Current figures for labour complaints of anti-semetism are a fraction of 1% what would you consider an achievable percentage ?
Did you read the part where I said the numbers don't matter?
You seem to be suggesting that with a large number of people like in Momentum then shit happens, deal with it.
Whereas some people actually believe it might be nice if Momentum grew some backbone and did something more significant about it before anyone needs to complain.
No my point is twofold; one a small percentage of a large number will be a high absolute number - and therefore processing will take time, and secondly that no human system will be perfect and most systems with a less than 1% fuck up rate would be considered to be operating with a high rate of success.
I am asking you what you would consider a realistic standard would be.
Systematic / instutional bias tends to imply a higher than normal rate of prejudice - I don’t think that has been evidenced for either Labour or Momentum.
Well y'know you can believe whatever you like. I think it is fairly clear that Momentum has "gone after" opponents and that this has included an easily seen element of anti-Semitism.
I'm not sure it really makes a whole lot of difference what the levels of comparable anti-Semitism in the Tory party, the Lib-dems or the National Trust are - because Jewish members of those groups don't tend to experience a trolling effort like Momentum.
Added to that, it seems like it has been a stated objective of Momentum to deselect - or generally force out - sitting MPs that are not supportive of their agenda. So it seems more-than-slightly ironic when some of the MPs that gave been in the crossfires of these efforts finally jump and are then described as being the problem.
Momentum forced them out - own it.
You say all this as if it's accepted fact. Momentum has done none of the things you claim.
Oh ok. So they don't go around in packs trolling anyone who disagrees with them. Got it.
But don’t still be MP as people voted for your party not you:
Nope, people voted for individual politicians. That is the system.
Everyone votes for an individual politician - and the party to which that individual belongs is normally the determining factor. This is the same argument that Orfeo uses when people say that they voted for Rudd (etc) to be PM - they don't, but they rely upon the candidate for whom they in fact voted to support Rudd in the post-election party room vote.
Yes, the theory is that people vote for an individual, but the reality is that they vote for a party and would vote for a horse if it was wearing the right coloured rosette. I suspect a significant number of people would struggle to even name their MP. Even fewer would be able to name their local councillors or MEPs
But don’t still be MP as people voted for your party not you:
Nope, people voted for individual politicians. That is the system.
Everyone votes for an individual politician - and the party to which that individual belongs is normally the determining factor. This is the same argument that Orfeo uses when people say that they voted for Rudd (etc) to be PM - they don't, but they rely upon the candidate for whom they in fact voted to support Rudd in the post-election party room vote.
Yes, the theory is that people vote for an individual, but the reality is that they vote for a party and would vote for a horse if it was wearing the right coloured rosette. I suspect a significant number of people would struggle to even name their MP. Even fewer would be able to name their local councillors or MEPs
Possibly - but what can you do? Ignorance about the system abounds.
That doesn't change the fact that that the Westminster is a representative system of individuals voting on their conscience.
Voters may well believe they can tell or threaten their MP to vote in a certain way - or that the vote of the national referendum reflection in their constituency somehow binds them to vote in a particular way.
It doesn't. All the party structures and things we think we know are secondary, later features superimposed on the long established reality of individual members voting on their concience.
It might be simpler if it was not like this and that, as with the Welsh Assembly, regional members are selected by party.
Some commentators are saying this to s a sign that the current parliament is broken and we need to press the big reset button. Would it be any better if we did? I am begging to think the Guy Fawkes has some merit.
Some commentators are saying this to s a sign that the current parliament is broken and we need to press the big reset button. Would it be any better if we did? I am begging to think the Guy Fawkes has some merit.
How, though? Parliament is itself essentially sovereign - so although the Queen kind-of holds power, that's constitutionally devolved to Westminster.
And with the HoC eating itself, there is little chance of any kind of dramatic reset.
Thank you, TheOrganist, for making plain was has been clear from the start - the primary objective of those shouting about anti-semitism is to get rid of Corbyn. Attacks on his clothing didn't work, attacks on electability didn't work but anti-semitism is the gift that keeps on giving. It's great because if you're accused you either admit it, so you're an anti-semite, or you deny it, in which case you're denying the problem and therefore institutionally anti-semitic. Meanwhile every false allegation makes Jews less safe from actual anti-semites.
