Is the Labour party antisemitic?

[wing commander]

  I for one am getting pretty much fed up with the lot of them..Maybe if BOTH party's spent more time in concentrating on doing whats best for this country rather than constantly trying to score cheap pointless political digs at each other..Then maybe just maybe this country could move forward...

[The Red Baron]

TRB

It was Bill Clinton.

Was it him? I knew he later found other purposes for cigars. 😊

[Filo]

TRB

It was Bill Clinton.

Or was it this Australian

https://www.smh.com.au/national/abbott-i-tried-marijuana-but-didnt-inhale-20040725-gdjf1e.html

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K3wfm-pwH4k

[Donnywolf]

  I for one am getting pretty much fed up with the lot of them..Maybe if BOTH party's spent more time in concentrating on doing whats best for this country rather than constantly trying to score cheap pointless political digs at each other..Then maybe just maybe this country could move forward...

Im with you

I have banged on (too long) about PR but flwed as it may be it should avoid extremism either way - and off the top of my head stop the DUP getting 10 Seats with 295,000* (and of course the balance of Power) where the Green Party gets 1 Seat for 550,000 votes *

Just cant be fair. Give us PR and then things might get better

* I excuse myself for guessing at the number of Votes / Seats but I cant be bothered to look it up as it just winds me up !

[donnyproletarian]

I am a LP member and have never met a antisemitic individual .I have no doubt that following the massive influx of members over the last couple of years you could find the odd antisemitic dude who has fallen for some conspiracy theory .You could also find flat earthers's if you look hard enough .The reality is this is the basis of a third attempted coup by the billionaire owned  MSM and the blairite relics who want to preserve there power base.JC has been accused of being an IRA sympathiser ,check spy ,Putins stooge and now antisematic .Just shows how desperate the stars quo are to discredit him.Pick on the oldest conflict in the world just when its escalating due to Trumps interference and blame it on JC.Then put pressure on adopting this controversial definition of antisemitism which be the way is aimed to stifle any criticism of right wing israeli government attrocities.A very dangerous precedent for free speech.Meanwhile ignore brexit and the crisis in government .Cant believe how manipulated people are to swallow this crap judging by some of the comments on this subject.

The wreath laying stunt has shown him up for what he is an anti Semitic, IRA Terrorist sympathiser. Wtf is he doing in charge of the Labour Party. Other than ensuring we have to endure another 5 years of Tory hell!

He is in charge of the LP because he was elected twice by the rank and file and has the biggest swing to labour since 1945 based upon his policies .This makes us the largest socialist movement in europe currently showing a 5 per cent lead in the polls.Hence the smear campaign.Cant do the link thing but would urge you to look at the full interview regarding the wreath issue as he it is gerrymandered to facilitate opinions like yours.Central to his interview is the message that the cycle of violence needs to be broken through dialogue .This is hardly an endorsement for terrorism .

[donnyproletarian]

I’m pretty sure that Corbyn isn’t anti-Semitic. I do think he’s genuine in his claim that he’s against all prejudice.

The problem is what I’ve pointed out earlier in this thread. It’s the one-dimensional approach that he and his core team has to foreign policy.

It’s simple. It’s all about who is seen as being powerful and who isn’t.

The less powerful, in Corbyn’s world, cannot be criticised for hitting out at the more powerful.

Israel is seen as being more powerful than the Palestinians. Therefore what Israel does is wrong, but what the Palestinians do (like murdering innocent Israeli athletes) is a justified act of resistance. And the heroes who carry out those attacks should be lauded.

That’s his approach. Consistent right down the line for decades. When he was a backbencher...

Except now of course, he has to win over an electorate. And the electorate don’t see it the same way. So now when he’s faced with his lifelong beliefs and actions, it suddenly becomes “Well, I was THERE (at the laying of a wreath to commemorate the Palestinians who carried out the Munich killings) but I didn’t participate in laying the wreath.”

See. He KNOWS that he’s unelectable if he tries to argue what he truly believes - that the Palestinian killers WERE heroes. So he has to pretend that he doesn’t really think that.

This is the new politics that Corbyn promised us.  It’s a right f**king mess. And it’s in danger of giving a free pass to the most f**king useless Govt for more than a century.

Dont agree with your analogy although acknowledge there are some discrepancies when dealing with a hostile press .This is mainly because many of the PLP exist to undermine a socialist agenda that departs from the neo liberal agenda they have benefited from via the gravy train.MPs like Mann et al are there to undermine any credible attempt to get elected .Hence the recent reported secret meeting looking to form a third centre party should the unthinkable happen .Many people like me believe that socialism is not an electoral liability but the fifth column have smelt blood and capitulation in my opinion is a massive tactical mistake.JC is isolated and surrounded by advisors like lansman who adopt this approach.There needs to be a bridge between the JC and the rank and file but standing in the way is twenty years of blairite corruption .This needs to be challenged and OMOV will take care of this .
Ask yourself why all his critics focus upon historical issues involving foreign policy such as IRA ,Hamas ,Putin etc .Then ask yourself why the MSM don't focus upon domestic policies  such as the NHS etc.Could it be that they know challenging austerity is proving vastly popular with the electorate on the bread and butter issues relevant to our communities .

