Subvert Central

Full Version: So Jeremy Corbyn is the new boogie-man?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
First time Im going to consciously vote - gonna register online and vote for Corbyn Icon_razz
It’s the British establishment that has a problem with democracy
The Corbyn earthquake – how Labour was shaken to its foundations
Lol I've been reading more comment and analysis on the Guardian website than I can describe, those articles as well

Looking forward to the conference then we can all get good indicator what hes made of
my local MP Grumble

he voted for Liz Kendall lol.
very relevant to all the Trident and nuclear button nonsense...

It's not just that mainstream media dislike Corbyn. They have institutionally become partisans of the Right...
On Corbyn and our collapsing orthodoxies...
Lol i've spotted someone on CIF with a Velma avatar... is that you on there??
(24th October 2015, 14:59)Ornette Wrote: [ -> ]Lol i've spotted someone on CIF with a Velma avatar... is that you on there??

very likely Smile

jenalex is my moniker on CiF
Jeremy Corbyn 'Systematically' Attacked By British Press The Moment He Became Leader, Research Claims

well. obviously – and if anything they're underplaying it
understatement of the year.
More worthless garbage from Andrew Rawnsley...

But here's a comment worth reading...

Michael Rosen Wrote:2 fallacies in this article::
1. 'Lacerating' people in the House of Commons is some kind of game-changer. Even if McDonnell had said all that Rawnsley is saying now that he could or should have said, most of the press would have roasted him for talking pie-in-the-sky, jam tomorrow, debt denial economics. The idea that Corbyn and his entourage would get a free ride from any paper or news outlet is a joke. To then blame Corbyn et al for not doing so, is merely another stick to beat them with.
2. Again, the idea that there could be a 'strong' way of opposing the bombing of Syria which would be approved of by the press, is laughable. Weak or strong, (as perceived by Rawnsley) it would all be seen as some kind of fatal error.

In fact hiding behind this article is the usual Westminster-worshipping view of politics, propped up by a supine press, who swill about in the lobbies and TV studios. I'll never forget the time I was a trainee at the BBC - around 1970 and we trainees were invited in to observe Robin Day interviewing Iain Macleod, the one-time Tory minister who had been tipped as a potential PM. We watched Day ask him various questions which he batted away very neatly even though Day at the time had the reputation of being some kind of eviscerating (to borrow a Rawnsley term) interviewer. Then the recording ended. But the mic was still up and you could see Day put his arm round Macleod and ask him how he felt about the leadership of the Tory Party and did he think his time had passed. It was a wonderful chummy moment between two people who needed each other (if they had both lived that long) for at least the next ten years. From memory - you can pull me up on this one - Macleod had a none too honourable line on southern Africa. Any idea that the interests of peace, justice and democracy was being upheld at this moment would be rubbish.

So, back with the Labour Party. Yes, it is in part how Rawnsley describes it, but that's not because of a crisis IN Westminster. It's the crisis WITH Westminster and with the press. Part of that crisis is the fact that Blair - a perfect creature of the system - whose entourage successfully kept people like Rawnsley on board, took this country into a war that is still causing havoc across the world. The converse of what Livingstone said is not true either and to use his words extracted from context as a stick to beat the Labour leadership is a convenient way to obscure the fact that western policies (of which we are an intrinsic part) have had SOME effect on the rise of fanatic groups who have figured out how to do terrible things in many different places. So the nice, clever, smooth Westminster people that the Blair machine ran, end up implicated in a massive disaster. No slew of condemnation for them this morning. Instead, it's yet another column on the Corbyn 'disaster'.

I think there is another disaster going on here of much more significance than anything that Corbyn could do: it's a press and TV machine that is itself in massive danger of going down under a hail of alternative means of communication is lying down on the Westminster mat and saying we're more comfortable here than out there. It's the same press machine that spent hours and hours of time talking about Corbyn's jumper.

Back in politics, it looks, according to some polls, that Corbyn's anti-bombing stance expresses at least 50% of this country's views on the matter. That of course isn't a story. Why would it be? Because it is the view of 50% of us. Not Westminster.
Corbyn - what's a leader really for?

so Labour have a big win the Oldham byelection and...

the Guardian mostly opine that Labour won in spite of Corbyn and that really he's very unpopular

the BBC do that as well, but spend most election "analysis" on Nigel Farage's claims of "electoral fraud"

I'm not bothering to look at what the real Tory media say about it

politics in this country is a farce.
Also the suggestion that this is the "first real test of Corbyn's leadership" is laughable. He's been on trial with an assumption of incompetence by the UK media since minute one of his leadership.
quite so
Jeremy Corbyn now abandoned by everyone apart from ‘voters’

100 days of Jeremy Corbyn: At last, a real alternative

Stewart Lee's Comedy Vehicle:

Well I've come across this very interesting post on the internet. It seems Corbyn has actually posted a reply to a satirical blog outlining some policy

Can't remember how I stumbled on it (well, yes it was probably from reading one of the numerous comments on CIF). Its hard to tell whats really going on here but the replies seem too substantive to be fake. There's also a couple more on there (see here)
"Regrettably I do not have a lot of time in my schedule to reply to flippant comments on an insignificant political blog."

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11