WOW!
<some background> I am not anti Labour. Yes, I am anti-Corbyn and that is for many reasons, among which are that I have known him since he was my local councillor back in the 1970s and when he became an MP I was then in his constituency. We met fairly frequently, sometimes at Labour events where I was one of a crowd, sometimes at more intimate gatherings such as dinner parties. While I never regarded him as a personal friend he has continued to be part of the social circle of a family member so I have occasionally run into him from time-to time - and the same runs true for a couple of his advisers.
I regard Mr Corbyn as someone who is confused about anti-semitism and dangerously blinkered about the very real issue there is for members of the jewish community if they try to complain. I base that on conversations about the middle east and its politics, his knee-jerk support for anything anti-American, and his attitude towards people who have complained in his hearing about abuse for being jewish and he has just shrugged it off.
His clothing? I wouldn't choose to wear the same sort of clothing for formal events, but everyone has their own take on that sort of thing.
As for getting rid of Mr Corbyn - think again! So long as he is leader of the Labour Party he makes it unelectable as a party of government, and the longer his tenure the more that will become apparent to the people who actually bother to go out and vote. Long may he reign!
But this Government has caused all sorts of problems. Many people who I know are very community lead. They are volunteers at food banks, soup kitchens and work with Christians Against Poverty. There has been a steady rise in all of these. People are committing suicide and just simply die because they are not treated properly by Treezas lot. That is not to mention the NHS and the railways or the Brexit mess. Something needs to be done. You may not like JC and Labour themselves are not in the best place at the moment but things are bad and need dealing with.
But this Government has caused all sorts of problems. Many people who I know are very community lead. They are volunteers at food banks, soup kitchens and work with Christians Against Poverty. There has been a steady rise in all of these. People are committing suicide and just simply die because they are not treated properly by Treezas lot. That is not to mention the NHS and the railways or the Brexit mess. Something needs to be done. You may not like JC and Labour themselves are not in the best place at the moment but things are bad and need dealing with.
Soup kitchens, Food banks and Christians Against Poverty provide little than sticking plasters against the evils of Austerity exemplified by PIPs, Universal Credit and the continued demonisation of the poor and unemployed, the sick and disabled and asylum seekers & refugees. The government has identified the "out groups" that ordinary people can blame for all that is wrong, which distracts most from those who are really responsible for the shit we are in.
No Mr Cheesey Christians Against Poverty is a great organisation. Have you actually gone into detail of what they do, how they work, why they were founded. If you are going to knock them then provide evidence please.
But this Government has caused all sorts of problems. Many people who I know are very community lead. They are volunteers at food banks, soup kitchens and work with Christians Against Poverty. There has been a steady rise in all of these. People are committing suicide and just simply die because they are not treated properly by Treezas lot. That is not to mention the NHS and the railways or the Brexit mess. Something needs to be done. You may not like JC and Labour themselves are not in the best place at the moment but things are bad and need dealing with.
Soup kitchens, Food banks and Christians Against Poverty provide little than sticking plasters against the evils of Austerity exemplified by PIPs, Universal Credit and the continued demonisation of the poor and unemployed, the sick and disabled and asylum seekers & refugees. The government has identified the "out groups" that ordinary people can blame for all that is wrong, which distracts most from those who are really responsible for the shit we are in.
No Mr Cheesey Christians Against Poverty is a great organisation. Have you actually gone into detail of what they do, how they work, why they were founded. If you are going to knock them then provide evidence please.
I have gone into a lot of detail about the way they operate and the materials they put out.
If you like it, that's fine. I think it's disgusting.
I run money courses at my church for them (for full disclosure) they are respected within the debt help community. If you think they are disgusting that is up to you. I have not seen your comments on them so I cannot comment on that. I have however seen lives turned around by getting out of debt, hope given to people that they are not stuck in a bad situation forever and people treated as human beings not just numbers.
CAP openly state that they believe debt help and evangelism are intertwined.
Possibly things have changed, but when I examined their materials a few years ago with a view to introducing the course, this was very much reflected in their materials. Including some very dubious Bible studies.
