Rache- Part 1

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 3:34pm

Do not count me among those who revel at opposition retreat, to regroup and rise again. You spare me at your peril.

Jeremy Corbyn's victory was crushing. There is simply nothing else to call it, 62 - 38 is a 24 point margin. In raw votes it was 119,980, almost as many as the 130,000 votes suppressed (in Britain they call it "gerrymandering" and are quite wrong to do so, it's an entirely different thing all together- "it's an entirely different thing"). 77% of the Party voted, you can hardly call it undemocratic unless, as the straw grasping Tory-lite Quisling Blairites do, you posit a "silent majority" of people who feel too intimidated to express publicly their 'I got mine' selfishness in the face of moral disapproval (and please, call it 'bullying' so you demean people who actually suffer persecution not privilege).

The reaction is not unexpected or unpredictable, legacy media is howling Dolchstoßlegende conspiracy theories about why they are no longer respected or trusted (duh), they and the PLP (nice blokes you'd share a pint with at the pub, not stinking radical entryist Trots) are consoling themselves with fantasies of redemption (unfortunately likely, we'll see, more later in any event)- in the words of The Mirror bowing the knee, or schism (good luck with that, Britain already has a "Center-Left" Neoliberal Party- the Liberal Democrats who by virtue of licking Tory boots now have a whopping 8 seats in Parliament, exactly the same as the Democratic Unionist Party, you know, Ian Paisley's Northern Irish sectarian thugs and terrorists).

Humiliated in fact if not in attitude the PLP lurches zombie-like chanting "reconciliation" instead of "brains" which if they had any would have stopped them from starting this coup in the first place. They live in existential fear that they'll be "deselected" and have to face what we would call a primary challenge from their constituency whom they've given no reason to support them.

'But the Media Guys still like us at the Pub!", they whine. Yeah, but your voters don't.

Hear that scratching sound? It's moderate rats scrambling back aboard the good ship Corbyn
By Dan Hodges, The Mail
19:49 EST, 24 September 2016

What we witnessed yesterday was billed as the result of the Labour leadership contest. But instead it had the feeling of a surrender ceremony. The final, formal capitulation of moderate, progressive socialism.

‘It’s already starting,’ one Labour MP told me. ‘I’ve had people emailing me saying, “I don’t want to go back, but I’ve got a wife and kids to think about”.’

By ‘going back’ they mean returning to serve in Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet. Two months ago the instigators of Labour’s Summer of Discontent were desperately struggling to restrain people from resigning to help manage the insurrection in an orderly manner. Today they’re fighting to prevent those same MPs scrambling back aboard the sinking ship.
...
(Deputy Leader Tom) Watson (the face of the Parliamentary Labour Party Quislings) knows full well the rebellion is teetering on the point of collapse. His move is simply an attempt to provide a way of giving a route back into the shadow cabinet that allows Labour moderates to save face.

‘Tom’s priority is just trying to protect the MPs and the party staff from the coming backlash’, an ally told me.

But there can be no dignified return. No peace with honour.

Whether people go back to the shadow cabinet via elections or via the munificence of their leader is utterly irrelevant. They will – to borrow the words of one former Labour Minister – have ‘done a Burnham’, a reference to the newly anointed Marshall Petain of Manchester, who refused to back the coup against Corbyn in order to secure his party’s mayoral nomination.

Once again, Labour’s moderates are preparing to reinforce every negative caricature painted by Corbyn and his acolytes. That they are governed solely by personal ambition. That they have no courage or conviction. That they exist only to secure for themselves the closest proximity to power.

And if they bow the knee to Corbyn now, that caricature will become a self-portrait.

A portrait of Dorian Gray, so to say.

This is a distinct and pivotal defeat for Neoliberalism's sense of inevitability. To compare it with Moscow (1815 or 1941, pick 'em) or Midway it represents a distinct change in Momentum and a guide for activism.

(Of course it's cross posted from The Stars Hollow Gazette and DocuDharma)

Tags:

ek Politics

Vote

Comments

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 3:35pm

Vent Hole

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 4:20pm

So, is the rise of the OUTSIDER across the political spectrum

…this cycle just an Anglo thing? Is it some kind of inner affliction suffered by the people who are racially indigenous to the European land mass? Wherever they happen to be, geographically?

Whatever this bursting convulsion is that manifests as "populism", I bet it's going to leave a mark.

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 4:42pm

Of course not you sly dog.

Anglos are late to the game (because of our 'exceptionality', it's like 'Wessonality' without the grease clog in your sink).

Sigh. If you want me to admit the cultural bias and limitations of my (United States) education I'm too painfully aware of that and strive to improve. I write what I know and the only 'foreign' countries I've ever been in are Canada and the Confederacy. Love those, what do you call them... grits.

Populist/Nationalist revolution against NeoLiberal Globalism didn't start among English speakers but the fact it's spread even to our insular shores is significant.

Submitted by shaharazade on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 4:38pm

I spent all morning

reading the establishment Brit press from the Mail to the right wing New Labour Guardian. Oh brother I thought. I missed the Mail piece you I agree count as someone who who does revel at opposition retreat, to regroup and rise again. Thanks ek. I'm copying and pasting my comment in another essay here where I was told go Corbyn but get real he's not going to win in the general. Labour must take Toryland to win. Like Milibrand took Toryland? Like the Democratic party here punch the far left extremist hippies and Trot's. A persona cult my ass.

Yeah Right. Get a grip 'moderate' people. The times they are a changing. The comment sections this morning on the Guardian we're fun to read as The Tory's and Tory-lites are a bunch of stupid cowardly and or neo-liberal Blariite gits. So here's my comment that I should have waited till you came back with another brilliant essay on the this matter. Nothing moderate or modern about either the Blairite Labour or the New Democratic RW'ers we're stuck with. Sorry this is so long do not mean to usurp your excellent coverage as of late in the fascinating politics across the pond.

If the 'far left', 'Corbynista's', Momentum, and 'Trot's, are as doomed as the corporate, New Labour centrist Brit press says they are how come Labour has more then doubled it's membership after Milliband's defeat in 2015?

Miliband began his campaign by launching a "manifesto for business", stating that only by voting Labour would the UK's position within the European Union be secure......

Despite opinion polls leading up to the general election predicting a tight result, Labour decisively lost the 7 May general election to the Conservatives. Although gaining 22 seats, Labour lost all but one of its MPs in Scotland and ended up with a net loss of 26 seats, failing to win a number of key marginal seats that it had expected to win comfortably. After being returned as MP for Doncaster North, Miliband stated that it had been a "difficult and disappointing" night for Labour.

You may be right Labour will not win in the general but I think your underestimating how feed up people are with the neoliberal 1% economic disparity and privatization. The constant attacks on the left and Corbyn by the media makes me think the Blarites are worried. The times they are a changing globally. The 'inevitability'' of the 1% global neoliberal/neocons who 'rule the world' is breaking down. Austerity is wearing thin as is endless bloody war and corruption.

Here's a breakdown of the votes in 2nd round of the coup to oust Corbyn. Mind you this is from the Guardian which is very pro New Labour and even this article is full of dire predictions and declarations of Corbyn is not electable and fear mongering about the upcoming Tory victory and the demise of Labour forever and ever.Now where have I heard this bs. before hummm....."Stronger Together" or else ????? Bernie had to kiss the ring in order to come back and fight another day? Yeah the's right no protest votes the empower ~~Hitler~~ The Hair Ball and his fascist brown shirts.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/24/jeremy-corbyn-leadershi...

Jeremy Corbyn’s election result has proved to be even bigger than a year ago, with the Labour leader commanding 313,209 votes – 61.8% of the electorate.

Overall, there were 654,006 people eligible to take part in the election as either full members, registered supporters who had paid £25, or affiliates largely through the trade unions. Of this total, 506,438 cast a vote. As Corbyn says, Labour is now the largest socialist movement in western Europe.

It is a movement that in 2016 has offered Corbyn its concerted backing across the board. He won 59% of the members’ votes (168,216), 70% of registered supporters (84,918) and 60% of affiliated supporters (60,075). That is not just a bigger victory for Corbyn than in 2015, it is a significant shift in the core membership.

Maybe Toryland will win but I somehow don't think so. From the comment section in an obnoxious article belittling the Corbyn anti -New Labour victory. This one has a very lively comment section to say the least. It's a fun read.

National newspapers unimpressed by Jeremy Corbyn's victory -Roy Greenslade
‘An unelectable leader is about as much use as an ice-cream in the desert’, says the Labour-supporting Sunday People - and the Tory press is sharper still'
https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/sep/25/national-newspa...

Conservative Party membership - 150,000
SNP Party membership - 120,000
Lib Dem Party membership - 76,000
Green Party membership - 55,000
UKIP - 39,000
Plaid Cymru - 8300

Total party memberships combined - 448,300

Labour Party membership - 515,000

As you can see I spent my morning reading the Establishment Brit press's predictable reactions to the defeat of the New Labour, Blairtite PLP 's failed coup.

Here's one more reaction from a Corbyn campaigner. It's a good read and anyone who thinks this movement here or anywhere is going now where should read it. Corbyn may lose but ordinary people globally are rejecting the inevitable neoliberal/neocon's global rule. New Labour and the New Democratic party may win this time around but they are going down. At least the Corbyn supporters and people who have joined Labour to stop the Torylite right wing Labour are not running around yelling protest votes are dangerous because ????? Get out of the doorways quit blocking the halls.' 'there is something deeper going on.'

As a member of Momentum, let me explain what all you Blairites have so far failed to understand
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/24/as-a-member-of-momentum-let-m...

To listen to some on Labour Right you’d think the party membership had lost their minds. This is ironic given the anti-Corbyn camp’s behaviour over the last year, and particularly the last three months. In any case, we’re far from mad; there is something deeper going on.

Owen Smith can talk Left, while Corbyn sounds all too moderate – but Smith “smells” like a man of the capitalist establishment, while Corbyn does not. Labour people are not stupid; we have a good sense of smell. And, at the end of the day, like it or not, antagonistic and clashing class interests do exist. As long as they do, labour movements will emerge and re-emerge, no matter how much they driven down (physically or ideologically).

The movement which swept Corbyn to office, and has just crushed the attempt to remove him, is fundamentally a class movement. It reflects the deep frustration of various sections of Britain’s working population with the bland, technocratic political consensus which has served the interests of employers and the rich so well for thirty years, and spectacularly enriched them during the decade of “austerity”.....................................

I don’t think I’m naive. Posing the question of socialism is a long way off. It will be a hard struggle even to transform Labour, oust the Tories and change society’s direction. But we need to begin the work now, not go on as we did before.

Let me finish with an appeal to the Labour “moderate” rank and file. You should be angry at your leaders. You should be angry at self-styled Labour loyalists who have done their best to wreck our party; at self-styled social democrats who have strained every muscle to defend unrestrained neo-liberalism and the interests of the rich. There is a place for you in a transformed Labour Party and labour movement, but not for the professional wreckers. Help us call them to account.

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 4:45pm

Hey thanks for a really illuminating analysis.

Thanks for taking the time.

Submitted by divineorder on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 7:38pm

yes, it was quite helpful.

—

A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.

Submitted by glitterscale on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 9:47am

The hope I have for us

is that our folks 45 and younger come out and vote for Jill along with a bunch of us old hippies and rebs. Johnson doesn't feel right to me f(or rather feels TOO rightist). I want REAL change now. I hunger for it. If we don't see it happening we will become the monsters in this world with our never ending wars and our austerity programs that bleed everybody to feed the Kochs' and Waltons' never ending greed.

—

glitterscale

Submitted by tapu dali on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 6:33pm

The PLP (the Parliamentary Party)

consists of all Labour MPs in the House and Labour Peers in the Lords. The "Party Members" are those who signed up as Full members, Associate members, and Supporters, at various fee schedules. You could sign up for as little as 25 pounds.

The "rank and file" elected Corbyn, over the stiff opposition of the PLP.

The closest analogy this year is Trump's ascendancy to the nomination over the opposition of the House and Senate Republicans, few of whom endorsed him.

Much as some here rejoice over Corbyn's win, this is not necessarily good news for Labour: Corbyn is a divisive, alienating figure who (e.g.) wants policy and even the (Shadow) Cabinet to be decided not by MPs (legislators) but by Labour supporters.

I don't think that's wise, but YMMV.

—

There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 8:33pm

Well...

no disrespect but what exactly do you think is unwise about having democratically decided policy and democratically elected Shadow Cabinet members?

I think they tend to lend legitimacy to a system that is currently 'Spoils Only'.

Corbyn is completely within his rights as Leader, confirmed by consecutive landslides, to simply dictate. Instead he offers a system where Party members decide.

What is wrong or undemocratic in that?

The argument of the PLP is that they 'know better' and answer to a 'general electorate' rather than a party.

Why then do they seek the support of a Party at all? Particularly one as unpopular and dictatorial as Labour. It's a rhetorical question, the obvious answer is that they're indistinguishable from any average Briton without their Party identification.

In the United States it's different, local personal celebrity is sufficient to sustain a political base.

Submitted by tapu dali on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 8:56pm

So you disagree with Responsible Government (q.v.)

where citizens elect Representatives to make policy decisions on their behalf?

It's worked well in Canada since the time of James Howe of Nova Scotia.

Do you want every policy question, including those of peace and war, being decided by the entire country = government by referendum?

What happens if the referendum goes 51-49? Will the "49%" meekly sit back and say, OK, majority rules, or will there be a fight?

I believe there's something rather precious about believing that putting everything to referendum will solve anything. That's the first step on the road to anarchy.

—

Submitted by Shahryar on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 8:59pm

how is a party election "everything to referendum"?

would you end primaries in the United States because it's direct vote and not decided by "representatives"?

Submitted by expatjourno on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 4:42pm

It isn't.

It's a straw man.

—

Hillary: Making sure women get a bigger piece of the middle-class pie that her neoliberal, DLC, pro-Wall Street, pro-Pentagon, pro-TPP, Republican-lite economic policies are designed to shrink.

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:13pm

I don't disagree with 'Representative' government...

provided it represents. Nor am I against the idea that Leaders lead and create a climate that guides people to believe that their solutions are the best ones for all even if they are compromises.

But that's not what we have here. We have instead a sense of privilege and entitlement that is entirely unjustified, especially among those who claim to represent Labor, the working person.

And I am an anarchist, Anarcho-Syndicalist precisely, thank you for noticing.

Submitted by shaharazade on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:49pm

What is wrong with

the 'rank and file' Labour members of a political party democratically voting for policy they want from their representatives this is nothing but good news. You got something against democracy? No it is not like Trump's ascendancy in the Republican party. It might be a good analogy if it was UKIP's Nigel Ferage's ascendancy in the Tory party or Labour won but no their dead in the water. Hysterical calls of we can't have a bunch of Nazis running the place so vote Tory -Light that is not lite but full throated anti-democratic elitist bs.

Did the Greeks when they were screwed by the EU and Goldman Sachs go with the dreaded right wing Golden Dawn. No they went with Syriza. Another dreaded 'far left 'divisive party that post haste got punitively slammed down by the 1% EU. and all the global bankster's. C'est la vie. It's not over yet this is just the start.

As for Corbyn being divisive and alienating maybe it's time the left stopped cow towing to these fuckers who call themselves moderates or progressive and united to get a political party that democratically represented the policies and agenda that is willing to stand against this neo-liberal endless bloody war duopoly or one party state. It seems to me like Labour and the Momentum movement have managed to take it to the people and get an overwhelming vote of approval.

What the matter with you? Nothing wrong at all with the rank and file of Labour or the Democrat's rejecting this Brave New World. The one where left is right, night is day and any opposition to this absurd reality is divisive and alienating. So pray who tell who does does it alienate in a world gone mad where the Tories-lites are moderate and the Democrat's are progressive?

Submitted by shaharazade on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:59pm

So join

the rank and file.Thanks a lot.

Submitted by GreatLakeSailor on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 7:30pm

From the Mirror link...

Blairite Rally

Corbyn's Rally

—

Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.

Submitted by tapu dali on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 8:43pm

Well, fine, if you want

your leaders chosen by an inchoate mass (like Trump).

Just b/c Corbyn is "left" doesn't mean he's not a dangerous demagogue (like Trump). In fact I think that Corbyn, like Trump, can't really be placed on a L-R axis. You need the 2-dim "political compass" for him, and I'd frankly place him at left-libertarian. Libertarian because of his anarchic tendencies (having union members voting on national policies, for example).

Be careful what you wish for.

—

Submitted by Shahryar on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 8:55pm

you know you're being terribly elitist here, right?

there's too many people and too much representation in democracy! It must be curbed! only the professional leaders know what's best. Also because they're professional we must vote for them, over and over.

Is what you're saying and I'd disagree with you.

Submitted by tapu dali on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:16pm

Not at all.

Allow me to refer you to Responsible Government.

Responsible government refers to a government that is responsible to the people. In Canada responsible government is more commonly described as an executive or Cabinet that is dependent on the support of an elected assembly, rather than on the monarch. It originated in Canada in the 1830s and became an important part of Confederation. It’s the method by which Canada achieved independence without revolution.

Note the bolded section. That's how Canadian and UK Parliaments work. It's not how yours works. Our systems are not the same. Once you elect a President, and s/he chooses a Cabinet, that's it. Our Legislature can dismiss a Prime Minister (read: President) and dissolve Parliament (congress), yours can't.

That's a huge difference.

Also remember that our MPs are "whipped". If The PMs party has a Majority in the House, he above scenario is highly unlkely. However, in a Minority (where two or more opposition parties can outvote the Government), it is very likely to happen and Minority Governments rarely last in power for more than a couple of years before it is defeated by a non-confidence vote and new Parliamentary elections are called.

Please familiarise yourself on parliamentary systems before calling me 'elitist'.

Thank you for reading

—

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:23pm

Well...

Responsible government refers to a government that is responsible to the people.

62%. What about that is a problem for you?

Oh, "elected assembly". How elected are you if your holding, constituency, district party decides you don't represent them anymore?

Fortunately the PLP does not decide who is leader, the members do.

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:34pm

Yes actually.

I do want my leaders chosen by an "inchoate mass".

It's called Democracy.

Likening it to Trump support is a vile calumny. I don't expect a retraction because I'm a tougher blog warrior than most and your photon opinion matters not at all.

I'm sure tomorrow we'll find something to agree about.

Submitted by tapu dali on Sun, 09/25/2016 - 9:43pm

I'm quite sure we will agree on more

than not.

We are allowed to disagree here.

Cheers

—

Submitted by gjohnsit on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 11:34am

Funny how some liberals despise Democracy

I do want my leaders chosen by an "inchoate mass".

It's called Democracy.

Liberals today will quickly toss aside democracy when a true leftist wins.
But they will tolerate democracy when a conservative wins.

Submitted by TheOtherMaven on Tue, 09/27/2016 - 8:47am

Maybe the problem is with "Liberals"

if the word has any meaning at all besides "self-privileged elitist snobs".

—

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

Submitted by gjohnsit on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 11:31am

Regarding Labour

This was once important

A thoroughfare got blocked by onlookers yesterday as the 84-year-old MP held forth on Mr Corbyn, "Dodgy Dave" and "Tedious Theresa".
And he pointed out a mostly-missed line from general secretary Iain McNicol - that Labour is now debt-free thanks to a surge in membership, largely attributed to Mr Corbyn.

"That £25m has now been wiped out," he said. "Why? Because of the membership and because of all these people who have joined.

"They have wiped out a £25m debt. We are the only political party in Britain, maybe Europe, that has got a surplus.

"It's incredible and it's time that the people in the PLP who are Blairites or whatever they call them, who are members of Progress and financed by [donor Lord] Sainsbury.

"It's time they understood that Jeremy is here to stay, he's got the biggest majority of anybody since the second world war.

Earlier general secretary Mr McNicol opened the conference by saying times had been "tough".

However, he presented a report to conference showing Labour recorded a £4.3m surplus last year.

"Historic debts totalled almost £25m in 2006," he said.

"But after years of living with that burden, I am delighted to report that at the end of last year we repaid the remainder.

"Becoming debt free coincided with a surge in membership. The money the new members will add to our funds helps put the Party in its strongest financial position for generations.

"We have paid back the loans, we have paid off our debt to the banks. The Labour Party is debt free."

membership

So what would Corbyn have to do to defeat the Tories?
First, he has to become the undisputed leader of Labour and his second victory will go a long way to achieving that. The Blairites will split, some will retire, some will accept the result, some will join the Tories or the Liberal Democrats and some might even form a new party. Whatever happens, Corbyn’s party, already 600,000 strong (the Tories have 150,000 members) will continue to grow, creating a major door-knocking organisation that will, along with social media, undermine the power of the war-loving neoliberal corporate media.

Submitted by ek hornbeck on Mon, 09/26/2016 - 12:37pm

Some people don't understand what winning is.

If you beat them down long enough they come to accept it as "normal".

I pity them, but they can not hold me back from victory.