist?
I would say if you've got to the point where you're so hate-filled that you're sending death threats to people and calling people "Jewish vermin", you're not going to magically see the error of your ways just because a politician tells you to.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
One very good point made by the Board of Deputies was that he does, however, have a lot of influence with many people who do say and do horrible things in this way. He may not like everyone who is in his corner, politically, but he can (or continue to) tackle those people head on, as they won't respond to outsiders.
No it doesn't eradicate the problem, anymore than any other leader telling their side to stop being racist makes racism go away, but when some only listen to him, and some of those don't seem convinced of a problem even when he says there is, clearly there's more to do in his house. Which is not to say others don't need to look after their houses.
@a the Apocalypse.... Anyhow...I'm Green now. I don't give a flying fuck about the Labour Party, it's machinations. the utter stupidity of Corbyn and his 1970's throwback to something that didn't exist. I've got a Labour Board out for the locals, and if it wasn't so warm, I'd mash it up and burn it in my log burner
I genuinely think I despise the Labour Party and Tory party in equal measures...but I do still care about killing badgers, fracking, and rampant use of pesticides and climate change.
I'm sure there's an opening for the Greens to pick up the NOTA above.
But they'd need to get rid of much of their metropolitan leftism and become a bit like the old Liberals.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
I don’t have much confidence in Corbyn on dealing with antisemitism as well. But the way the Home Office has handled the Windrush issue doesn’t exactly provide me with much confidence in them either.
British politics is very depressing right now.
I rather fear we get the politicians we deserve.
In any case its not going to get any better as the social media effects will discourage more sensible people from getting involved in politics.
With social media in the next years we’ll see even more stories of the silly things politicians in their younger years said or did. I think it’s going to be issue within society more generally, as employers will also be able to see the stupid thing their employees may have said or done. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it affecting people’s job opportunities.
Re the impact on politics I see a couple of possibilities - either we end up with a lot of bland automatons in post (I have no twitter account, so I should be a good pick there) as normal people will be scared off standing, with a sprinkling of extremist wackos who get away with crazy social media pasts because they are in safe seats so don't care. Or societal attitudes will actually change, and we'll become less judging of stupid things said when younger on facebook, so it won't have as big an impact as thought.
Yep, those two sceanrios are pretty plausible although a lot of the outrage on these issues actually comes from social media itself. I think another scenario is people being increasingly weary of what they put online. More and more people now see that what you say online can come back to haunt you, after all.
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
I assume this is still Corbyn's fault though, as I guess the idea behind the debate was people would talk about their experiences with anti-semitism, some people would call out Corbyn and then the two could be linked in some people's minds even when they are not.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
She made it clear*, she wasn't the one I was criticising.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Just listen to yourself.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
Do you really think Corbyn "speaking out" would magically make racists stop being racist?
It would make them less likely to want to join, campaign for, and be candidates for, the Labour Party.
It might protect a few impressionable young people from being sucked into their web of conspiracist thinking when they thought they were getting cheaper housing and lower tuition fees.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
This is the other thing I don't get. What exactly do people want Corbyn to do about people posting on Twitter, if they're not Labour Party members? He doesn't have any power over people who simply *support* him, no power to take their Twitter access away or to prevent them from sending hate-mail. It seems to me that the people holding Corbyn personally responsible for every foul Twitter post by a supporter of his are either being touchingly naive about how the internet works, or they're disingenuously setting a bar that they know it's impossible to meet.
Should we hold Theresa May personally responsible for every Tory supporter (not member) who abuses Diane Abbott? I saw tons of people on Facebook last year posting vile stuff about her (including one which had a picture of a gorilla with the caption "forget the London look, get the Diane Abbott look!"), in between sharing some of the Conservatives' content, but it would never have occurred to me to expect Mrs May to take responsibility for that or to stand up and name and shame every person who'd done it.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Is that literally the bar now? He hasn't said out loud that racism is OK by him, so we don't have a problem?
Well after a deeply disturbing day in politics with the Windrush scandal and the shocking HOC debate it is time for me to wish all my fellow posters a very peaceful nights rest.