But this Government has caused all sorts of problems. Many people who I know are very community lead. They are volunteers at food banks, soup kitchens and work with Christians Against Poverty. There has been a steady rise in all of these. People are committing suicide and just simply die because they are not treated properly by Treezas lot. That is not to mention the NHS and the railways or the Brexit mess. Something needs to be done. You may not like JC and Labour themselves are not in the best place at the moment but things are bad and need dealing with.
Exactly. Which is why it's so bloody frustrating that we're stuck with Corbyn, Momentum and his far-left mates (Derek Hatton readmitted to Labour yesterday, huzzah!), and level-pegging at best, lagging behind even, with this shitshow of a government.
CAP openly state that they believe debt help and evangelism are intertwined.
Possibly things have changed, but when I examined their materials a few years ago with a view to introducing the course, this was very much reflected in their materials. Including some very dubious Bible studies.
They are an Evangelical organisation. Evangelicalism is part of who they are. They do not insist that you are or have to become an evangelical or even a Christian. I have come across Muslims doing the course. They are up front about who they are. If they were not that would be worse. As I said they help anyone but to act as though they are not Evangelical when they are is dishonest and would open them up to real criticism.
CAP openly state that they believe debt help and evangelism are intertwined.
Possibly things have changed, but when I examined their materials a few years ago with a view to introducing the course, this was very much reflected in their materials. Including some very dubious Bible studies.
They are an Evangelical organisation. Evangelicalism is part of who they are. They do not insist that you are or have to become an evangelical or even a Christian. I have come across Muslims doing the course. They are up front about who they are. If they were not that would be worse. As I said they help anyone but to act as though they are not Evangelical when they are is dishonest and would open them up to real criticism.
There are plenty of debt materials which do not insist that participants use materials using religious language.
That "they are evangelicals" does not seem to cover the reality of the way the thing is done. They might not force anyone to do anything (and I sincerely hope they do not) but even asking Muslims to use those terms seems disgraceful.
And the tragedy is that do many believe that this is the only possible way, and the only available Christian materials, to run a course.
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
Right at the moment that part of the Conservative Party is dictating policy, through being the squeaky wheel (that gets the oil). Nothing new there: cheap populism when times are hard has been popular at least since Rome knocked the shit out of Carthage.
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
Yes, that's why I just quoted the very last bit of your post!! Normally, of course, I avoid political topics! I'm too old to worry about their effect on me personally, I'm afraid.
But this Government has caused all sorts of problems. Many people who I know are very community lead. They are volunteers at food banks, soup kitchens and work with Christians Against Poverty. There has been a steady rise in all of these. People are committing suicide and just simply die because they are not treated properly by Treezas lot. That is not to mention the NHS and the railways or the Brexit mess. Something needs to be done. You may not like JC and Labour themselves are not in the best place at the moment but things are bad and need dealing with.
Exactly. Which is why it's so bloody frustrating that we're stuck with Corbyn, Momentum and his far-left mates (Derek Hatton readmitted to Labour yesterday, huzzah!), and level-pegging at best, lagging behind even, with this shitshow of a government.
What would you rather? The halcyon days of New Labour, with Tony Thatcher 2.0 Blair? Enter the Red Tories ...
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
You do bang on about what you're "not" a fair bit, don't you? You're not a royal apologist, while sticking up for Prince Pip (who apparently can be as much of a gormless bigot as he likes); you're not anti-Labour, just opposed to one of the few true left leaders of a major political party in the Anglophone world; you're not Tory despite all that. What are you?
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
You do bang on about what you're "not" a fair bit, don't you? You're not a royal apologist, while sticking up for Prince Pip (who apparently can be as much of a gormless bigot as he likes); you're not anti-Labour, just opposed to one of the few true left leaders of a major political party in the Anglophone world; you're not Tory despite all that. What are you?
Moreover, not anti-Labour but glad that Corbyn is leader so they can't (in TheOrganist's view) get in. That sounds anti-Labour to me. If the Tories were the opposition I'd be glad if they had an unelectable leader (and by the gods they've got some potential ones - Boris, Reese-Mogg) because it would hopefully keep them out of power. Because I'm openly anti-Tory.
