Post Reply Jeremy Corbyn is elected leader of the Labour Party
15259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 9/12/15 , edited 9/12/15
Recently, the second largest political party in the UK, the Labour Party has been undergoing a leadership election, the winner of which could become Prime Minster of the UK in 2020. Jeremy Corbyn the most left-wing candidate (for a very rough translation for any Americans think Bernie Sanders) has won with 59% of the vote. Corbyn's policies include: renationalisation of the railways and energy companies, opposes privatisation of the National Health Service, scrapping Britain's nuclear deterrent, wants Britain to leave NATO, if elected Prime Minster he would apologise for the Iraq War. However, it has been argued that Corbyn would be unelectable in a general election and if elected leader he could split the Labour Party leaving it out of power for a generation.

A more comedic view of the election
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBDoaCu6INo

A few articles on Jermany Corbyn

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-jeremy-corbyn-policies-that-most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/jeremy-corbyn-is-he-really-unelectable-as-prime-minister

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/what-does-jeremy-corbyn-think

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34184265


What are your thoughts?


6014 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 9/12/15
While I personally like Jeremy Corbyn and agree with a lot of his ideas, I don't agree with leaving NATO or scrapping our nuclear deterrent. It's my opinion that even if he wanted to do those two things he wouldn't be able to (read that as: not allowed to). NATO, for all its faults, is essential in securing peace and effective armed response across the EU by providing an already integrated combined military force in the event of hostile action. I mean think about it, if East Europe got invaded, would West Europe refuse to get involved? No, we'd join asap because if they take the East then what's stopping them from pressing the advantage and the sudden availability of East European resources/manpower.

Nuclear weapons I think everyone should get rid of, HOWEVER, if we all did we all know there'd be a few choice countries that would secretly stockpile them so I think as long its known roughly what everyone has individually, it enables proportionate countermeasures rather than the old Cold War mad-dash for as many as possible secretly.

With regards to privatisation of NHS, I could talk a lot about how I oppose it and how everyone is actually willing to have higher taxes to fund it so yeahhhh.
Iraq is highly debateable but I agree there needs to be some form of apology because even if we didn't get in, it would be another dictatorship like Syria........why do you think we're hesitating about getting involved? Damned if you, doomed if you don't.

Renationalisation of the utilities I wholly agree with, I mean, why privatise the essentials people need to live with? I think what needs to be done though is go about it differently as nationalisation can lead to the workforce cutting corners, etc so there needs to be an incentive to work well (competition with the private sector in some form?).


Regardless of my own personal views, I think honestly he allows for a much broader debate in UK politics, a breath of fresh air tbh. He'll change British politics and hopefully force his opponents to change so that they prioritise the betterment of the whole British public
6250 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 9/12/15
Really for Labour this is pretty much looking backwards from the Tony Blair era. Granted he appears to be more of a leader than Milliband and he appears to me to be decisive and firm about his intentions which for Labour gives a strong leader that they have been lacking since Blair. Corbyn is more of a traditional character, Blair was a bit of celebrity in some ways.

I do not agree with some of his intentions, particularly where spending/austerity lies. If by 2020 the country has the money to spend then fine, carry on but it is pointless to have gone through the last few years to simply spend and build up debt again. All that will happen is Labour gets us into trouble, then Conservatives are elected in to sort out the problems and fight fires. Which is pretty much how history has worked.

Nationalisation of services and utilities sounds good to me. The infrastructure of a country should be owned and ran by the government but as the above says something will have to be worked out to keep costs from becoming bloated. Working for the Civil Service you can see how government money is spent on er...less than essential items. Is this possible though seeing as so money companies are invested in public services now? But as a traditional Labour man he will rely on the Civil Service so that puts me in a strong position career wise.

I don't think leaving NATO is a good idea, I'm all for scaling back our military presence so working with NATO would probably be a way to help do this. We are a small island at the end of the day which has less as less importance on the world stage as time goes on. As for trident I agree, get rid of it, the cost far out weighs the benefit. 95/96% of all nuclear war heads are owned by Russia and America, the other 4% is spread across the remaining nuclear nations. What can we realistically achieve with our comparatively minuscule stockpile? We should set an example like South Africa did and disarm. We signed up to the non proliferation treaty so if we believe in it we should have no problem in leaving.

I think you might be right with Labour being unelectable, during an election most parties aim towards the middle. The changes he is proposing are many and significant, too much stomach all at once. I don't know who I would vote for, have to see when the time comes!
15259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 9/12/15

flyinggibbon wrote:

I think you might be right with Labour being unelectable, during an election most parties aim towards the middle. The changes he is proposing are many and significant, too much stomach all at once. I don't know who I would vote for, have to see when the time comes!


Actually I'm of the mind that Corbyn was the best choice for Labour leadership out of the four candidates. Offering a genuine alternative rather than an uninspired "Tory lite" manifesto would give Labour the best chance of victory in 2020. For example, In 1945 Labour argued for social security, a national health service, the nationalisation of major industries and won a landslide victory despite wanting to enact huge amounts of change and running against Churchill who was very popular.
6250 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 9/12/15

Voc666IV wrote:


flyinggibbon wrote:

I think you might be right with Labour being unelectable, during an election most parties aim towards the middle. The changes he is proposing are many and significant, too much stomach all at once. I don't know who I would vote for, have to see when the time comes!


Actually I'm of the mind that Corbyn was the best choice for Labour leadership out of the four candidates. Offering a genuine alternative rather than an uninspired "Tory lite" manifesto would give Labour the best chance of victory in 2020. For example, In 1945 Labour argued for social security, a national health service, the nationalisation of major industries and won a landslide victory despite wanting to enact huge amounts of change and running against Churchill who was very popular.