I went on a cruise to Norway and the Arctic once and each night the skipper came on the ships intercom and said in a lovely accent
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
And now Nick Griffin has thrown his weight behind Labour, we have the party that Remainer hopes are vested in being the home for the Jew-haters......
I could easily go far left....but Corbyn just talks shit quite frankly on just about everything.....
I'm waiting for a Labour leader who wants to face down the lunacy of Brexit and champion environmental causes...and Jezza.... it fucking well ain't him, or any of those toady toads that chaperone him....
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
So who were the PB tories exploiting loophole to vote Corbin in as Leader of her Majesty’s Opposition, one unforeseen economic crash away from No. 10? My question to you is would you do the same tomorrow?
Before you answer I am adding, if your answer now is no you wouldn’t then why the blazes did you do so in the first place!
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
This is the other thing I don't get. What exactly do people want Corbyn to do about people posting on Twitter, if they're not Labour Party members? He doesn't have any power over people who simply *support* him, no power to take their Twitter access away or to prevent them from sending hate-mail. It seems to me that the people holding Corbyn personally responsible for every foul Twitter post by a supporter of his are either being touchingly naive about how the internet works, or they're disingenuously setting a bar that they know it's impossible to meet.
Should we hold Theresa May personally responsible for every Tory supporter (not member) who abuses Diane Abbott? I saw tons of people on Facebook last year posting vile stuff about her (including one which had a picture of a gorilla with the caption "forget the London look, get the Diane Abbott look!"), in between sharing some of the Conservatives' content, but it would never have occurred to me to expect Mrs May to take responsibility for that or to stand up and name and shame every person who'd done it.
The problem is that genuine fair criticism (which is deserved) has become buried under a motherload of partisan atttacks.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
Zac's campaign was just wrong and he paid the price.
However who would have thought 2 years later labour would poll 61% as a racist party, only just ahead of UKIP
Jeremy Corbyn is evidently doing what he regards to be the bare minimum on the subject. I expect he’ll get away with that too.
Race has re-entered politics with a vengeance after the EU referendum. Sadly, none of the Leavers on here who so stridently condemn Jeremy Corbyn have yet found themselves able to accept that the Leave campaign pandered to xenophobia. They should concentrate on getting their own house in order before luxuriating in condemning opponents.
Excuse me but:-
1. Not all the people on here condemning Corbyn are Leavers and some have condemned the way the Leave campaign spoke about immigration and the language used by our politicians since the referendum; and
2. Problems with anti-semitism in Labour and Corbyn’s attitude to it predated the referendum. Corbyn was criticised precisely because of his history and background when he was a candidate for leader because of the concern that he would drag the Labour party down to his level.
June 2016 was not some sort of Year Zero for racist/xenophobic attitudes.
I agree with all of your points.
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
You do post bollocks,before 2016 we were getting BNP Councillors voted in and thousands voting for a far more racist party,years before we left the EU.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
That campaign really changed how I viewed Goldsmith. Prior to that I’d had quite a positive view of him. But by the end of that campaign I was more than happy to see Sadiq Khan win in London.
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
For some of them it was a good way of showing the left what a derisory vote total they would get to show them they are finished.
A lot of people decided that Labour had lost the previous election by being too left wing! obviously anybody with any sense would agree with this assessment and vote accordingly.
I think they just massively overestimated the appeal of Blairism/Centrism/Moderatism probably not helped by the media who felt similarly.
Another aspect of this struck me yesterday. When I saw Rudd and May shifting uncomfortably in response to David Lammy's speech yesterday, for me it was the sight of the opposition actually landing blows on the Government. So rare nowadays, and what Corbyn has singularly failed to do ever since he became leader.
Corbyn could have called a debate on the deportations. Instead he went for a debate on the air strikes.
Could be his six questions at PMQs .
Doubt it - The PM response will be I have publicly apologised and am dealing with it and no one will be deported unlike the way you have allowed anti semitic views to take hold in your party
Given what’s already reported to have happened, I think many in the Windrush generation are going to have to see words put into practice before they feel the situation is resolved.
The Windrush children are just the dress rehearsal for a much bigger group to be targeted in May's Hostile Environment.
