264

Jeremy Corbyn re-elected as independent in Islington North after expulsion from Labour (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 4 months ago by SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works to c/world@lemmy.world

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 96 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Good for him. I've never seen Jeremy Corbyn be anything other than decent and honest, and frank about his policies and why they are needed, even as he was treated terribly by the media. Hopefully he can be an effective voice in Parliament during this Labour government.

load more comments (45 replies)

[-] MurrayL@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

Not surprising. He was sadly too divisive to be a widely-popular Labour leader, but afaik he’s well-liked by his actual constituents, and this backs that up.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 48 points 4 months ago

If someone being consistent with Labour's values is too divisive to lead Labour, there can't be Labour at all. I disagree with some of his stances, but what this man suffered wasn't internal opposition, it was political assassination.

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

As an American looking in, Corbyn has always been the face of UK's Labour Party.

Why was he ousted? The article says something about an antisemitism statement, but surely that's not the whole of it.

[-] Hotspur@lemmy.ml 44 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They basically did something similar to what happened to Bernie with the DNC. they did a full court press antisemitism campaign against him, but like many of the charges of antisemitism in the US right now, it was largely based on criticism of Israeli policy AFAIK.

Edit: to clarify—they ousted him because labor was looking ascendant, and the more centrist and corporatist elements of labor could not stomach the idea of actually having a PM that wanted to do left wing things that aligned with the theoretical purpose of the labor party, so they took him out by getting enough articles published in the famously above-board uk media to force him from leadership.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Just to illustrate the nature of that campaign, at one point and in order to accuse Corbyn of being anti-semitic, they said that he had sat on a panel in a conference where one of the members of the same panel compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis, "hence" (by association) Corbyn was an anti-semite.

The thing is, said member of the panel who compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis was a Jewish Holocaust Survivor.

If such words made Corbyn an anti-semite by association then, having said such words, said panel member would even more so have to be an anti-semite.

In other words, the anti-Corbyn campaign was so rabid ragingly extremist and sleazy that they were accused a Jewish Holocaus Survivor of being an anti-semite in order to try to taint Corbyn by association.

PS: And, by the way, this very newspaper - The Guardian - was an active participant in that campaign and published this slander, amongst others.

[-] aleph@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yup, this pretty much sums it up.

To add, the vast majority of the antisemitism complaints involved other Labour ministers liking and posting anti-Israel Tweets that were consider too extreme. These ranged from ones that "crossed the line" of criticism against Israeli policy and the Israel lobby in the UK (some of which you can read in the report on pages 27-30) to ones that allegedly blamed Jewish members of the Labour party for making false complaints, or even tried to dimish the Holocaust (although I can't find the exact details of those).

Either way, none of the complaints involved Corbyn himself but his reputation was tarnished and it made him an easy target for his opponents.

[-] FelixCress@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

By "antisemitism" they mean not licking Israeli arse while they keep murdering Palestinians.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 46 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

In 2017, under Corbyn, Labour got over 40% of the vote compared to about 34% yesterday. Even in 2019 under Corybyn, Labour got like 32%. The narrative in Britain might be that Corbyn was too divisive and Starmer is a unifier but the real issue is that the right wing was split this time in ways it wasn’t under Boris Johnson.

I mean, say what you want about Corbyn — lord knows the garbage UK media will — but his Labour Party did very well once and about average the next time. The main issue is that using a “first past the post” system in a country with more than 2 parties is silly and undemocratic.

[-] FelixCress@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

FPTP is undemocratic, full stop. Doesn't matter how many parties.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 30 points 4 months ago

He was sadly too divisive to be a widely-popular Labour leader

Bullshit. He was elected leader because people wanted to go back to the party's left wing roots.

The Blairite Neoliberal wing of the party didn't like that, so they ousted him with a smear campaign calling him "divisive" (read: agrees more with the broader population than with the neoliberal establishment and their rich owner donors) and "antisemitic" (read: isn't in the pocket of the fascist apartheid regime, has empathy for their Palestinian victims)

[-] peg@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

How was he divisive?

[-] roguetrick@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

His victory ends a tradition of Islington North voting for Labour since a 1937 byelection.

Which is good, because voting for stealthy Tories disguised as Labour would've been bad.

[-] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 13 points 4 months ago

Fascinating. I think he summarizes the expectations on Starmer in a pretty useful way.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Corbyn grew the Labour party to the top. Then israel coup'd the Labour party and forced him out. Now israel controls the Labour and by extension the UK.

Democracy btw.

[-] TacticsConsort@yiffit.net 9 points 4 months ago

Excellent news. Even if he made a few too many vital blunders in debates to be the PM, he's a really good leftist politician and he absolutely deserves that seat.

[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Jeremy has managed to get far for someone so ahead of his time.

[-] r_deckard@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

This will please Rachel Riley no end. I expect her messages of support and congratulations any moment now.

Any moment........

load more comments

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024

264 points (99.3% liked)

World News

39021 readers

979 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.