Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party?
Discussion
otolith said:
Not sure how some alleged anti-Semitism from Starmer's internal opponents on the hard left makes Starmer look bad?
Because the bloke above is saying starmer hasn’t condemned it.He thinks because starmer hasn’t condemned his opponent McCluskey saying mandleson who isn’t even Jewish should count his gold makes Starmer look bad.
Showing the motivation for bringing it up in the first place.
El stovey said:
You brought it up, nobody else thinks it’s anti Semitic except one poster. Who like you is looking for it too much.
This kind of looking for anti Semitism, to score political points undermines genuine examples of it.
You’re only reason for doing it is to try and make Starmer look bad.
Now you're being willfully ignorant. What I think is offensive or not is irrelevant. See the quotes above. The thread is about Starmer reviving the Labour Party. Under the hard left the party had a problem with antisemitism, I assumed you heard of that at least? Starmer to his credit tried to draw a line under it although it's worth noting non other than McCluskey threatened to withdraw Union funding over the damages payments to Jewish whistleblowers. If Labour's biggest donor is going to continue to stick two fingers up to Starmer's efforts, in a documentary about Starmer, whilst insulting Labour ''grandees" who were a core part of Labour's only electoral successes since 1976 then his response, or lack of, is absolutely relevant any effort on his part to be seen to be moving away from the antisemitic hard left. "Just trying to make Starmer look bad." Grow up.This kind of looking for anti Semitism, to score political points undermines genuine examples of it.
You’re only reason for doing it is to try and make Starmer look bad.
El stovey said:
nobody else thinks it’s anti Semitic except one poster.
No that's not accurate:fblm
me
And some high profile Jews as listed above:
The Chair of Jewish Labour
Dame Hodge
Euan Philipps (Labour Against Antisemitism)
President of the Board of Deputies British Jews
You have now had why it is offensive explained to you at least twice yet you continue to defend it. You are clearly ignorant of the trope, again, it refers to deeply racist iconography, art and language that has been used through the ages to stoke up hatred and murder of Jews. It was a dog whistle. Mclusky would have understood this full well. No better than Trump's rabble rousing.
El stovey said:
This kind of looking for anti Semitism, to score political points undermines genuine examples of it.
I am perfectly entitled to be offended by an antisemitic comment without your approval of my motivation thanks all the same. El stovey said:
Showing the motivation for bringing it up in the first place.
Dear god, this is pathetic. Yes I loathe Starmer and I think that by procrastinating on PH that's read by 3 people I can damage him so badly I can keep him out of power. Or maybe I'd much rather see a centerist Labour party lead by someone like Starmer with a brain and some morals, than one beholden to hard left fvcksticks like McCluskey if they stand any chance of winning. What motivation do you want to pin on me to explain away your ignorance? fblm said:
El stovey said:
Showing the motivation for bringing it up in the first place.
Dear god, this is pathetic. Yes I loathe Starmer and I think that by procrastinating on PH that's read by 3 people I can damage him so badly I can keep him out of power. Or maybe I'd much rather see a centerist Labour party lead by someone like Starmer with a brain and some morals, than one beholden to hard left fvcksticks like McCluskey if they stand any chance of winning. What motivation do you want to pin on me to explain away your ignorance? A)McClusky said something anti Semitic and B) That Starmer is somehow responsible or tarred by it for not doing anything about it.
That’s what’s “pathetic”
El stovey said:
You’re actually pretending you think
A)McClusky said something anti Semitic and B) That Starmer is somehow responsible or tarred by it for not doing anything about it.
That’s what’s “pathetic”
Oh goody now you're telling me what I think. Your ignorance is baffling but as I've said what I think is or isn't anti-semitic is irrelevant. A) See the quotes above; are they all wrong? Are they trying to find antisemitism where there is none? Are they just politically motivated? Is the gold "trope" made up? Are they all just a bunch of trouble makers? B) No idea why you imagine I think Starmer is "responsible or tarred by it", I've said no such thing. Time will tell if being seen to do nothing about antisemitism will cost him. It didn't work for Corbyn.A)McClusky said something anti Semitic and B) That Starmer is somehow responsible or tarred by it for not doing anything about it.
That’s what’s “pathetic”
Here are the quotes from the last few days again. I can only assume you didn't read them. Perhaps you can explain what they are thinking too and why they are wrong.
Chair of Jewish Labour said ''Stay classy, Len... Pretty disgusted by his language..."
Dame Hodge “The ignorance with which these tropes are used by McCluskey and others shows just how pervasive and unchallenged antisemitism is on the Hard Left.”