With the way the Windrush children have been dealt with, I did wonder how on earth are they going to manage all the EU migrants here - an even bigger group than Windrush - when the time comes. If they don’t get rid of their hostile environment policy I wouldn’t be surprised to see some very troubling stories in the media in several years time.
You can understand why the EU would want to nail the government's feet to the floor on the issue of EU citizens’s rights post-Brexit.
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
This is the other thing I don't get. What exactly do people want Corbyn to do about people posting on Twitter, if they're not Labour Party members? He doesn't have any power over people who simply *support* him, no power to take their Twitter access away or to prevent them from sending hate-mail. It seems to me that the people holding Corbyn personally responsible for every foul Twitter post by a supporter of his are either being touchingly naive about how the internet works, or they're disingenuously setting a bar that they know it's impossible to meet.
Should we hold Theresa May personally responsible for every Tory supporter (not member) who abuses Diane Abbott? I saw tons of people on Facebook last year posting vile stuff about her (including one which had a picture of a gorilla with the caption "forget the London look, get the Diane Abbott look!"), in between sharing some of the Conservatives' content, but it would never have occurred to me to expect Mrs May to take responsibility for that or to stand up and name and shame every person who'd done it.
The problem is that genuine fair criticism (which is deserved) has become buried under a motherload of partisan atttacks.
Now that is hard to say. Muddled by partisan attacks perhaps? Are we saying that the partisan attacks is way more than the fair attacks? It is more like 50/50? What proportion is reasonable and what not? What response is therefore proportionate?
Well after a deeply disturbing day in politics with the Windrush scandal and the shocking HOC debate it is time for me to wish all my fellow posters a very peaceful nights rest.
I went on a cruise to Norway and the Arctic once and each night the skipper came on the ships intercom and said in a lovely accent
'All is well'
Good night
Big..G
I do like aesthetically that gurdy, gurdy accent....but, without going all seanT, I once had a quite beautiful and sexually adventurous Swedish girlfriend...but the accent unfortunately was a slight turn off...
Anyway, on that note of male misogyny, I'll retire myself. And...to those of you who suffer from tinnitus, the best way to ignore the sound is to tune into World Service and sleep with some ear phones....
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
That campaign really changed how I viewed Goldsmith. Prior to that I’d had quite a positive view of him. But by the end of that campaign I was more than happy to see Sadiq Khan win in London.
Understandable and yes time to say good night again
On just how nastily racially charged politics is at the moment. Hm. Well there's some pretty vicious and race-baiting stuff from time to time in the media but perhaps 'twas ever thus? Those posters in the Brexit campaign were bad. But how much worse than "are you thinking what we're thinking" Howard-era Tory posters? While we're on that, some of Labour's anti-Howard posters verged very clearly on anti-Semitism (possibly or indeed probably accidentally, but I hope with more sensitive eyes these days the Howard/pig ad might have been picked up on and pulled before launch).
Would any individual politician today make the claims of Phil Woolas in 2010, or would any party today dare go with "British jobs for British workers", Gordo style? One would hope not, but then aside from the current Home Office cock-ups we have also had "citizens of nowhere" and threats that employers will end up making lists of foreigners...
Social media at its worst is a horrid cesspit. But I think a decade and a half back we were just spared a lot of bombardment of this stuff because folk didn't have the means to mass-broadcast it. One could hear foul stuff in pubs, or less progressive workplaces. Still can, though it seems to be less prevalent rather than more. (Not necessarily due to progressive views making huge gains, though social surveys suggest they are, but also because many perpetrators have learned the importance of self-censorship.)
In terms of just how bad race-relations are, it isn't so long ago that we had the Lozells riots where Asian and Afro-Caribbean communities reached very intense, indeed fatal levels of concentrated violence. In 2001 there was intense white/Asian violence in Bradford and Oldham, and there had been precursors throughout the 1990s (eg 1995 in Bradford) and 1980s (more widespread throughout the UK then too). Despite the fact that segregation in some of those areas has, if anything, got far worse, we don't seem to have this teetering-on-the-edge-of-fatal-violence level of racial tension lurking in the background quite so much. (I say "despite". The truth might well be "because", sadly, since further racial homogenisation can remove complex racial interfaces where violence could flare, while leaving blocs even more divided and uncommunicative.)