What I'd like is a competent centre-left government, thanks. But sure, just keep calling Labour people Tories, just don't be surprised if some of them start voting that way.
If the Tories were the opposition I'd be glad if they had an unelectable leader (and by the gods they've got some potential ones - Boris, Reese-Mogg) because it would hopefully keep them out of power. Because I'm openly anti-Tory.
Most of thought Trump unelectable. With that precedent Boris, Rees-Mogg or any number of others could beat Labour under almost any leader, let alone Corbyn.
My red line is austerity. If the party hasn't got the balls to implement Keynsian economic policies, it's not a Labour party. It's a pink tory party. That's what these alternative idiots are going to be.
I wonder what conversations they had with Ms May, given their alleged opposition to Brexit.
Mind you, I would enter nearly as large a raspberry to be fired at Seamus Milne, Len McClusky and any other adviser who has been supporting Corbyn in not opening his eyes to the enforced austerity which will (given the current direction of travel) accompany Brexit. It's ridiculous to say you oppose austerity but support Brexit because, like it or not, the latter will reinforce the former. Dig for victory and all that shit - plus oh look, no more business rates or corporation tax.
Definitely not an alternative Labour party, presumably they prefer the Tories. Be interesting to watch their voting patterns. Memories of SDP come flooding back, hello Polly Toynbee, well they kept the Tories in for a decade, which is a neat trick.
Definitely not an alternative Labour party, presumably they prefer the Tories. Be interesting to watch their voting patterns. Memories of SDP come flooding back, hello Polly Toynbee, well they kept the Tories in for a decade, which is a neat trick.
I can't believe that there are still people who parrot this shit. As if everyone who abhors Toryism must support Labour. And if they don't, then they are fucking scabs.
Some commentators are saying this to s a sign that the current parliament is broken and we need to press the big reset button. Would it be any better if we did? I am begging to think the Guy Fawkes has some merit.
I have been thinking of starting a Guy Fawkes Movement - the aim of which is that in each constituency you vote for the candidate most likely to unseat the current MP, in the hope of thereby getting rid of the lot of them.
I think it's pretty obvious, in a FPTP election, that if you split the votes of the left, while leaving the Tories intact, that we're far more likely than we'd otherwise be to get a Tory government.
The SDP formed in 1981, two years into the Thatcher government. The 1983 General Election saw the Tories get 42.4%, and their major opponents 53% - the Tories won 397 seats. In the 1987 election, the Tories got 42.2%, their major opponents 53.4%. The Tories won again with 376 seats.
So the winged serpent appears to be exactly right.
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
You do bang on about what you're "not" a fair bit, don't you? You're not a royal apologist, while sticking up for Prince Pip (who apparently can be as much of a gormless bigot as he likes); you're not anti-Labour, just opposed to one of the few true left leaders of a major political party in the Anglophone world; you're not Tory despite all that. What are you?
Someone who would dearly love to have a party that bothered about domestic politics as they affect everyone, not just vested interests that bankroll them - and that holds good for both of the biggest parties. So, what am I? Maybe a Gaitskellite would be the best answer. I believe in a mixed economy - for example, I'd support the renationalisation of rail for the simple reason that it makes sense.
So that would be the current labour manifesto then
Or maybe it is that one could conceivably be a socialist without supporting Corbyn. That there could be more than one way to be a socialist in British politics.
So that would be the current labour manifesto then
Or maybe it is that one could conceivably be a socialist without supporting Corbyn. That there could be more than one way to be a socialist in British politics.
The definition of Socialism seem to be up for grabs here. A lot of what JC suggests is classic Socialism. What the split is objecting to is not Socialism. They say they are objecting to a lack of discipline over Antisemitism and not agreeing with them over Brexit and making his stance the party stance.
The latter is a matter of policy the former needs to be sorted quickly.
So that would be the current labour manifesto then
Or maybe it is that one could conceivably be a socialist without supporting Corbyn. That there could be more than one way to be a socialist in British politics.
Like in almost every other European country.
For example? Let's hear about these left wing politicians on the continent ... I'm fascinated.
