UK Labour forced reshuffle/ leadership challenge thread

[madd0ct0r]

Sure, you may go and dismiss it as the next great rightwing leftist conspiracy and maybe it is. On the other hand, I have been following the referendum closely and Corbyn seemed disinterested. Heck, he even went on vacation. You may disagree and say it is all a long-planned coup by the anti-corbyn conspiracy (which apparently includes the guardian now) but I think there is truth to the charges.

It does include that journalist, in the same wave that Tory Gove's wife has a column in the Daily Mail. It's a very small world in british politics. As I said before, if Corbyn had campaigned the way Labour did in the Scottish referendum, then Labour would have been rewarded the same way at the next General Election. Why should he sacrifice his party to keep Cameron in power? Just like the Scottish referndum, the anger over immigration in the north not something that would go away afterwards, all neatly resolved. It'd rumble on, stoked by papers and UKIP wannabees.

This is a referendum promised by Cameron, designed to undermine labour and UKIP and cement the oik in power. It failed. Blaming Corbyn is clearly easier than examining the deeper issue. And I'm not at all surprised the Remain guy is looking scapegoat who is not himself. Corbyn should have just clicked his fingers instead of travelling and making speeches that the papers barely reported. As I've said before in this thread, Remain's arguments were complete dross for speaking to the heartlands. Who the fuck cares about economic impacts when you've been struggling for decades anyway? It's change you want, something different to the status quo of smug middle class MPs who live in London and visit their constieuncies onyl for dinnerparties with other smug middle classers.

I actually watched one of Corbyn's speeches.

"This is a Tory Brexit, pushed by people who want to undermine worker's rights, your rights. These people do not have your intrest in mind when they talk to you."

That's about the only line that 1) works against the similarly emotionally charged leave campaign, 2) posistions Labour to not be eviserated at the election following. Pity that the Blairite's couldn't stomach it and preffered to stick to the conservative economic line.

[His Divine Shadow]

Interesting article
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 41926.html

And an interesting comment that made it related to this thread

This is the real reason why the Blairites in Labour, who all might as well be in the Tory party given their political affiliations, are contorting themselves to remove Corbyn from office before the Report is discussed in Parliament. If the Report is discussed and its contents made broadly known, the Labour right will be so discredited as to more or less cease to exist, and their rosy corporate-funded futures will go up in smoke. Here too is the reason Corbyn is hanging grimly on to office. He doesn't have to win anything more now, just hang around in place till the Blairites all lose and are cast into political oblivion. Or jail, with luck. No doubt this explains too why Jack Straw has been appearing all over tv recently declaring the Corbyn leadership is the worst thing to happen since the year dot; for him, it absolutely will be, the miserable, wretched little toady that he is. A lot of the global warmongering thieving elites will be shaking in their boots at the moment, and rightly so. If the sainted Tony goes, they go too, and they know it.

I hope it's all true.

[Crazedwraith]

That was the gist of the blog post I linked to on page one, I think.

Interesting to see it picked up by a big newspaper.

[jwl]

Why do you keep talking about blairites? Most of the shadow cabinet that resigned were brownites if anything, the blairites refused to be part of the shadow cabinet in the first place.

[His Divine Shadow]

Because that's what everyone else are calling them basically. Asshats would work too.

[jwl]

A certain subset of people might but I would say most people who understand the labour party don't do that. The whole reason the term "blairite" came about was in opposition to the brownites.

Almost all of the public figures of this coup lean brownite or fall in neither camp. It could be that the Blaiirites are actually controlling things behind the scenes, but they are not the public front of the coup. This is possibly because a coup lead by those with brownite leanings is more likely to succeed, possibly because their disappearance when Corbyn came on the scene means the public these days sees the Blairites as irrelevant.

[Zaune]

Well, alright. Shall we call them the Diet Tories instead?

[jwl]

I think the best description of a load of brownites and associates is "brownites", don't you?

[madd0ct0r]

A certain subset of people might but I would say most people who understand the labour party don't do that. The whole reason the term "blairite" came about was in opposition to the brownites.

Almost all of the public figures of this coup lean brownite or fall in neither camp. It could be that the Blaiirites are actually controlling things behind the scenes, but they are not the public front of the coup. This is possibly because a coup lead by those with brownite leanings is more likely to succeed, possibly because their disappearance when Corbyn came on the scene means the public these days sees the Blairites as irrelevant.