(In my mind Lozells, Bradford and Oldham are far more recent than that. Even Manningham doesn't feel so far away. Time truly flies. Hands up anyone else surprised that was over two decades ago? Not Ms Apocalypse presumably but for some of us hearing that racial tensions were spilling over into blood and fire on the streets of Britain was a surprisingly normal, once-every-few-years-or-so, part of our news-consuming experience.)
Ms Berger made it clear that she had received abuse from far right groups and also from those on the far left. As did Ruth Smeeth. She specifically asked Corbyn to speak out against those who were using the “JC4PM” hashtag to launch anti-semitic abuse. He did not do so.
That is what he is being criticised for. Are you happy with that? He was apparently OK with people claiming to be his supporters to spew out racist filth against a Labour MP and his response was ...... silence.
She made it clear*, she wasn't the one I was criticising.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
Just listen to yourself.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
If you have not ventured into the comments on Facebook then do be prepared. I was really surprised by the language being used on the George Galloway posts.
On the BBC if the this was the Tories and sexism it would lead the news - and this is where accusations of bias stem from.
I remember feeling at the time of Yachtgate that the BBC were going over the top on the Today programme with interviews with both the political editor, and the economics editor, for something related to the Shadow Chancellor.
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
For some of them it was a good way of showing the left what a derisory vote total they would get to show them they are finished.
A lot of people decided that Labour had lost the previous election by being too left wing! obviously anybody with any sense would agree with this assessment and vote accordingly.
I think they just massively overestimated the appeal of Blairism/Centrism/Moderatism probably not helped by the media who felt similarly.
I agree. I think it was Toby Young who first claimed that Labour lost the GE because they were too left wing. Ed M tried triangulation with the whole we’ll be tough on immigration rhetoric, but tbh triangulation was a useless strategy by 2015.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/977966504141623296?lang=en ________________________________ Labour is an anti-racist party and I utterly condemn antisemitism, which is why as leader of the Labour Party I want to be clear that I will not tolerate any form of antisemitism that exists in and around our movement. _________________________________
These are just a few I found quickly, he has called out anti semitism. This doesn't magically stop people posting things on twitter.
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
Well, he had been almost invisible outside his own circles for much of the last 20 years, and they got complacent, I guess. The truth is there are MPs with less personal qualities than Corbyn, so they should have recognised that he might strike a chord if given the hearing, even if no one really thought he would cause a tsunami of support.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
Do you really think Corbyn "speaking out" would magically make racists stop being racist?
I would say if you've got to the point where you're so hate-filled that you're sending death threats to people and calling people "Jewish vermin", you're not going to magically see the error of your ways just because a politician tells you to.
It would send out a very important message about his expectations, about what he really stands for and about the sorts of people he does not want in the party, campaigning for it or supporting it.
Instead, he has created a party that a fascist/nazi supporter like Nick Griffin is happy to support.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
That campaign really changed how I viewed Goldsmith. Prior to that I’d had quite a positive view of him. But by the end of that campaign I was more than happy to see Sadiq Khan win in London.
Understandable and yes time to say good night again
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
That campaign really changed how I viewed Goldsmith. Prior to that I’d had quite a positive view of him. But by the end of that campaign I was more than happy to see Sadiq Khan win in London.
Forgot that on my list, not being a Londoner. The Goldsmith campaign does rather suggest that Muslim candidates are going to be facing some pretty nasty "extremist" insinuations for some time to come, particularly if they have been active on human rights issues on things like detention without trial or torture under foreign powers, which can be perceived as soft on terror(ists). I hope it also shows that such campaign tactics will lose more votes than they win.
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
Do you really think Corbyn "speaking out" would magically make racists stop being racist?
I would say if you've got to the point where you're so hate-filled that you're sending death threats to people and calling people "Jewish vermin", you're not going to magically see the error of your ways just because a politician tells you to.
It would send out a very important message about his expectations, about what he really stands for and about the sorts of people he does not want in the party, campaigning for it or supporting it.