Euan Philipps, Labour Against Antisemitism; "It is unsurprising but still shocking to hear one of the most senior figures in the British Labour movement seemingly reveal such a poisonous view... Over the last four years Mr McCluskey has at times appeared to dismiss antisemitism in the Labour Party, describing it as 'mood music' but this is the first time he has made such a seemingly antisemitic comment himself."
President of the Board of Deputies British Jews Marie van der Zyl; “We are deeply concerned that the leader of one of the most powerful Trade Unions in this country would go on television and use an antisemitic trope dating back to medieval times."
fblm said:
El stovey said:
You’re actually pretending you think
A)McClusky said something anti Semitic and B) That Starmer is somehow responsible or tarred by it for not doing anything about it.
That’s what’s “pathetic”
Oh goody now you're telling me what I think. Your ignorance is baffling but as I've said what I think is or isn't anti-semitic is irrelevant. A) See the quotes above; are they all wrong? Are they trying to find antisemitism where there is none? Are they just politically motivated? Is the gold "trope" made up? Are they all just a bunch of trouble makers? B) No idea why you imagine I think Starmer is "responsible or tarred by it", I've said no such thing. Time will tell if being seen to do nothing about antisemitism will cost him. It didn't work for Corbyn.A)McClusky said something anti Semitic and B) That Starmer is somehow responsible or tarred by it for not doing anything about it.
That’s what’s “pathetic”
Here are the quotes from the last few days again. I can only assume you didn't read them. Perhaps you can explain what they are thinking too and why they are wrong.
Chair of Jewish Labour said ''Stay classy, Len... Pretty disgusted by his language..."
Dame Hodge “The ignorance with which these tropes are used by McCluskey and others shows just how pervasive and unchallenged antisemitism is on the Hard Left.”
Euan Philipps, Labour Against Antisemitism; "It is unsurprising but still shocking to hear one of the most senior figures in the British Labour movement seemingly reveal such a poisonous view... Over the last four years Mr McCluskey has at times appeared to dismiss antisemitism in the Labour Party, describing it as 'mood music' but this is the first time he has made such a seemingly antisemitic comment himself."
President of the Board of Deputies British Jews Marie van der Zyl; “We are deeply concerned that the leader of one of the most powerful Trade Unions in this country would go on television and use an antisemitic trope dating back to medieval times."
jakesmith said:
El stovey said:
nobody else thinks it’s anti Semitic except one poster.
No that's not accurate:fblm
me
And some high profile Jews as listed above:
The Chair of Jewish Labour
Dame Hodge
Euan Philipps (Labour Against Antisemitism)
President of the Board of Deputies British Jews
You have now had why it is offensive explained to you at least twice yet you continue to defend it. You are clearly ignorant of the trope, again, it refers to deeply racist iconography, art and language that has been used through the ages to stoke up hatred and murder of Jews. It was a dog whistle. Mclusky would have understood this full well. No better than Trump's rabble rousing.
El stovey said:
This kind of looking for anti Semitism, to score political points undermines genuine examples of it.
I am perfectly entitled to be offended by an antisemitic comment without your approval of my motivation thanks all the same. Assumptions based on guesses, even when people really want them to be true, are not to be depended on. I was obviously wrong in my assumption, as was the poser.
Perhaps this, rather bewildering, revelation that someone has no knowledge of anti-semitic tropes is a good thing. Maybe they aren't so common as they were in my youth, and, most importantly, the youth of McCulsky. However, one wonders if this has been pointed out to the poster before and he decided to ignore it, as he has done on this thread.
The money-lending Jew; this was such a common theme that it is difficult to take on board the fact that there must be enclaves around where it has been less common. You know, somewhere where there's no TV, radio, newspapers and books. Especially history books.
Good news indeed if someone living in the modern world hadn't heard of it before. It would be reassuring for all those who believe it.
Derek Smith said:
Perhaps this, rather bewildering, revelation that someone has no knowledge of anti-semitic tropes is a good thing. Maybe they aren't so common as they were in my youth, and, most importantly, the youth of McCulsky. However, one wonders if this has been pointed out to the poster before and he decided to ignore it, as he has done on this thread.
There's always a chance McCluskey wouldn't have encountered racism working on the docks in Liverpool in the 60's & 70's. jakesmith said:
Derek Smith said:
Perhaps this, rather bewildering, revelation that someone has no knowledge of anti-semitic tropes is a good thing. Maybe they aren't so common as they were in my youth, and, most importantly, the youth of McCulsky. However, one wonders if this has been pointed out to the poster before and he decided to ignore it, as he has done on this thread.
There's always a chance McCluskey wouldn't have encountered racism working on the docks in Liverpool in the 60's & 70's. I worked in a factory in the middle to late 60s and there was precious little racism against anyone who wasn't black. We had a black cleaner come in and he was a fabulously weird chap. All of a sudden, things changed, all down to this nutty little chap. He was a grafter, which always went down well, and completely off the wall. Then the racisim didn't include anyone not black and him.