The definition of Socialism seem to be up for grabs here. A lot of what JC suggests is classic Socialism. What the split is objecting to is not Socialism. They say they are objecting to a lack of discipline over Antisemitism and not agreeing with them over Brexit and making his stance the party stance.
The latter is a matter of policy the former needs to be sorted quickly.
Well that's true. The point is that the version pushed by Momentum is not the only one available.
So that would be the current labour manifesto then
Or maybe it is that one could conceivably be a socialist without supporting Corbyn. That there could be more than one way to be a socialist in British politics.
Like in almost every other European country.
For example? Let's hear about these left wing politicians on the continent ... I'm fascinated.
Why don't you educate yourself? Pick a European country and read up on the socialist parties - most have more than one.
Comments
In other words you're full of shit.
More a liquorice man myself but thanks for the suggestion.
Yes, the theory is that people vote for an individual, but the reality is that they vote for a party and would vote for a horse if it was wearing the right coloured rosette. I suspect a significant number of people would struggle to even name their MP. Even fewer would be able to name their local councillors or MEPs
Possibly - but what can you do? Ignorance about the system abounds.
That doesn't change the fact that that the Westminster is a representative system of individuals voting on their conscience.
Voters may well believe they can tell or threaten their MP to vote in a certain way - or that the vote of the national referendum reflection in their constituency somehow binds them to vote in a particular way.
It doesn't. All the party structures and things we think we know are secondary, later features superimposed on the long established reality of individual members voting on their concience.
It might be simpler if it was not like this and that, as with the Welsh Assembly, regional members are selected by party.
But it isn't.
How, though? Parliament is itself essentially sovereign - so although the Queen kind-of holds power, that's constitutionally devolved to Westminster.
And with the HoC eating itself, there is little chance of any kind of dramatic reset.
<some background> I am not anti Labour. Yes, I am anti-Corbyn and that is for many reasons, among which are that I have known him since he was my local councillor back in the 1970s and when he became an MP I was then in his constituency. We met fairly frequently, sometimes at Labour events where I was one of a crowd, sometimes at more intimate gatherings such as dinner parties. While I never regarded him as a personal friend he has continued to be part of the social circle of a family member so I have occasionally run into him from time-to time - and the same runs true for a couple of his advisers.
I regard Mr Corbyn as someone who is confused about anti-semitism and dangerously blinkered about the very real issue there is for members of the jewish community if they try to complain. I base that on conversations about the middle east and its politics, his knee-jerk support for anything anti-American, and his attitude towards people who have complained in his hearing about abuse for being jewish and he has just shrugged it off.
His clothing? I wouldn't choose to wear the same sort of clothing for formal events, but everyone has their own take on that sort of thing.
As for getting rid of Mr Corbyn - think again! So long as he is leader of the Labour Party he makes it unelectable as a party of government, and the longer his tenure the more that will become apparent to the people who actually bother to go out and vote. Long may he reign!
Soup kitchens, Food banks and Christians Against Poverty provide little than sticking plasters against the evils of Austerity exemplified by PIPs, Universal Credit and the continued demonisation of the poor and unemployed, the sick and disabled and asylum seekers & refugees. The government has identified the "out groups" that ordinary people can blame for all that is wrong, which distracts most from those who are really responsible for the shit we are in.
Yes I agree. Austerity has been awful.
All political parties, being made up of humans, have many faults, but give me the present conservative Party against the Corbyn lot any day!!
I have gone into a lot of detail about the way they operate and the materials they put out.
If you like it, that's fine. I think it's disgusting.
Possibly things have changed, but when I examined their materials a few years ago with a view to introducing the course, this was very much reflected in their materials. Including some very dubious Bible studies.
Exactly. Which is why it's so bloody frustrating that we're stuck with Corbyn, Momentum and his far-left mates (Derek Hatton readmitted to Labour yesterday, huzzah!), and level-pegging at best, lagging behind even, with this shitshow of a government.
They are an Evangelical organisation. Evangelicalism is part of who they are. They do not insist that you are or have to become an evangelical or even a Christian. I have come across Muslims doing the course. They are up front about who they are. If they were not that would be worse. As I said they help anyone but to act as though they are not Evangelical when they are is dishonest and would open them up to real criticism.