Instead, he has created a party that a fascist/nazi supporter like Nick Griffin is happy to support.
For shame.
But he HAS spoken out in the past, as TheJezziah's links just showed. In fact, he's even spoken out specifically against the abuse Ms Berger gets:
But of course, the abuse towards her (from both Corbyn supporters and non-supporters of him) continued unabated after that, because most people who are that hateful aren't swayed by what a politician says.
If you wish to shape the direction of this country for the next thirty and forty years you need to be in power for majority of the next thirty or forty years, a kinder gentler politics with all the best intentions and most insightful manifestos will never achieve that. To win at politics you need to be good at politics.
And so falls the question, with opportunity to sign up for your rival party and participate in their leadership election, is it better to vote for the moderate closest to your own parties views, slightly mitigating the risk they do get in, or vote for the most unelectable unpalatable candidate, as we all know Adolf Hitler once was?
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
That campaign really changed how I viewed Goldsmith. Prior to that I’d had quite a positive view of him. But by the end of that campaign I was more than happy to see Sadiq Khan win in London.
Forgot that on my list, not being a Londoner. The Goldsmith campaign does rather suggest that Muslim candidates are going to be facing some pretty nasty "extremist" insinuations for some time to come, particularly if they have been active on human rights issues on things like detention without trial or torture under foreign powers, which can be perceived as soft on terror(ists). I hope it also shows that such campaign tactics will lose more votes than they win.
I hope so too. I think Islamophobia is the one form of racism which isn’t really taken seriously within society.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
It was pure arrogance from centrists. Nominate Corbyn to give off a pretence of debate while assuming they already had the leadership won. As soon as Corbyn got nominated I had a bad feeling. Obviously it turned out that Labour really did have a debate, and that the membership were not massive Blairites but unsurprisingly more left wing than the PLP. Why the PLP didn’t think the membership would take the opportunity to elect someone like Corbyn I’ll never know.
For some of them it was a good way of showing the left what a derisory vote total they would get to show them they are finished.
A lot of people decided that Labour had lost the previous election by being too left wing! obviously anybody with any sense would agree with this assessment and vote accordingly.
I think they just massively overestimated the appeal of Blairism/Centrism/Moderatism probably not helped by the media who felt similarly.
I agree. I think it was Toby Young who first claimed that Labour lost the GE because they were too left wing. Ed M tried triangulation with the whole we’ll be tough on immigration rhetoric, but tbh triangulation was a useless strategy by 2015.
It's unfortunate that we don't get to hear as much of Toby Young's wisdom these days......
In fairness there were a lot of factors at play that lost it for Ed but the triangulation attempts probably made it worse.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
Cuckoo.
??
Another who post bollocks on turning point for normalising racism.
Racism has always been here, from the brown shirts,thousands who supported the national front until recently the BNP so don't come all high and mighty that it's a recent thing because you lost the EU vote.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
Cuckoo.
??
Another who post bollocks on turning point for normalising racism.
Racism has always been here, from the brown shirts,thousands who supported the national front until recently the BNP so don't come all high and mighty that it's a recent thing because you lost the EU vote.
I know it isn't important in the scheme of things, but just from a historical point of view it's regrettable that the landing cards were destroyed by the Home Office because they probably would have been useful for future archivists, historians, sociologists, etc investigating that era of British and Commonwealth history.
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
Cuckoo.
??
Another who post bollocks on turning point for normalising racism.
Racism has always been here, from the brown shirts,thousands who supported the national front until recently the BNP so don't come all high and mighty that it's a recent thing because you lost the EU vote.
Well George, the Romanians allow us to move and work there. While - as a Brit - you need to get a work permit to move to Jamaica. Specifically, you need to get a job offer in an approved sector, and after that it's relatively easy. It's a question of reciprocity. We have it with the Romanians, but not the Jamaicans. Given they took away the right of Brits to vote in Jamaica, while we didn't remove the right of Jamaicans in the UK, you could say "they started it".