True, you might be right there. At least he is offering a complete alternative and is willing to put himself out there and make major changes. There have been no significant changes since Thatcher, just a bit of tweaking here or a shuffling of money. Really there hasn't been much difference and therefore choice between the main parties over the past years, Labour and Conservative have really been more centre than anything.

The changes he is offering are significant and in 2020 maybe we will be ready for this. It looks like politics in this country is about to become more interesting again either way!
1309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 9/12/15

nuclearcupcake wrote:

While I personally like Jeremy Corbyn and agree with a lot of his ideas, I don't agree with leaving NATO or scrapping our nuclear deterrent. It's my opinion that even if he wanted to do those two things he wouldn't be able to (read that as: not allowed to). NATO, for all its faults, is essential in securing peace and effective armed response across the EU by providing an already integrated combined military force in the event of hostile action. I mean think about it, if East Europe got invaded, would West Europe refuse to get involved? No, we'd join asap because if they take the East then what's stopping them from pressing the advantage and the sudden availability of East European resources/manpower.


Completely 100% agree with this (and thinking about it, the rest of your post).

I'm worried about the future of the Labour party myself - from what I understood, a sizable portion of the vote for Jeremy Corbyn was from the so-called '£3 supporters' who just became members of the Labour party to vote for him...as such I doubt they'll be sticking around for long. Add the fact that Tony Blair & his still-MP cronies want Corbyn's head on a stick and you've got a disaster in the making

One things for sure: Prime Minister's Questions are gonna be super interesting this time round
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 9/12/15 , edited 9/12/15

nuclearcupcake wrote:

While I personally like Jeremy Corbyn and agree with a lot of his ideas, I don't agree with leaving NATO or scrapping our nuclear deterrent. It's my opinion that even if he wanted to do those two things he wouldn't be able to (read that as: not allowed to). NATO, for all its faults, is essential in securing peace and effective armed response across the EU by providing an already integrated combined military force in the event of hostile action. I mean think about it, if East Europe got invaded, would West Europe refuse to get involved? No, we'd join asap because if they take the East then what's stopping them from pressing the advantage and the sudden availability of East European resources/manpower.

Nuclear weapons I think everyone should get rid of, HOWEVER, if we all did we all know there'd be a few choice countries that would secretly stockpile them so I think as long its known roughly what everyone has individually, it enables proportionate countermeasures rather than the old Cold War mad-dash for as many as possible secretly.

With regards to privatisation of NHS, I could talk a lot about how I oppose it and how everyone is actually willing to have higher taxes to fund it so yeahhhh.
Iraq is highly debateable but I agree there needs to be some form of apology because even if we didn't get in, it would be another dictatorship like Syria........why do you think we're hesitating about getting involved? Damned if you, doomed if you don't.

Renationalisation of the utilities I wholly agree with, I mean, why privatise the essentials people need to live with? I think what needs to be done though is go about it differently as nationalisation can lead to the workforce cutting corners, etc so there needs to be an incentive to work well (competition with the private sector in some form?).


Regardless of my own personal views, I think honestly he allows for a much broader debate in UK politics, a breath of fresh air tbh. He'll change British politics and hopefully force his opponents to change so that they prioritise the betterment of the whole British public


Pretty good post, all told. Nicely done. I'm just a bit hesitant to hop on board with avoiding full nationalisation of railways and utilities, that's all. Full disclosure, though: that should be taken as an outsider's perspective.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Offline
Posted 9/12/15

BlueOni wrote:


nuclearcupcake wrote:

While I personally like Jeremy Corbyn and agree with a lot of his ideas, I don't agree with leaving NATO or scrapping our nuclear deterrent. It's my opinion that even if he wanted to do those two things he wouldn't be able to (read that as: not allowed to). NATO, for all its faults, is essential in securing peace and effective armed response across the EU by providing an already integrated combined military force in the event of hostile action. I mean think about it, if East Europe got invaded, would West Europe refuse to get involved? No, we'd join asap because if they take the East then what's stopping them from pressing the advantage and the sudden availability of East European resources/manpower.

Nuclear weapons I think everyone should get rid of, HOWEVER, if we all did we all know there'd be a few choice countries that would secretly stockpile them so I think as long its known roughly what everyone has individually, it enables proportionate countermeasures rather than the old Cold War mad-dash for as many as possible secretly.

With regards to privatisation of NHS, I could talk a lot about how I oppose it and how everyone is actually willing to have higher taxes to fund it so yeahhhh.
Iraq is highly debateable but I agree there needs to be some form of apology because even if we didn't get in, it would be another dictatorship like Syria........why do you think we're hesitating about getting involved? Damned if you, doomed if you don't.

Renationalisation of the utilities I wholly agree with, I mean, why privatise the essentials people need to live with? I think what needs to be done though is go about it differently as nationalisation can lead to the workforce cutting corners, etc so there needs to be an incentive to work well (competition with the private sector in some form?).


Regardless of my own personal views, I think honestly he allows for a much broader debate in UK politics, a breath of fresh air tbh. He'll change British politics and hopefully force his opponents to change so that they prioritise the betterment of the whole British public


Pretty good post, all told. Nicely done. I'm just a bit hesitant to hop on board with avoiding full nationalisation of railways and utilities, that's all. Full disclosure, though: that should be taken as an outsider's perspective.


Having a publicly own railroad and utilities isn't so bad the trains run on time we get power, water cheap and we don't have to put up with comcast support. The last one is worth it's weight in gold. Yes the American city I live in owns a railroad and all the utilities.

By they way congrats Labor give them hell.
15259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 9/13/15
Interesting posts all-round
You must be logged in to post.