Nah, you have your chronology wrong, brownite came about to descirbe people inside blair's 'new labour' who weren't blairites. Since Brown has been keeping out of non-scotttish politics for a few years while Saint Tony continues to collect paychecks as 'peace ambassador' to the Middle East, Blair has re-eclipsed Brown as the face, owner and name holder of the New Labour camp, the one's who tack further right at every setback. New Labour seems more than a little inappropriate decades on, so Blairite will do nicely.

[His Divine Shadow]

Stolen from another forum:

The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Corbyn was not the principle figure. He was the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party's unity. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of his teaching. Somewhere or other he was still alive and hatching his conspiracies: perhaps somewhere beyond Islington, under the protection of his union paymasters, perhaps even - so it was occasionally rumoured - in some hiding-place in Westminster itself.

But what was strange was that although Corbyn was hated and despised by everybody, although every day and a thousand times a day, on platforms, on the telescreen, in newspapers, in books, his theories were refuted, smashed, ridiculed, held up to the general gaze for the pitiful rubbish that they were - in spite of all this, his influence never seemed to grow less. Always there were fresh dupes waiting to be seduced by him. A day never passed when spies and saboteurs acting under his directions were not unmasked by the Thought Police Dan Hodges.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

I think the best description of a load of brownites and associates is "brownites", don't you?

Or Brownstains.

[jwl]

A certain subset of people might but I would say most people who understand the labour party don't do that. The whole reason the term "blairite" came about was in opposition to the brownites.

Almost all of the public figures of this coup lean brownite or fall in neither camp. It could be that the Blaiirites are actually controlling things behind the scenes, but they are not the public front of the coup. This is possibly because a coup lead by those with brownite leanings is more likely to succeed, possibly because their disappearance when Corbyn came on the scene means the public these days sees the Blairites as irrelevant.

Nah, you have your chronology wrong, brownite came about to descirbe people inside blair's 'new labour' who weren't blairites. Since Brown has been keeping out of non-scotttish politics for a few years while Saint Tony continues to collect paychecks as 'peace ambassador' to the Middle East, Blair has re-eclipsed Brown as the face, owner and name holder of the New Labour camp, the one's who tack further right at every setback. New Labour seems more than a little inappropriate decades on, so Blairite will do nicely.

I was under the impression he Blairite/Brownite split stems from when Blair snubbed Brown for the leadership by building campaign momentum during John Smith's funeral, and Brown subsequently undermined Blair constantly from within during the Blair government.

[madd0ct0r]

The story i heard was they made a deal. Blair would take the first term and then standback and let brown take the second. Blair didnt step back and uneasy allies split at that point.

[jwl]

The story i heard was they made a deal. Blair would take the first term and then standback and let brown take the second. Blair didnt step back and uneasy allies split at that point.

I don't think that sorry is mutually exclusive with mine. My impression was that the said deal was forced on Brown because Blair's earlier campaigning meant that Brown would have struggled to bear him in a straight contest. When Blair went back on the deal it deepened the split.

Anyway, John Prescott has reiterated his support for Labour rallying back around Corbyn again. Do people here think he will be given a Shadow Cabinet position in return?

Also, according to newspaper "anonymous sources", a there was a deal that was almost brokered where Corbyn would step down in exchange for ensuring an anti-austerity candidate on the ballot for the leadership election, as well as a commitment for whoever wins to continue the anti-austerity program to the next election regardless, and for them to keep Corbyn's core team, including John McDonnell as Chancellor.

So, if true, the coup plotters have four possible routes to go down:
>Broker for Corbyn's resignation, which most likely will include staying anti-austerity as a condition.
>Try to challenge with Angela Eagle, which if successful will probably mean going back to the "too far, too fast" position (but has a high chance of failing).
>Try to challenge with Owen Smith, who is anti-austerity himself.
>Take John Prescott's advice, give up on the whole coup thing and rally back around Corbyn, and oppose austerity on the way.
It's interesting what three of the four options have in common.

[Elfdart]

Sure, you may go and dismiss it as the next great rightwing leftist conspiracy and maybe it is. On the other hand, I have been following the referendum closely and Corbyn seemed disinterested. Heck, he even went on vacation. You may disagree and say it is all a long-planned coup by the anti-corbyn conspiracy (which apparently includes the guardian now) but I think there is truth to the charges.