Now, we could have a sensible and mature chat about the nature of immigration systems. But it's not clear that arbitrarily choosing the Second World War encourages good decisions. Should we prevent Japanese and Germans from coming to the UK on the basis that their great grandparents may have fought against us, while allowing every Bangladeshi to come on the basis that they were allies? And perhaps - as Ireland was neutral during the war - there are rights their citizens should lose, just to bring them into line, right?
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
I know it isn't important in the scheme of things, but just from a historical point of view it's regrettable that the landing cards were destroyed by the Home Office because they probably would have been useful for future archivists, historians, sociologists, etc investigating that era of British and Commonwealth history.
Agreed. Knowing some information governance types though, good people too, some have a presumption that you should destroy everything the instant the legal minimum period for holding information is up. There are sensible reasons not to hold certain info all the time, but other stuff, even mundane, will be needed by historians.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
That does seem a startling statistic.
I think it reflects the number of New Zealanders who would like to live nearer civilization.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
Enough to cause problems if there was freedom to do so easily en masse .
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
That does seem a startling statistic.
I think it reflects the number of New Zealanders who would like to live nearer civilization.
So harsh on the junior antipodeans.
But I must return to the land of nod. Stomach bugs are a deep annoyance enough without costing the entire nights sleep.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
Given that Hawaii’s population is less than 1.5m and not overrun with Americans, having the right to move somewhere (and the desire) can’t overcome market forces.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
Given that Hawaii’s population is less than 1.5m and not overrun with Americans, having the right to move somewhere (and the desire) can’t overcome market forces.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
I think so. Particularly people living in industrial parts of the UK.
Interesting that 82% of New Zealanders are apparently in favour of free movement with the UK. I don't think they quite realise just how many British people would move there if they had the opportunity. It would probably be more than the current 4.5 million population of the country.
Really?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
Given that Hawaii’s population is less than 1.5m and not overrun with Americans, having the right to move somewhere (and the desire) can’t overcome market forces.
It is the 13th in pop density, so not somewhere people don't particularly want to move to.
"Whilst approximately six million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust, nearly one-third of all Americans (31%) and over four-in-ten Millennials (41% ) believe that two million Jews or less were killed during the Holocaust."
doe anybody know of any equivalent polling from the UK?
"Whilst approximately six million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust, nearly one-third of all Americans (31%) and over four-in-ten Millennials (41% ) believe that two million Jews or less were killed during the Holocaust."
doe anybody know of any equivalent polling from the UK?
It's not clear if that's just a poor grasp of history or something more sinister. A friend of mine at Cambridge about a decade ago told me that many of his (left-wing) friends believe the 6 million figure was an exaggeration.
"Whilst approximately six million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust, nearly one-third of all Americans (31%) and over four-in-ten Millennials (41% ) believe that two million Jews or less were killed during the Holocaust."
doe anybody know of any equivalent polling from the UK?
It's not clear if that's just a poor grasp of history or something more sinister. A friend of mine at Cambridge about a decade ago told me that many of his (left-wing) friends believe the 6 million figure was an exaggeration.
We need an expert on such matters ... where's Rod?
Comments
However, June 2016, while not Year Zero, was a watershed. It was the moment when pandering to xenophobia won an election. The consequences of that discovery are coursing through the political system, as emboldened politicians of all stripes seek to otherise unattractive outsiders who can be made into suitable hate figures. Those Leavers shedding crocodile tears have to reflect on their own part in creating this environment. They have normalised this behaviour and brought it into the mainstream.
In the context of his previous behaviour, however, he is unlikely to be given the benefit of the doubt.
*At least I assume she did from what you said.
Corbyn has spoken out lots of times against anti semitism, I have never seen him say he was okay with people being racist to Labour MPs. He cannot control what people do on twitter.
In any case its not going to get any better as the social media effects will discourage more sensible people from getting involved in politics.
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/986281834530181120?s=19
Just come onto Netflix, too, by the looks of it.
Paradoxically, a belief that you are a good person or good organisation can lead to a dangerous complacency. It’s not what you call yourself that matters; it’s what you do. Labour’s actions have never been quite as wonderful as their propaganda claims.