There are plenty of debt materials which do not insist that participants use materials using religious language.
That "they are evangelicals" does not seem to cover the reality of the way the thing is done. They might not force anyone to do anything (and I sincerely hope they do not) but even asking Muslims to use those terms seems disgraceful.
And the tragedy is that do many believe that this is the only possible way, and the only available Christian materials, to run a course.
When that's far from the case.
I didn't say I was a supporter of Mrs May or her party. Decent woman maybe but dreadful PM. And the self-indulgent right wing of the Conservative Party are, by-and-large, an absolute shower.
Right at the moment that part of the Conservative Party is dictating policy, through being the squeaky wheel (that gets the oil). Nothing new there: cheap populism when times are hard has been popular at least since Rome knocked the shit out of Carthage.
What would you rather? The halcyon days of New Labour, with Tony Thatcher 2.0 Blair? Enter the Red Tories ...
You do bang on about what you're "not" a fair bit, don't you? You're not a royal apologist, while sticking up for Prince Pip (who apparently can be as much of a gormless bigot as he likes); you're not anti-Labour, just opposed to one of the few true left leaders of a major political party in the Anglophone world; you're not Tory despite all that. What are you?
Moreover, not anti-Labour but glad that Corbyn is leader so they can't (in TheOrganist's view) get in. That sounds anti-Labour to me. If the Tories were the opposition I'd be glad if they had an unelectable leader (and by the gods they've got some potential ones - Boris, Reese-Mogg) because it would hopefully keep them out of power. Because I'm openly anti-Tory.
Most of thought Trump unelectable. With that precedent Boris, Rees-Mogg or any number of others could beat Labour under almost any leader, let alone Corbyn.
I wonder what conversations they had with Ms May, given their alleged opposition to Brexit.
Mind you, I would enter nearly as large a raspberry to be fired at Seamus Milne, Len McClusky and any other adviser who has been supporting Corbyn in not opening his eyes to the enforced austerity which will (given the current direction of travel) accompany Brexit. It's ridiculous to say you oppose austerity but support Brexit because, like it or not, the latter will reinforce the former. Dig for victory and all that shit - plus oh look, no more business rates or corporation tax.
I can't believe that there are still people who parrot this shit. As if everyone who abhors Toryism must support Labour. And if they don't, then they are fucking scabs.
For goodness sakes grow up.
What's a straw man? You implied the SDP caused Thatcherism.
I have been thinking of starting a Guy Fawkes Movement - the aim of which is that in each constituency you vote for the candidate most likely to unseat the current MP, in the hope of thereby getting rid of the lot of them.
The SDP formed in 1981, two years into the Thatcher government. The 1983 General Election saw the Tories get 42.4%, and their major opponents 53% - the Tories won 397 seats. In the 1987 election, the Tories got 42.2%, their major opponents 53.4%. The Tories won again with 376 seats.
So the winged serpent appears to be exactly right.
Someone who would dearly love to have a party that bothered about domestic politics as they affect everyone, not just vested interests that bankroll them - and that holds good for both of the biggest parties. So, what am I? Maybe a Gaitskellite would be the best answer. I believe in a mixed economy - for example, I'd support the renationalisation of rail for the simple reason that it makes sense.
Why would the Organist let the facts get in the way of a good story?
Or maybe it is that one could conceivably be a socialist without supporting Corbyn. That there could be more than one way to be a socialist in British politics.
Like in almost every other European country.
Exactly.
The latter is a matter of policy the former needs to be sorted quickly.
For example? Let's hear about these left wing politicians on the continent ... I'm fascinated.
Well that's true. The point is that the version pushed by Momentum is not the only one available.
Why don't you educate yourself? Pick a European country and read up on the socialist parties - most have more than one.
How hard can that be?
This is entirely theoretical. Whilst the practical reality is that our current government is terrible and failing in so many ways.*
I just don't understand that reasoning at all.
Corbyn was not my choice of Labour leader but there's nothing in the platform (apart from current Brexit policy) that I disagree with.
AFZ