The most f---ing useless government in a century will continue if the left fail .This will give rise to the right with clowns like Tommy Robinson et al who by the way have links with Israel and finance by zionists .By using this latter word i risk being labelled antisemitic and expulsion under the controversial definition .This is the basis of my objection as it is already happening in the current witch hunt climate .The irony is that the first ones to challenge historically the NF ,BNP etc and now the EDL to put there necks on the line will be the ones like J Walker while the so called moderates will be hiding behind there keyboards .

Your a clever bloke do the math

[BillyStubbsTears]

DP

You’re preaching to the converted in your last paragraph. I’ve been saying for 3 years that I fully agree with Corbyn’s domestic policies.

The problem IS his foreign policy. It is an electoral liability and it offers free hits for the Tories and the press. That’s HIS responsibility. It’s up to HIM to sort it out.

[wilts rover]

Not strictly on topic but interesting to note that anti-semitism has become so rife that the EU has now been accused of it, for scheduling their next meeting on Yom Kippur.

https://www.politico.eu/article/jewish-officials-question-timing-of-eu-summit-yom-kippur-anti-semitism/

[Filo]

I am a LP member and have never met a antisemitic individual .I have no doubt that following the massive influx of members over the last couple of years you could find the odd antisemitic dude who has fallen for some conspiracy theory .You could also find flat earthers's if you look hard enough .The reality is this is the basis of a third attempted coup by the billionaire owned  MSM and the blairite relics who want to preserve there power base.JC has been accused of being an IRA sympathiser ,check spy ,Putins stooge and now antisematic .Just shows how desperate the stars quo are to discredit him.Pick on the oldest conflict in the world just when its escalating due to Trumps interference and blame it on JC.Then put pressure on adopting this controversial definition of antisemitism which be the way is aimed to stifle any criticism of right wing israeli government attrocities.A very dangerous precedent for free speech.Meanwhile ignore brexit and the crisis in government .Cant believe how manipulated people are to swallow this crap judging by some of the comments on this subject.

The wreath laying stunt has shown him up for what he is an anti Semitic, IRA Terrorist sympathiser. Wtf is he doing in charge of the Labour Party. Other than ensuring we have to endure another 5 years of Tory hell!

From Dennis Skinner on his FB account

Have seen the U.K. reports that Jeremy Corbyn laid a wreath at the grave of the Munich Terrorists in Tunisia. This report carries the small logistical problem of the Munich Terrorists being buried in Libya, not Tunisia. The commemoration Jeremy attended was to mark the 1985 bombing of Tunisia by Israel that killed 47. Now, in fairness to the Daily Mail, Libya and Tunisia are in the minds of its readership as much of a muchness. But if you crack out that atlas and scroll your finger along North Africa you’ll see them damn natives actually make up two different countries. I can confirm Jeremy has never attended a wreath laying ceremony in Libya, nor has he attended the service of a Munich Terrorist. Enjoy the rest of your day folks.x

[Axholme Lion]

I can't believe you lot would want a labour government. The tories are a load of shite, what a weak kneed leader they have. But Labourwould lead us on the road to oblivion. They have no interest in the British working class. They have forgot what they were set up for.

[BillyStubbsTears]

You obviously haven’t looked looked at Labour’s domestic policies then AL.

Investment in infrastructure.
Investment in manufacturing.
Long-term re-structuring of the economy away from the financial sector.
An end to the stupid obsession with Austerity that has f**ked up the last decade.

Precisely what is needed to give a better future for the working class.

[bpoolrover]

Problem is bst at the last election they promised everyone everything, and the rich were going to pay for it, people didn’t believe that they could afford to deliver what they said, it would be better if they didn’t promise everything and were realistic they would have much more chance of winning

[RedJ]

Almost as if they didn't publish a fully costed manifesto...

oh wait.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bpool.

I’m not sure what they could do to convince you. As RJ says, they published a fully costed manifesto. They were NOT proposing huge tax rises. They were proposing to run a balanced current budget (i.e. that existing taxes with some very minor increases would pay for all day to day costs - NHS, benefits, pensions, schools, Defence etc).