Anyhow...I'm Green now. I don't give a flying fuck about the Labour Party, it's machinations. the utter stupidity of Corbyn and his 1970's throwback to something that didn't exist. I've got a Labour Board out for the locals, and if it wasn't so warm, I'd mash it up and burn it in my log burner
I genuinely think I despise the Labour Party and Tory party in equal measures...but I do still care about killing badgers, fracking, and rampant use of pesticides and climate change.
Maybe not such a good thing to interfere in other parties leadership elections?
IDK, I don't like Corbyn much, but not being present every second of the debate seems pretty weaksauce unless there's more to it.
Should we hold Theresa May personally responsible for every Tory supporter (not member) who abuses Diane Abbott? I saw tons of people on Facebook last year posting vile stuff about her (including one which had a picture of a gorilla with the caption "forget the London look, get the Diane Abbott look!"), in between sharing some of the Conservatives' content, but it would never have occurred to me to expect Mrs May to take responsibility for that or to stand up and name and shame every person who'd done it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s39hDNMJCg
Wrong!
Though I doubt it had much practical effect beyond making Toby Young look like a prat (if he didn't do so already).
We may never see something like this from the UK government, but I wouldn't be surprised if in the future such systems operate on the quiet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
Corbyn should have spoken during this debate. It was a failure of leadership not to do so.
He should have spoken out, when specifically asked to so by his own MP, against those using his name to spew out racist filth. By refusing to do so, he again showed a failure of leadership.
What’s worse, his silence gave the impression to the racists that he condoned it - whether he meant to do so or not - and to the victims that he did not care.
As Martin Luther King once said: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”
If you have not listened to Ms Berger’s speech or Ms Smeeth’s I suggest you do so.
I would say if you've got to the point where you're so hate-filled that you're sending death threats to people and calling people "Jewish vermin", you're not going to magically see the error of your ways just because a politician tells you to.
No it doesn't eradicate the problem, anymore than any other leader telling their side to stop being racist makes racism go away, but when some only listen to him, and some of those don't seem convinced of a problem even when he says there is, clearly there's more to do in his house. Which is not to say others don't need to look after their houses.
But they'd need to get rid of much of their metropolitan leftism and become a bit like the old Liberals.
It might protect a few impressionable young people from being sucked into their web of conspiracist thinking when they thought they were getting cheaper housing and lower tuition fees.
I went on a cruise to Norway and the Arctic once and each night the skipper came on the ships intercom and said in a lovely accent
'All is well'
Good night
I could easily go far left....but Corbyn just talks shit quite frankly on just about everything.....
I'm waiting for a Labour leader who wants to face down the lunacy of Brexit and champion environmental causes...and Jezza.... it fucking well ain't him, or any of those toady toads that chaperone him....
2016 also saw Zac Goldsmith’s disgustingly racist campaign to be mayor, courtesy of the odious Lynton Crosby I am led to believe. It does seem that 2016 was indeed a turning point for normalising racism.
@Cyclefree Yep, I agree with you. The comment by Brown that another Richard just brought up also backs up what you say.
@Cyclefree Yep, I agree with you. The comment by Brown that another Richard just brought up is another reminder of what you say as well.
Before you answer I am adding, if your answer now is no you wouldn’t then why the blazes did you do so in the first place!
However who would have thought 2 years later labour would poll 61% as a racist party, only just ahead of UKIP
A lot of people decided that Labour had lost the previous election by being too left wing! obviously anybody with any sense would agree with this assessment and vote accordingly.
I think they just massively overestimated the appeal of Blairism/Centrism/Moderatism probably not helped by the media who felt similarly.
I do like aesthetically that gurdy, gurdy accent....but, without going all seanT, I once had a quite beautiful and sexually adventurous Swedish girlfriend...but the accent unfortunately was a slight turn off...
Anyway, on that note of male misogyny, I'll retire myself. And...to those of you who suffer from tinnitus, the best way to ignore the sound is to tune into World Service and sleep with some ear phones....
Would any individual politician today make the claims of Phil Woolas in 2010, or would any party today dare go with "British jobs for British workers", Gordo style? One would hope not, but then aside from the current Home Office cock-ups we have also had "citizens of nowhere" and threats that employers will end up making lists of foreigners...