The Guardian has always been anti-Corbyn, and their hacks were ready to foment the Chicken Coup no matter what he did in the Brexit campaign and no matter what the outcome was. If he had campaigned with enthusiasm against it and it passed anyway, the ringleaders of the Chicken Coup would have used that as proof that he was a weak leader and needed to be pushed out of the office he won legitimately.

[Elfdart]

The story i heard was they made a deal. Blair would take the first term and then standback and let brown take the second. Blair didnt step back and uneasy allies split at that point.

I don't think that sorry is mutually exclusive with mine. My impression was that the said deal was forced on Brown because Blair's earlier campaigning meant that Brown would have struggled to bear him in a straight contest. When Blair went back on the deal it deepened the split.

Anyway, John Prescott has reiterated his support for Labour rallying back around Corbyn again. Do people here think he will be given a Shadow Cabinet position in return?

Also, according to newspaper "anonymous sources", a there was a deal that was almost brokered where Corbyn would step down in exchange for ensuring an anti-austerity candidate on the ballot for the leadership election, as well as a commitment for whoever wins to continue the anti-austerity program to the next election regardless, and for them to keep Corbyn's core team, including John McDonnell as Chancellor.

So, if true, the coup plotters have four possible routes to go down:
>Broker for Corbyn's resignation, which most likely will include staying anti-austerity as a condition.

And hope he'll be stupid enough to trust the word of those who knifed him in the back?

>Try to challenge with Angela Eagle, which if successful will probably mean going back to the "too far, too fast" position (but has a high chance of failing).

The Blairites can't find a single MP in their ranks who voted against the Iraq War?

>Try to challenge with Owen Smith, who is anti-austerity himself.

Yes, undo Corbyn and try to pass off the new guy as Corbyn-lite. Why bother?

>Take John Prescott's advice, give up on the whole coup thing and rally back around Corbyn, and oppose austerity on the way.
It's interesting what three of the four options have in common.

This is looking more and more like a ruse to distract from the Chilcot report which, no matter how watered-down it might be, will almost certainly confirm that Blair, Straw, et al committed the ultimate crime of lying a country into a war of aggression. No other explanation for the Chicken Coup makes any logical sense.

[Dartzap]

Apparently an impeachment is on the cards for Blair. One presumes some poor sod had to dig up the Hansaard records from 1806 to figure out how to so.

[jwl]

I think (I'm not sure) it might be possible to make portions of the deal binding if the PLP is willing to throw their weight behind it.

It's the brownites, not their blairites, who are the public face of this coup, remember? Angela Eagle is a brownite. There are at least quite a few blairites and brownites who weren't MPs at the time of the Iraq war, and there are quite a few brownites (and possibly blairites), who now publically say the Iraq war was a mistake. Ed Miliband is one example. Dan Jarvis was thought of as a candidate, and although he hasn't spoken out against the Iraq war, he wasn't an MP at the time because he was too busy fighting in it. This would make the "don't vote for wars you wouldn't fight in" argument null in his case.
I think Angela Eagle was picked because she is willing to stick her neck out (or was able to be manipulated into this position) and they thought she looked like she could be a credible leader of the opposition when she subbed in for Corbyn at prime ministers question time.

[jwl]

On the idea of Blair being impeached: that would require Tory support to get through. Going for either side could bring political capital to the Tories, so it might be interesting to look and see how it goes. Looking for precident, there was a blair impeachment motion in 2004 and the Tories didn't support it then. However, some Tory MPs rebelled and voted for it anyway, and interestingly one of them was Boris Johnson.

[Esquire]

What would the charges be in a hypothetical Blair impeachment?

[jwl]

Well, here's the wikipedia page for the 2004 challenge:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeach_Blair_campaign

>Failing to resign after misleading parliament and the country;
>making a secret agreement with a foreign power;
>undermining the constitution; and
>negligence and incompetence.

But really, it would depend on the results of chilcott.

[His Divine Shadow]

Here's hoping for a hot stewing pot of chilcot carnage.

This sums up the labor partys coup so far:



And your potential next PM:
http://i.imgur.com/jP7XMs0.jpg

[Dartzap]

She is basically Malory Archer.

[His Divine Shadow]

I like the new union jack.

[Simon_Jester]

Which new Union Jack?