That Corbyn fella...

Don't think he's upset, he's just pointing out that Corbyn's position as fair and reasonable will make his foreign policy hard in a world where our biggest allies are resolutely pro-israel. Which is a shame, as a lot of us will probably agree.

you just want a pro-Israel position at the expense of fair and reasonable.

Was that the sound of a can 'o worms being opened...?

No, sorry I farted.

Any position in the Israel-Palestine situation that offers security for one community comes with constraints and restrictions on the other.

Yes. It is impossible not to offend someone on this issue, whatever you say, as Corbyn has just discovered.

You correctly point out that he does not voice any bias, but then are complaining that what you want is for him to voice a position that is favourable to one party and is in fact a position of bias.

You're basically upset because he's being fair and reasonable... presumably because you do not wish fair and reasonable behaviour to be any part of this, you just want a pro-Israel position at the expense of fair and reasonable.

And I seem to have offended your pro-palestine bias, despite saying I am NOT making a pro Israel point. The labour Party has built up support among the Jewish community, and there is quite an established Jewish presence in the party. Corbyn's position on the conflict is clearly different from what has gone before, how bad the fallout from this shift is will rest on how good a diplomat he is.

There are many groups of the Labour party who feel alienated by Corbyn. He talks alot about discussion, and all opinions being valid etc, which sounds good but we need to see it in action. I'm not upset, but I would be if the Labour party split over a combination of issues such as this.

And I seem to have offended your pro-palestine bias

I don't have a pro anything bias in that geographical area. Possibly there is an anti-everything bias based on my non-religious position, but what I can say is that I do have an extremely strong bias towards good reasoning and that what your argument represented was a failure of that.

I'm not pro/anti Corbyn either, but I do respect the fact that he really does seem to not be dictating anything to the Labour party and whilst that means the debates are fierce those core principles being played out like that are really good to see. That is in fact the kind of politics I do want to exist, even though I'm not actively engaged in politics of any kind.

It take it back then. Neither of us have a bias one way or the other over Israel / Palestine, good. I'm also glad you don't share my fears that the kinds of conflicts arising in the Labour party may lead to it's break up, I aspire to your optimism.

glad

That's good.

Group hug?

Was that the sound of a can 'o worms being opened...?

No, a big 'ol can of mutual respect and goodwill.

I agree, I think where Jeremy is (still) sweeping all before him is in political style. The jury's still out as to whether that will resonate more widely, given hostile media etc. but I've found it refreshing right from the start of his campaign (no particularly strong party-political affiliation here, either).

Group hug?

It's only an Internet forum, we delegate all hugging responsibilities to ChainBreaker.

He's trying to turn the party from Tory-lite into something approaching proper Labour for the modern age. Whether that works, who knows. A lot of current labour voters are gonna be essentially tories who don't want to vote tory - that's presumably what the Blair years did for their support.

A lot of current labour voters are gonna be essentially tories who don't want to vote tory

In other words, if you're not hard left, you're tory scum. It is exactly this divisive attitude to the voters that will put labour out of power for a decade. Most people dont see themselves as left or right.

Calling lifelong labour members, voters and activists "tory lite" will spilt the party and weaken election prospects.

In other words, if you're not hard left, you're tory scum.

These are your words. No one said that. Not even anything close to that. Jesus.

bashthebox's point was a lot of New Labour voters share more in common on policy with the Tory party. How does that get construed into one group calling another group scum?

The tabloids and Toryrazzi are frothing at the mouth about Corbyn "snubbing" the Privy Council by not attending the first possible meeting and being "stripped" of the title Right Honourable. It's all being wonderfully blown out of proportion.

I think one of the things I like most of all about Corbyn is how worked up the Conservative media get over his apparent no fucks to give about this mostly irrelevant crap. Of course I think he should be attending the Privy Council meetings simply on the grounds that he shouldn't be excluding himself from conversations that are relevant to his position. The pomp and circumstance relevant to those meetings is entirely irrelevant.

I don't know if Corbyn will make it to the next election. If he doesn't then I hope that he will have a legacy of diminishing the importance that is placed on ceremony and certain appearance in politics and moving us towards a more grounded and practical approach to government and governance.

Whether Winni was making this point, I can see how you could interpret my words as saying that.
And indeed, public/media perception is going to be Corbyn's biggest battle.
You do a blind tasting of policies and I'm going to guess that the majority of the electorate would come out backing Corbyn... but a lot of people won't vote for him because 'left' is an ugly word for them.
It's a tough one indeed.

Also, he's not calling Labour support 'tory-life', I am. I'm not sure I have quite as much influence over Labour voters as you seem to think I do.

I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but there's has been alot of "tory scum" type jibing from the hard left at the more centrist elements of the labour party.

I think the way to win back tory voters is not to make out that they are bad people, but to convince them in debate. Corbyn has been trying to say this.

The tabloids and Toryrazzi are frothing at the mouth about Corbyn "snubbing" the Privy Council by not attending the first possible meeting and being "stripped" of the title Right Honourable. It's all being wonderfully blown out of proportion.

Yes, this kind of coverage had made me pretty angry to.

being "stripped" of the title Right Honourable

i.e correcting the pre-emptively applied honorific back to absence until it's actually bestowed.

I don't completely agree. Branding is important and it's quite crucial that the Nasty Party label and everything associated with it is made to stick.

It's weird, a lot of tory voters just don't think Tory policies are all that harmful - my parents are included in that, I'm afraid. Extremely caring people, who just happen to have an oddly unchanging political stance no matter what the politicians actually do, or their real world experience of how policies work - my sister nearly meeting her maker due to understaffing in hospital after giving birth, for example.
For many, the status quo is preferable - no matter how bad it may be - to trying something new and riskier but fairer.

but there's has been alot of "tory scum" type jibing from the hard left at the more centrist elements of the labour party.

I think the way to win back tory voters is

Just my 2p, but as the Tories changed their name to the Conservatives along time ago using the description "Tory" generally has connotations of being part of the reactionary, old fashioned neocon, end of the party scale rather than part of the Liberal Conservative end. This is generally viewed as a negative.

That is why when thingy-bob used the word Tory, you interpreted as inferring Tory Scum. It's a negative phrase, so you infer the point in a negative light. Pretty much the same as the negative connotations that go along with the word socialist.

Not to mention 'Hard' left.

eugh?