Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Isn't it about time another thread was set up to discuss all things Corbyn Labour party?A party member has recently found himself in trouble for posting off topic on this thread, which in essence is no longer a relevant thread. Meaning all posts are now off topic and have been for some time now.
moderator1 wrote:Vin wrote:How about this for the front cover of next standard3rd and final warning 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
So I receive a warning for being off topic when every sing member of the forum has been off topic and received no warning? Leading to my suspension
Corbyn delivered a speech to a business audience saying Labour and business are natural allieshttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/mar/03/eu-referendum-french-calais-warning-dismissed-as-propaganda-by-brexit-campaign-politics-live
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/140383112424/jeremy-corbyn-mp-leader-of-the-labour-party-in-aFull speech.
Quote:To shape that new economy we need to work together. It is only through effective co-operation between government and business, state and markets, public and private, education and enterprise. That we can build an economy for the future that delivers for all.Quote:Labour’s alternative will put investment first. We will only borrow to invest over the business cycle.(Gordon Brown said that too, as did Milliband).
Quote:We want to see a genuinely mixed economy of public and social enterprise along with long-term private business commitment that will provide the decent pay, jobs, housing, schools, health and social care of the future.!! And people used to ask why we were standing against him, because he is "A Socialist"!
Quote:Wealth creation is a collective process between workers, public investment and services, and creative individuals and businesses.Ramsay MacDonald wrote:Thus the banking business of the nation and
of all the municipalities (the local banks could be
grouped into districts), would be done by national
and municipal departments which would deal with
the financial side of all their enterprises and receive
deposits. These banks would also keep the indus-
trial accounts, and act as financial secretaries of local
industries. Thus, national and municipal .finance
would be systematized, financial parasitism ended,
and a capitcd pool be accumulated as a reservoir from
which an efficient system of production could be kept
going, and the financial business of government
transacted. The function of finance must be
co-ordinated with those of government and
production.https://ia902703.us.archive.org/34/items/socialismcritic00macdgoog/socialismcritic00macdgoog.pdf
Ramsay MacDonald wrote:The State performs a necessary function.
It is part of social economy, and this throws
a new light upon taxation. The State re-
quires an income, and this need not, as
the individualist economists maintained,
be taken of necessity from individual
incomes. It is earned just as much
as a personal income is earned.https://archive.org/stream/socialismgovernm01macd/socialismgovernm01macd_djvu.txt
Ramsay MacDonald wrote:The principle that each should contribute to the
State revenues according to his ability is of secondary
importance to the Socialist, to whom the fundamental
principle of the levying of State income is that the
State should secure for its own use the values that
are created by the existence and activity of the
State.https://archive.org/stream/socialism616macd/socialism616macd_djvu.txt
So much for Harold Wilson Warmed up – step forward, the Pale Shadow of Ramsay MacDonald…
So, unsurprisingly, Corbyn has been re-elected as Labour Party leader. Among those congratulating him on his victory is the 'Socialist Party' (read SPEW)
Guardian wrote:The Socialist party, the successor organisation to Militant, has also put out a statement welcoming Jeremy Corbyn’s re-election. It said: Despite the best efforts of the Blairites, the right-wing media, and behind them the capitalist establishment, Jeremy Corbyn now has a bigger mandate than ever. The Blairites are reeling in the face of the mass anti-austerity surge that has defeated them. This doesn’t mean, however, that they are reconciled to Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership or to the prospect of Labour becoming an anti-austerity party. The issue of what needs to be done to consolidate Jeremy Corbyn’s victory – by really transforming Labour into an anti-austerity, socialist, working-class mass movement – is the critical question facing socialists in Britain today.Cue Media Committee rebuttal.
The good news is that hopefully they will now dissolve themselves as a public party and re-enter the Labour Party leaving to us one of the names we've called ourselves since 1904.
My take on the issue is what the media do not wish to discuss particularly deeply – is what is a political party in relation to parliamentary democracy.Unable to challenge Corbyn's credentials as a democrat within the Labour Party,(even if some failed attempts were made to raise the spectre of Trot entryism) they now say that a Labour Party MPs does not need to have the loyalty to the organisation that they joined and got them elected but their loyalty is to all their constituents, not even their voters, which raises the question why did the voters vote for them – personal attributes or because they were members of the Labour Party and that who they vote for – the party and not the person.I know library shelves have been written about this paradox. But the media seem very reluctant to debate and discuss it. I think from fear of just exactly where the arguments and conclusions will lead to. If the Labour MPs are not prepared to accept that they are the instruments of the party then they should be made to do the honourable thing – apply for the Chiltern Hundreds and stand as independents and, of course, without the wherewithal and resources of an organised political party, we all know what the likely outcome at the ballot box will be for 99% of them.I know members of our party have democracy and parliamentary procedure as their personal hobby-horse and are much more well-read and well-informed than myself but as we have done to a certain degree we should be pushing very strongly this aspect of the Labour party dilemma – it is a real question of Parliament, Democracy and Politics.
The result is of course one in the eye for the media who were unaminously and in some cases viciously against him. Of course he's not a socialist and will fail but it's good to see that there are many people who are not swayed by the media.As to what the rebels MP's should "honourably" do, the 50 Years Ago column in the August Socialist Standard makes a pertinent point, though then the shoe was on the other foot:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2016/no-1344-august-2016/50-years-ago-rebels-too-late
Corbyn's speech to the CBI seemed to have been given little attention.http://press.labour.org.uk/post/167193240854/jeremy-corbyn-speech-at-the-cbi-annual-conference
Quote:When too much of household income is going to pay debts or rent, that’s less money for consumers to spend on productive businesses. That’s why Labour backs a Real Living Wage and sensible controls on rents and debts.Because it isn’t good for business either.Rent and interest are essential for business.
Quote:Again, I echo Carolyn; if we are to raise wages and living standards we must solve our productivity crisis.And it is a crisis.It continues to take a worker in Britain five days to produce what a worker in France or Germany produces in four.Quote:Because every one of you in this room who knows what goes into seeing an idea brought to market or what it takes to survive the cut and thrust of consumer choice month to month, knows that privatised monopoly utilities are not real markets. Where’s the pressure for efficiency and innovation if consumers cannot go elsewhere when they are dissatisfied?I know some of you disagree and think that bringing some parts of the economy into public ownership won’t be good for the reputation of business, but it’s not good for the image of business when water companies pay out billions in dividend and interest payments through opaque financial arrangements, while households see their bills go up to pay for it.Here is the 2016 onehttp://press.labour.org.uk/post/153479104824/jeremy-corbyn-speech-to-cbi-annual-conference-2016
jondwhite wrote:Rent and interest are essential for business.Not really, some businesses are basde on rent, but industrial/productive businesses see rentiers as a leech upon them, or a barrier to their growth: the classical industrial capital orientation of labour sees the state taking these revenues and decreasing the costs of rent/interest to promote growth. Corbyn is promoting the old microeconomic efficiency arguments put forward by social democrats in the 1930s. Nothing Ramsay McDonald couldn't embrace.
To clarify rent and interest are not essential for every business, but are for business / capitalism in general.The big question is why a "workers hero" is pandering to the CBI.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.