What was a welcome change from the Tories’ plans was that they were planning to do what every sensible economist in the world has been screaming at our Govt to do for 8 years - borrow money to pay for big infrastructure investments. New social houses. New roads. New rail upgrades. New ultra-fast broadband. The Govt can borrow at negative interest rates compared to inflation. Those projects would put skilled jobs back on the table, boost the economy and provide tax receipts to pay for themselves.

It was an absolute no-brainer. Unless you get your news from The Express.

[Axholme Lion]

You obviously haven’t looked looked at Labour’s domestic policies then AL.

Investment in infrastructure.
Investment in manufacturing.
Long-term re-structuring of the economy away from the financial sector.
An end to the stupid obsession with Austerity that has f**ked up the last decade.

Precisely what is needed to give a better future for the working class.

Blair opened the floodgates to the world to come here and take the few jobs we already had, how did that benefit the working class?

[Filo]

Calling Israel out for their policies towards the Palestian people is not anti semetic

[bpoolrover]

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-labour-manifesto   Now I could post varied links doubting that it is fully costed and the institute of fiscal studies are far from certain the figures will bring in anywhere near as much money as labour think, in fact they said the same about the tories, but that labour might well damage the economy

[BillyStubbsTears]

Bpool

The Tories HAVE damaged the economy since they came to power, through the utterly stupid obsession with Austerity. Over the past 8 years, since the end of the Great Recession, we've had the slowest recovery from recession for over 150 years. We KNEW this would happen if we implemented Austerity and it DID happen. As a result, we as a country are massively poorer than we should have been. We lost something  between 4-8% of GDP between 2010-2012 (depending on whose figures you take) compared to what we would have had if we'd had a sensible recovery from the recession and we have never made that up. The cost of that is truly terrifying. We're now something between £500-1000bn poorer as a country that we would have been if we'd had a proper recovery in 2010-12. That means we've lost, permanently, something like 4-8 times the annual budget of the entire NHS. Or 10-20 times the annual defence budget.

It ought to be the cause for national outrage, but for some reason, no one ever mentions it. It is Austerity and not immigration which has f**ked over the working class over the past decade. It's Austerity that is the reason that we are all working harder without getting any better off. And THAT was the Tories' choice. The biggest economic policy disaster of any Govt since the 1920s.

[bpoolrover]

But if you were to ask 30 independent money people I reckon 2 thirds would trust there money with the tories and not labour! Labour offered everything to everyone that simply can't happen bst

[RedJ]

You keep saying that but what exactly does that even mean. Or have you just lazily decided it?

[i_ateallthepies]

Answered your own question there RedJ.

[wilts rover]

I believe blackpool is correct. Those people with money would sooner back the Tories than Labour - as is shown in the funding and donation figures of the two parties. The result of that being the massive wealth disparity in the country perfectly demonstrated by the salaries for CEO's rising 6 times faster than that of workers as announced this week. The richest 10% own 45% of the wealth in the UK - the poorest 50% less than 9%.

The Tories fought the 2010 and 2015 elections on fiscal responsibilty and the need to reduce the National Debt so as not to leave it for our grandchildren to pay off. Of course it was no coincidence they ignored it in 2017 as rather than reducing it they have trebled it!

So I can easily see why millionaires wouldn't wish to vote for a party that would clamp down on their tax havens and tax-free bonuses. They dont use public services or the NHS, why should they pay for them?

Though why any ordinary worker or pensioner thinks that what benefits millionaires benefits him or her is beyond me.

https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic-inequality-uk

[BillyStubbsTears]

But if you were to ask 30 independent money people I reckon 2 thirds would trust there money with the tories and not labour! Labour offered everything to everyone that simply can't happen bst

If you were to ask 30 macroeconomic experts which party had the more sensible economic plans, 20 would say Labour.

These are people whose life work is to study the effect that Govt decisions have on the economy and to develop predictions which can be compared to how things actually pan out. They were tearing their hair out and screaming that Austerity was bloody stupid back in 2010. They’ve been proved right.

[SydneyRover]

But if you were to ask 30 independent money people I reckon 2 thirds would trust there money with the tories and not labour! Labour offered everything to everyone that simply can't happen bst

If you were to ask 30 macroeconomic experts which party had the more sensible economic plans, 20 would say Labour.

These are people whose life work is to study the effect that Govt decisions have on the economy and to develop predictions which can be compared to how things actually pan out. They were tearing their hair out and screaming that Austerity was bloody stupid back in 2010. They’ve been proved right.

It's the perception that counts and I/we always get back to who controls the media, the majority of the media is controlled by the wealthy industrialists and bankers etc and media they don't control is constantly criticised by them in an attempt to shut it and its influence down. Most of the rags, oops sorry the tabloid form of media sell their sports stories along with the tits and bums but all the while they drip feed the masses into believing that those out of work don't want work that it the immigrants that are taking jobs and ruining the country, undermining all the positives about those subjects, in fact breaking up and undermining the vote that would normally go to the left leaning parties.