The floor was packed out with ex soldiers from WWII, and a number had been on the battles for Germany. I was told that they used to get on with German prisoners very well, swapping fags, right up until the first liberations of the concentration camps. They had stories which weren't particularly inspiring of treatment of German PoWs.
There was a great deal of sympathy for Jews in my area of London, and where I worked. I didn't hear an anti-Jewish joke until I went to clubs where there were comedians who were near the line. And over it. These jokes often didn't go down well. Anti black were a different matter - this at a time when signs in my area of London had 'No dogs, no blacks, no Irish' were hardly difficult to find. I had a Jewish girlfriend at the time, and she said she didn't experience any personal racism. Mind you, I was, and still am of course, half Irish and, beyond such signs, and the pathetic comedians, I didn't either.
Ozzy Mosley and his little me, Max, were stiring up matters in the east end, and they didn't get far. Roundly trounced.
I always thought anti-semitism would go away. Pretty stupid of course, but I could go anywhere with the Jewish lass. Never a trace of anything.
A different time, sadly.
768 said:
otolith said:
Not sure how some alleged anti-Semitism from Starmer's internal opponents on the hard left makes Starmer look bad?
They pay him, he takes their money.otolith said:
768 said:
otolith said:
Not sure how some alleged anti-Semitism from Starmer's internal opponents on the hard left makes Starmer look bad?
They pay him, he takes their money.If this is a problem then it is one for the union to sort out and potentially push McKluskey aside.
The donations are by the members, to the union, in the knowledge that a proportion goes to the Labour Party.
Derek Smith said:
I always thought anti-semitism would go away. Pretty stupid of course, but I could go anywhere with the Jewish lass. Never a trace of anything.
I don't even understand how antisemitism is a thing. There's so few Jewish people in the UK for starters. The contrast between the reaction to antisemitism and islamophobia is profound. If anything, after WW2, you'd think we'd be pretty s
t-hot on the demonisation of Jews?! 
fblm said:
Now you're being willfully ignorant. What I think is offensive or not is irrelevant. See the quotes above. The thread is about Starmer reviving the Labour Party. Under the hard left the party had a problem with antisemitism, I assumed you heard of that at least? Starmer to his credit tried to draw a line under it although it's worth noting non other than McCluskey threatened to withdraw Union funding over the damages payments to Jewish whistleblowers. If Labour's biggest donor is going to continue to stick two fingers up to Starmer's efforts, in a documentary about Starmer, whilst insulting Labour ''grandees" who were a core part of Labour's only electoral successes since 1976 then his response, or lack of, is absolutely relevant any effort on his part to be seen to be moving away from the antisemitic hard left. "Just trying to make Starmer look bad." Grow up.
I took the comment to be more a slur on "Mandelson the man" rather than "Mandelson the man of partial Jewish origin". A man who seems to have done well out of "New Labour" which one supposes Mr McCluskey probably doesn't like. McCluskey would probably have been wiser to use the word "money", but then I guess that could also have been taken the same way. Is it not allowed for someone to be denigrated after they've made a pot of cash out of the working people? (Assuming that is one's belief).
I'm not saying I care either way btw. McCluskey's politics aren't mine in the slightest...I just think we're too quick to pull the "ism" trigger in this country these days, and that that is a very slippery slope. No matter who it is doing it.
I'm not sure what is expected of Starmer right now. I suspect he still needs the unions to support him. And I don't believe he can personally do anything about McCluskey.
Murph7355 said:
I took the comment to be more a slur on "Mandelson the man" rather than "Mandelson the man of partial Jewish origin". A man who seems to have done well out of "New Labour" which one supposes Mr McCluskey probably doesn't like.
McCluskey would probably have been wiser to use the word "money", but then I guess that could also have been taken the same way. Is it not allowed for someone to be denigrated after they've made a pot of cash out of the working people? (Assuming that is one's belief).
I'm not saying I care either way btw. McCluskey's politics aren't mine in the slightest...I just think we're too quick to pull the "ism" trigger in this country these days, and that that is a very slippery slope. No matter who it is doing it.
I'm not sure what is expected of Starmer right now. I suspect he still needs the unions to support him. And I don't believe he can personally do anything about McCluskey.
Exactly, I agree with everything you say. Especially about the -ism trigger.McCluskey would probably have been wiser to use the word "money", but then I guess that could also have been taken the same way. Is it not allowed for someone to be denigrated after they've made a pot of cash out of the working people? (Assuming that is one's belief).
I'm not saying I care either way btw. McCluskey's politics aren't mine in the slightest...I just think we're too quick to pull the "ism" trigger in this country these days, and that that is a very slippery slope. No matter who it is doing it.