Social media at its worst is a horrid cesspit. But I think a decade and a half back we were just spared a lot of bombardment of this stuff because folk didn't have the means to mass-broadcast it. One could hear foul stuff in pubs, or less progressive workplaces. Still can, though it seems to be less prevalent rather than more. (Not necessarily due to progressive views making huge gains, though social surveys suggest they are, but also because many perpetrators have learned the importance of self-censorship.)
In terms of just how bad race-relations are, it isn't so long ago that we had the Lozells riots where Asian and Afro-Caribbean communities reached very intense, indeed fatal levels of concentrated violence. In 2001 there was intense white/Asian violence in Bradford and Oldham, and there had been precursors throughout the 1990s (eg 1995 in Bradford) and 1980s (more widespread throughout the UK then too). Despite the fact that segregation in some of those areas has, if anything, got far worse, we don't seem to have this teetering-on-the-edge-of-fatal-violence level of racial tension lurking in the background quite so much. (I say "despite". The truth might well be "because", sadly, since further racial homogenisation can remove complex racial interfaces where violence could flare, while leaving blocs even more divided and uncommunicative.)
(In my mind Lozells, Bradford and Oldham are far more recent than that. Even Manningham doesn't feel so far away. Time truly flies. Hands up anyone else surprised that was over two decades ago? Not Ms Apocalypse presumably but for some of us hearing that racial tensions were spilling over into blood and fire on the streets of Britain was a surprisingly normal, once-every-few-years-or-so, part of our news-consuming experience.)
https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/life/current-affairs/jeremy-corbyn-condemns-anti-semitism-address-thousands-may-day-rally/
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/977966504141623296?lang=en
________________________________
Labour is an anti-racist party and I utterly condemn antisemitism, which is why as leader of the Labour Party I want to be clear that I will not tolerate any form of antisemitism that exists in and around our movement.
_________________________________
These are just a few I found quickly, he has called out anti semitism. This doesn't magically stop people posting things on twitter.
Instead, he has created a party that a fascist/nazi supporter like Nick Griffin is happy to support.
For shame.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/709386165439348736
But of course, the abuse towards her (from both Corbyn supporters and non-supporters of him) continued unabated after that, because most people who are that hateful aren't swayed by what a politician says.
And so falls the question, with opportunity to sign up for your rival party and participate in their leadership election, is it better to vote for the moderate closest to your own parties views, slightly mitigating the risk they do get in, or vote for the most unelectable unpalatable candidate, as we all know Adolf Hitler once was?
I’m off to bed now. Goodnight everyone.
In fairness there were a lot of factors at play that lost it for Ed but the triangulation attempts probably made it worse.
Edit: Goodnight.
Racism has always been here, from the brown shirts,thousands who supported the national front until recently the BNP so don't come all high and mighty that it's a recent thing because you lost the EU vote.
https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/985614233827205121?s=21
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/986395361815166981
Now, we could have a sensible and mature chat about the nature of immigration systems. But it's not clear that arbitrarily choosing the Second World War encourages good decisions. Should we prevent Japanese and Germans from coming to the UK on the basis that their great grandparents may have fought against us, while allowing every Bangladeshi to come on the basis that they were allies? And perhaps - as Ireland was neutral during the war - there are rights their citizens should lose, just to bring them into line, right?
I love New Zealand, I really do. But it's like Wales. Lots of sheep. A rainy climate, and a rich accent. A few decent cricketers. Looked down upon by Australians.
I could see Brits moving to Australia. But NZ? I mean, really?
But I must return to the land of nod. Stomach bugs are a deep annoyance enough without costing the entire nights sleep.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/apr/15/actus-sally-mcmanus-calls-for-cut-in-temporary-work-visa-numbers
http://cc-69bd.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Holocaust-Knowledge-Awareness-Study_Executive-Summary-2018.pdf
"Whilst approximately six million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust, nearly one-third of all Americans (31%) and over four-in-ten Millennials (41% ) believe that two million Jews or less were killed during the Holocaust."
doe anybody know of any equivalent polling from the UK?