[BillyStubbsTears]

There was a very revealing blog exchange a few years ago between Simon Wren-Lewis, Oxford Prof of Macroeconomics, and Jeremy Warner, Assistant Economics Editor at the Telegraph.

Warner made some claims about the economic benefits of Austerity.

Wren-Lewis replies by pointing out the logical mistakes he had made, and demonstrating that Austerity was very bad for the economy.

The exchange went back and forth for a bit. Warner kept making claims. Wren-Lewis kept knocking them down.

Then Warner cracked and said something very revealing. He wrote an article (which has since been taken down from the Telegraph website) titled “Oh God I can’t take any more of this Austerity debate!” In it, he firstly accused Wren-Lewis of arrogance (presumably for pointing out facts). Then he said:
“In the end, you are either a big-state person, or a small-state person, and what big-state people hate about austerity is that its primary purpose is to shrink the size of government spending.

“The bottom line is that you can only really make serious inroads into the size of the state during an economic crisis. This may be pro-cyclical, but there is never any appetite for it in the good times; it can only be done in the bad.”

(“Pro-cyclical” is an economist’s term for Govt policy reinforcing the direction that the economy is going. Sensible policy should be anti-cyclical to stop booms booming too much, and slumps going on too long. So the textbook policy is that Govt spending should increase in a slump and decrease in a boom. What the Tories did was to slash it in a slump. And the slump went on for 3 years too long as a result.)

There you have it in black and white. A right-wing journalist whose job it is to educate and inform people about economics stating baldly that Austerity was never about economics. It was about political ideology. He’s saying it clearly and plainly there. It doesn’t matter if the country takes a massive and entirely avoidable economic hit, as long as you succeed in changing the ideological outlook.

And people accuse Labour of being eeconomically dangerous class warriors. f**k me...

[SydneyRover]

There was a very revealing blog exchange a few years ago between Simon Wren-Lewis, Oxford Prof of Macroeconomics, and Jeremy Warner, Assistant Economics Editor at the Telegraph.

Warner made some claims about the economic benefits of Austerity.

Wren-Lewis replies by pointing out the logical mistakes he had made, and demonstrating that Austerity was very bad for the economy.

The exchange went back and forth for a bit. Warner kept making claims. Wren-Lewis kept knocking them down.

Then Warner cracked and said something very revealing. He wrote an article (which has since been taken down from the Telegraph website) titled “Oh God I can’t take any more of this Austerity debate!” In it, he firstly accused Wren-Lewis of arrogance (presumably for pointing out facts). Then he said:
“In the end, you are either a big-state person, or a small-state person, and what big-state people hate about austerity is that its primary purpose is to shrink the size of government spending.

“The bottom line is that you can only really make serious inroads into the size of the state during an economic crisis. This may be pro-cyclical, but there is never any appetite for it in the good times; it can only be done in the bad.”

(“Pro-cyclical” is an economist’s term for Govt policy reinforcing the direction that the economy is going. Sensible policy should be anti-cyclical to stop booms booming too much, and slumps going on too long.)

There you have it in black and white. A right-wing journalist whose job it is to educate and inform people about economics stating baldly that Austerity was never about economics. It was about political ideology.

Thanks BST, and this is how its done, give tax cuts to big business and the rich, reduce the amount of money available in the budget and then cut back on services to ''balance the books'' to show you are a ''responsible'' government. The pea and thimble trick.

''Osborne’s huge tax giveaway starts for rich – as the poor are hit''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/01/huge-tax-giveaway-for-rich-as-poor-are-hit-george-osborne-tax-benefit-budget-changes.

''Tax cuts for the rich don't help the rest. Don't take my word for it, ask the IMF''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2017/sep/10/tax-cuts-for-the-rich-dont-help-the-rest-dont-take-my-word-for-it-ask-the-imf

''Governments in Europe, most notably the United Kingdom, have also pursued tax cuts for the rich while imposing austerity measures on the working classes. And the European financier class has benefited even more directly than their American counterparts from these budgets.''
https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/austerity-wall-street_n_1690838

[bpoolrover]

The ifs are worried that taxing the rich would raise nothing like labour expect, let's say there right, what then where will labour get the money to fund all there promises?

[bpoolrover]

I was also reading how any of it would benefit people on working tax credits and benefits as there the poorest people as a rule, and still can't figure out how anyone will be any better off?

[RedJ]

The ifs are worried that taxing the rich would raise nothing like labour expect, let's say there right, what then where will labour get the money to fund all there promises?

Probs the same place you're getting this "promising everything to everyone" spiel.