I'm not sure what is expected of Starmer right now. I suspect he still needs the unions to support him. And I don't believe he can personally do anything about McCluskey.
He said
“I stopped listening to anything Peter Mandelson says years ago.
“I would suggest Peter goes into a room and counts his gold and not worry about the Labour Party. Leave that to those of us who are interested in ordinary working people.”
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co....
“Counting your gold” here is about his wealth and it’s being used to suggest he’s disconnected from what McCluskey sees as “ordinary working people”
It’s an old labour new labour thing and a conflict within the party between those that want to stay true to the labour trade Union roots and those that want to be more about aspiration like Blair Mandleson and Starmer.
McCluskey hates Madleson because he was central to the new labour rebranding and what came after.
It’s about new vs old labour not religion, not that Mandleson is Jewish anyway.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co....
El stovey said:
Murph7355 said:
I took the comment to be more a slur on "Mandelson the man" rather than "Mandelson the man of partial Jewish origin". A man who seems to have done well out of "New Labour" which one supposes Mr McCluskey probably doesn't like.
McCluskey would probably have been wiser to use the word "money", but then I guess that could also have been taken the same way. Is it not allowed for someone to be denigrated after they've made a pot of cash out of the working people? (Assuming that is one's belief).
I'm not saying I care either way btw. McCluskey's politics aren't mine in the slightest...I just think we're too quick to pull the "ism" trigger in this country these days, and that that is a very slippery slope. No matter who it is doing it.
I'm not sure what is expected of Starmer right now. I suspect he still needs the unions to support him. And I don't believe he can personally do anything about McCluskey.
Exactly, I agree with everything you say. Especially about the -ism trigger.McCluskey would probably have been wiser to use the word "money", but then I guess that could also have been taken the same way. Is it not allowed for someone to be denigrated after they've made a pot of cash out of the working people? (Assuming that is one's belief).
I'm not saying I care either way btw. McCluskey's politics aren't mine in the slightest...I just think we're too quick to pull the "ism" trigger in this country these days, and that that is a very slippery slope. No matter who it is doing it.
I'm not sure what is expected of Starmer right now. I suspect he still needs the unions to support him. And I don't believe he can personally do anything about McCluskey.
He said
“I stopped listening to anything Peter Mandelson says years ago.
“I would suggest Peter goes into a room and counts his gold and not worry about the Labour Party. Leave that to those of us who are interested in ordinary working people.”
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co....
“Counting your gold” here is about his wealth and it’s being used to suggest he’s disconnected from what McCluskey sees as “ordinary working people”
It’s an old labour new labour thing and a conflict within the party between those that want to stay true to the labour trade Union roots and those that want to be more about aspiration like Blair Mandleson and Starmer.
McCluskey hates Madleson because he was central to the new labour rebranding and what came after.
It’s about new vs old labour not religion, not that Mandleson is Jewish anyway.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co....
I’m no fan of McCluskey myself, very far from it, but I can’t stand seeing comments being misrepresented like this.
I also abhor and condemn (actual) anti-semitism, for the record.
Why have prominent Jewish figures condemned it then? Let me guess, an axe to grind for some reason?
I think it’s up to the group in question to decide whether the comment is offensive to them, not some anonymous randoms on a car forum
No other ethnic group in the U.K. would be told that the racism they saw and heard and were offended by, wasn’t racism. Could you imagine such a thing? Shameful.
I think it’s up to the group in question to decide whether the comment is offensive to them, not some anonymous randoms on a car forum
No other ethnic group in the U.K. would be told that the racism they saw and heard and were offended by, wasn’t racism. Could you imagine such a thing? Shameful.
jakesmith said:
Why have prominent Jewish figures condemned it then? Let me guess, an axe to grind for some reason?
I think it’s up to the group in question to decide whether the comment is offensive to them, not some anonymous randoms on a car forum
No other ethnic group in the U.K. would be told that the racism they saw and heard and were offended by, wasn’t racism. Could you imagine such a thing? Shameful.
I will let those people speak for themselves. They have their opinion, I have mine. Others have theirs. My own opinion doesn’t invalidate or attempt to invalidate anyone else’s. I think it’s up to the group in question to decide whether the comment is offensive to them, not some anonymous randoms on a car forum
No other ethnic group in the U.K. would be told that the racism they saw and heard and were offended by, wasn’t racism. Could you imagine such a thing? Shameful.
Only Len knows the truth, but what I’ve said is how I see it, as things stand.
Jake, are you a supporter of the SNP hate crime bill? Off-topic, I know, but this has clauses which amount to any victim essentially being able to define racism by their own level of offence. I personally am uncomfortable with such a concept.
Edited by markyb_lcy on Thursday 22 October 22:04
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff