Corbyn did win, what's next?

[Lothian]

Ignorance of the Australian political system noted. Turnbull was "voted in" in the same way a Rotary president is. As was Corbyn. Let's wait for a real election before crowing.

Sorry mate, not getting your point.

Why do you consider the process to make Corbyn the leader is not an election? How does a vote differ from an election?

 

[Craig B]

Ignorance of the Australian political system noted. Turnbull was "voted in" in the same way a Rotary president is. As was Corbyn. Let's wait for a real election before crowing.

They were elected to political office within a party. Many more people participated in the Corbyn than in the Turnbull procedures. But yes, if you want to speak about a UK Parliamentary Election Corbyn has not won one of these.

Nobody is crowing, except at the discomfiture of the Blairite Right of the LP, which seemed to think that the Party had become its private property.

 

[WildCat]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

 

[Craig B]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

Keep waiting. This is a product of a definition of everything not right wing indiscriminately as "socialist" or "leftist" or something; so if anyone is tempted to engage you, you'll start going on about the Second Five Year Plan, or the Anabaptist regime in sixteenth century Münster or whatever.

 

[uk_dave]

Nobody is crowing, except at the discomfiture of the Blairite Right of the LP, which seemed to think that the Party had become its private property.

And now the left have "taken it back!"

Remarkable how the rhetoric can work both ways, isn't it?

 

[Craig B]

And now the left have "taken it back!"

Remarkable how the rhetoric can work both ways, isn't it?

You call it remarkable? That the faction winning a victory should celebrate the event?

 

[angrysoba]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

I'm sure if you name a policy then one of his supporters will be able to do that.

But for starters, we were talking before about railway nationalization. That discussion is still going on, but I notice that you have lost interest in it.

Has railway nationalization "failed spectacularly everywhere" it has been tried?

I would say not, and in many cases it led to improved railway service especially in times of war, or following war, according to this Wikipedia page.

 

[uk_dave]

You call it remarkable? That the faction winning a victory should celebrate the event?

It wasn't your celebration of winning that I found ironic, it was that, apparently:

Blairites thinking they owned the party = bad
Corbynites thinking they own the party = good

 

[angrysoba]

And now the left have "taken it back!"

Remarkable how the rhetoric can work both ways, isn't it?

Actually, the party grassroots have voted for their candidate when previously the Labour Party Establishment contrived to not allow certain choices. Just after Corbyn won the necessary number of MPs to stand in the leadership election, the panic-stricken party establishment types said this:

John McTernan, a former aide to Mr Blair, said the 35 Labour MPs who nominated Mr Corbyn were “morons”.

He told the BBC’s Newsnight: “The moronic MPs who nominated Jeremy Corbyn to ‘have a debate’ need their heads felt. They should be ashamed of themselves. They’re morons.”

Rivals were scathing of the party’s MPs for risking the party’s electoral future on allowing an extreme left winger to enter the leadership debate.

One aide to a rival candidate said: “This is too little too late. These Labour MPs don’t realise they are were supposed to be gate keepers.

“Their role was to determine the candidate selection – their vote is now just one of over 300,000 members and supporters.”

Ha ha! "Gate keepers"! This is the type of thing conspiracy theorists think is going on in corridors of power - contriving like some Guardian Council to prevent normal people from having a say in the parties unless they are voting for one of the Party Automatons that have been groomed since university.

 

[ddt]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

Are you somehow suggesting that Corbyn would want to turn the UK into a Soviet state? He hasn't even advocated a return to Clause 4, AFAIK, let alone to make the UK communist.

 

[asydhouse]

I take it they haven't kicked off yet. My final thought on this, which I am sure everyone is eager to read, is that his earnestness could count against him. If he is seen as unable to take a joke or to let insults roll off him then he could become a figure of ridicule.

Cameron might say, "the Labour Party are not all singing from the same hymn sheet, and in the leader's case not singing at all. Boom boom!"

Corbyn would need to come back with a witty put-down, but I fear he might say something like, "oh just grow up!" And be laughed at.

Or, as seems to be his way, just ignore irrelevant taunts and speak quietly and sensibly to explain his intentions.

 

[Rat]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

And I am getting bored of every right-winger trotting out the bit about how no policy left of centre could ever work because Communism failed in the USSR.

 

[Lothian]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

Which policies of his specifically are you referring to? With links please.

If your point was not a serious contribution and instead was a pathetic cheap shot from an ignorant troll please accept my apologies.

 

[The Don]

I'm still waiting for a Corbyn supporter to explain why his policies, which have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried since they were first enacted in the real world a century ago, would find their first-ever success in the UK.

"His" policies, whatever you imagine them to be, would have to make it through the Labour Party Conference first. Given that the same body has been responsible for policy for years, I don't see it differing significantly on major points except in tone. The areas where Corbyn's policies are most radical are:

• Getting rid of the UK's nuclear weapons. Although personally I support this (and hope that most of the money would find its way into suporting conventional forces), it's far from the majority opinion in the Labour party
• Reversing the caps on benefits which hit the poorest with the largest families worst - this may gain popular support if pitched correctly
• Renationalisation of the rail industry. This has already been partly done thanks to the failure of Railtrack. I think that rail privatisation has been an expensive mistake. Fares are far higher in real terms but so is subsidy

 

[The Don]

And I am getting bored of every right-winger trotting out the bit about how no policy left of centre could ever work because Communism failed in the USSR.

Not even left of centre, just left-of-far-right.

 

[WildCat]

Keep waiting. This is a product of a definition of everything not right wing indiscriminately as "socialist" or "leftist" or something; so if anyone is tempted to engage you, you'll start going on about the Second Five Year Plan, or the Anabaptist regime in sixteenth century Münster or whatever.

I'm well aware of the definition of the word "socialist", and Corbyn claims to be a socialist as the word is correctly defined.

Now, do you care to explain how it is that Corbyn's socialist policies, the same ones that have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried, would find success in the UK?

 

[Craig B]

It wasn't your celebration of winning that I found ironic, it was that, apparently:

Blairites thinking they owned the party = bad
Corbynites thinking they own the party = good

This was a more inclusive vote than had happened in the past. I hope it is followed by a more democratic régime within the party. If Corbyn ever comes to believe that he, and not the members, own the party, I will be most disappointed.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Not even left of centre, just left-of-far-right.

Not even that. Left-handed far-rightists.

 

[WildCat]

I'm sure if you name a policy then one of his supporters will be able to do that.

But for starters, we were talking before about railway nationalization. That discussion is still going on, but I notice that you have lost interest in it.

Has railway nationalization "failed spectacularly everywhere" it has been tried?

I would say not, and in many cases it led to improved railway service especially in times of war, or following war, according to this Wikipedia page.

Railways are an odd example to use, since it is impossible to have a private railway without massive government assistance, for example using eminent domain to acquire the land.

But you're claiming the government could run a railroad at a lower cost (and let's include total costs, not just fares) and I seriously doubt that could happen.

 

[Craig B]

I'm well aware of the definition of the word "socialist", and Corbyn claims to be a socialist as the word is correctly defined.

Now, do you care to explain how it is that Corbyn's socialist policies, the same ones that have failed spectacularly everywhere they've been tried, would find success in the UK?

I'm not being drawn into this, because I'm not sure what you mean, by socialist. Did the Atlee reforms of 1945-51 succeed? Were they socialist?

Is the Italian national rail network a successful operation? Did Bismarck's social welfare policy succeed? Are such things "socialist"?

Which of Corbyn's policies do you have in mind? Is the NHS socialist? Is free higher education socialist?

So give me this correct definition of socialist, and how Corbyn corresponds to it.