That Corbyn fella...

Would the leader of the opposition not be invited?

(I have no idea if the question's even worth asking.)

"No politicians" rule has been applied

Ah, OK, thanks.

So the political establishment grants them their benefits but when there’s a party they don’t even get invited?

Seems like friends without benefits. I’d get rid ASAP.

I think Jonathan Arkush is wrong here:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/30/jeremy-corbyns-views-could-drive-jewish-people-from-uk-leader

A last salvo as he leaves his post?

It sounds like it. But I'd guess there's more to it - where he lands might give a clue.

Tbh he sounds like a dick. That type of rhetoric is what really riles critics of Israel and he knows it. Basically an inflammatory comment designed to stoke division.

In truth the quote from the Labour spokesman doesn't go far enough (understandably). You can legitimately question the very concept of the State of Israel without necessarily being anti-semitic...

... obvs there's little practical benefit to exploring that idea so late in the day, but there's nothing inherently prejudiced in that argument.

You can legitimately question the very concept of the State of Israel without necessarily being anti-semitic...

But not without being accused of it, it would seem...

But not without being accused of it, it would seem...

... or you're one of those Haredi groups like the Neturei Karta.

What a steaming shit of a take.

“If he shares the prevalent discourse about Israel, then that view is unquestionably antisemitic.”

I don't think Jonathan understands what "unquestionably" means.

R4 has a series on JC:

The Long March of Corbyn's Labour - Episode 1 - @bbcradio4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b5stvx

I listened to (some of) that. It was quite interesting.

And, on a related note, here is some banter.
https://twitter.com/JohnJCrace/status/1007210593735069697

Calling it 'the long march':
BBC bias associating Corbyn with Chairman Mao, along the lines of that newsnight image?
Or a reference to Mcdonnel Waving the little red book around, and therefore a justified reference?

Yeah I thought the same and meant to go back and check the titles of some of the other profile programs.

Although I think it's more the idea of spring boarding to success from defeat, and then obviously a cheeky pun on his left wing views.

I'm never sure whether folks over react a bit to the communist comparisons. Obviously the News Night debacle is a different matter given the underlying story content.

I re-read some coverage of the McDonnel red book thing, and there was comment by a politician saying they didn't think it was funny to joke about someone who caused x million deaths. Whereas I actually thought it was quite witty.

http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1266495-jeremy-corbyn

Anyone know what Corbyn wants out of the current chaos? So much coverage of Tory in-fighting at the expense of anything else

Corbyn only seems interested in the Labour party. Acquiring a position of government for the Labour party (i.e. making serious plans to acquire sufficient public support to win an election) is not obviously on his radar.

Don't worry, when the Tories are on the ropes there's also the chance for some Labour in-fighting

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-told-by-veteran-jewish-mp-youre-a-fucking-racist-and-anti-semite-margaret-hodge_uk_5b4e34cbe4b0fd5c73bfe020?dh

Acquiring a position of government for the Labour party (i.e. making serious plans to acquire sufficient public support to win an election) is not obviously on his radar.

Clearly false - the difficulty finding a consensus that would attract the electorate is exactly why there is so little clear Brexit strategy from Labour.

Labour is agreeing to membership of a customs union post-Brexit. It's a pretty incoherent concession but placates the remainers in the party and electorate, as well as taking some of the wind out of the hard right's sails for the time being.

A united, organised labour could probably bring May down, and even force a election. Quite likely Corbyn wants to wait until Brexit is finalised so as not to inherit the current shambles and take blame for administrating the outcome. Also quite likely the party is simply too divided to formulate any coherent strategy.

Also quite likely Corbyn would loose a GE, causing more divide within the party.

United over what?

JC has been one of the few worth listening to on Brexit, with a pretty reasonable and even-handed assessment of the options. That didn't stop him getting shouted down as a traitor by the party right.

Brexit is going to happen. The division caused mostly by the party right and the worthless radical centrist metro student bloc is only going to hand the day to the far right.

The division caused mostly by the party right and the worthless radical centrist metro student bloc

lol
The party is also divided by the slurs that are chucked around at anyone who disagrees with Corbyn (who voted against his own leadership repeatedly as an MP)
I think it's a mistake to frame the choice as between Corbyn or the EDL.

For the party to grow, it would help to compromise, and accommodate views from a wider base. Otherwise, the party will narrow its appeal. It was that open-minded approach that helped start the long process of turning around Labour's fortunes during the 1980s (after its move towards marginalisation at the hands of the Militant tendency). The current party appears quite single-minded and uncompromising, and while it has some much-needed positive policies, the rejection of any points of view that do not align with its own perspective does not seem like an effective way to win the necessary wider support.

^ an accusation you could level at those at the centre as much as the left of the party.

John Woodcock has left the Labour party.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/jul/18/senior-tory-criticises-may-over-brexit-saying-jacob-rees-mogg-is-running-our-country-politics-live?page=with:block-5b4efc00e4b017453414d51e#block-5b4efc00e4b017453414d51e

Yes, very true. Corbyn's team have given some valuable emphasis to more 'socialist' policies, and that helpfully coincides with an apparent movement in public opinion. To try to revive a 'centrist' party would be a mistake as it would fail to acknowledge those evolving circumstances.