6 ms·

> What do they actually want from the deal? The conventional wisdom is that the party is split between Remainers and Leavers, and that Corbyn himself is a clos

by cgiles 7y ago

> What do they actually want from the deal? The conventional wisdom is that the party is split between Remainers and Leavers, and that Corbyn himself is a closet Leaver who wants to leave so he can get out from under EU rules on state aid and bring about a glorious socialist revolution. If this is remotely true, then Corbyn's personal aim is to help the Tories to a no-deal Brexit, or even a hard Brexit under the WA, but in such a way that Labour does not get the blame. However, much of the party wants a soft Brexit or Remain so he cannot be seen to be doing this. Hence why he does not want, and never has wanted, to obtain Government until Brexit has been sorted (badly) by the Tories, and to come along and pick up the pieces. The entire Labour strategy has been to completely disassociate themselves from Brexit and this latest non-proposal is just a continuation of that. > What is the party's true desired outcome, being in the EU or not being in the EU? In short, they do not know and are split. The only thing they agree on is not being blamed for either Remain, soft Leave, or hard Leave. And whoever is in power when the final decision is made most certainly will get blame for any decision taken.

pytester 7y ago
>The conventional wisdom is that the party is split between Remainers and Leavers, and that Corbyn himself is a closet Leaver who wants to leave so he can get out from under EU rules on state aid and bring about a glorious socialist revolution. More of an absurd conspiracy theory than conventional wisdom, that. >If this is remotely true, then Corbyn's personal aim is to help the Tories to a no-deal Brexit Which I suppose he would achieve by passing a law that prohibits the tories from achieving a no deal brexit? If he truly didn't want that he probably wouldn't have whipped for it. Wouldn't be the first time his position was completely misrepresented though... and the motive for the various parts of the media owned by tax avoiders to do this is pretty obvious. >he cannot be seen to be doing this. How convenient for the conspiracy theory that he does and says the exact opposite of what he truly "wants" to do because he can't be "seen" to be doing it.
- cgiles 7y ago
  OK, I confess that no one really knows what is going on in the mind of Jeremy Corbyn, possibly not even the man himself. What is unquestioned fact is that the party is split on Brexit. Known facts about Corbyn are: - He has opposed expansion of the EU throughout his political career - After the referendum, he urged rules on state aid to be jettisoned on the grounds they would no longer be valid after Brexit anyway - He is a self-identified socialist and is far left, even by Labour standards My take is that overall, he is anti-EU but has been forced into a publicly neutral or pro-EU (during the referendum) position because that is the position of the majority of his party. What are his precise motivations for this, I do not know. Thus I read his whipping against no-deal and his new stance on a referendum as more of a forced concession to his party, and as a tool to beat the Tories over the head with, than as something arising out of his personal convictions. Especially because of how long it took him to arrive at those positions. But no one can know for sure. Keep in mind "no no-deal", which was JC's only position for so long, is not really a position, as pjc50 pointed out. This was made painfully obvious during the series of indicative votes during the spring.
  - pytester 7y ago
    >OK, I confess that no one really knows what is going on in the mind of Jeremy Corbyn, possibly not even the man himself. It's fairly plain from the people who listen to his words and watch his actions but I can imagine it would be fairly confusing understanding him through the UK media filter. That is entirely deliberate. >What is unquestioned fact is that the party is split on Brexit. Depends what you mean by "split". If you mean they actually split - no (bar the tinge lot) - the tory party DID split themselves on brexit though, and they will do again very soon. If you mean that there are differences of opinion, yes. Like every party they have that. Yet they still have an agreed policy. >He has opposed expansion of the EU throughout his political career https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1065 https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/isling... Note the part that says "Jeremy Corbyn generally voted for more EU integration". If you're wondering who gave you the impression that the exact opposite of the truth was true, the answer is likely "tax avoiders". Note that the Lisbon treaty was about tax avoidance... not integration. >He is a self-identified socialist and is far left, even by Labour standards By European or UK historic standards he is pretty mild. The fact that the overton window has shifted in this country does not make him extreme. If you divorce personality and ask people about policies... most people agree with Labour's. You'll find that the country is actually "far left". It's why a lot of media tries to avoid talking about his policies and focus on scandal, personality and lies. >My take is that overall, he is anti-EU Of course, that's the take that most people who listen to the media and don't look at the voting records take. >Thus I read his whipping against no-deal and his new stance on a referendum as more of a forced concession to his party, and as a tool to beat the Tories over the head with, than as something arising out of his personal convictions. Especially because of how long it took him to arrive at those positions He changed this positions largely because circumstances changed. Our relationship with the EU has changed and our negotiating position has changed and sensible parties react to that. I do wonder why only Labour gets criticized this when every other party has also changed their positions - multiple times.

by cgiles 7y ago

pytester 7y ago

>The conventional wisdom is that the party is split between Remainers and Leavers, and that Corbyn himself is a closet Leaver who wants to leave so he can get out from under EU rules on state aid and bring about a glorious socialist revolution. More of an absurd conspiracy theory than conventional wisdom, that. >If this is remotely true, then Corbyn's personal aim is to help the Tories to a no-deal Brexit Which I suppose he would achieve by passing a law that prohibits the tories from achieving a no deal brexit? If he truly didn't want that he probably wouldn't have whipped for it. Wouldn't be the first time his position was completely misrepresented though... and the motive for the various parts of the media owned by tax avoiders to do this is pretty obvious. >he cannot be seen to be doing this. How convenient for the conspiracy theory that he does and says the exact opposite of what he truly "wants" to do because he can't be "seen" to be doing it.

cgiles 7y ago
OK, I confess that no one really knows what is going on in the mind of Jeremy Corbyn, possibly not even the man himself. What is unquestioned fact is that the party is split on Brexit. Known facts about Corbyn are: - He has opposed expansion of the EU throughout his political career - After the referendum, he urged rules on state aid to be jettisoned on the grounds they would no longer be valid after Brexit anyway - He is a self-identified socialist and is far left, even by Labour standards My take is that overall, he is anti-EU but has been forced into a publicly neutral or pro-EU (during the referendum) position because that is the position of the majority of his party. What are his precise motivations for this, I do not know. Thus I read his whipping against no-deal and his new stance on a referendum as more of a forced concession to his party, and as a tool to beat the Tories over the head with, than as something arising out of his personal convictions. Especially because of how long it took him to arrive at those positions. But no one can know for sure. Keep in mind "no no-deal", which was JC's only position for so long, is not really a position, as pjc50 pointed out. This was made painfully obvious during the series of indicative votes during the spring.
- pytester 7y ago
  >OK, I confess that no one really knows what is going on in the mind of Jeremy Corbyn, possibly not even the man himself. It's fairly plain from the people who listen to his words and watch his actions but I can imagine it would be fairly confusing understanding him through the UK media filter. That is entirely deliberate. >What is unquestioned fact is that the party is split on Brexit. Depends what you mean by "split". If you mean they actually split - no (bar the tinge lot) - the tory party DID split themselves on brexit though, and they will do again very soon. If you mean that there are differences of opinion, yes. Like every party they have that. Yet they still have an agreed policy. >He has opposed expansion of the EU throughout his political career https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1065 https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/isling... Note the part that says "Jeremy Corbyn generally voted for more EU integration". If you're wondering who gave you the impression that the exact opposite of the truth was true, the answer is likely "tax avoiders". Note that the Lisbon treaty was about tax avoidance... not integration. >He is a self-identified socialist and is far left, even by Labour standards By European or UK historic standards he is pretty mild. The fact that the overton window has shifted in this country does not make him extreme. If you divorce personality and ask people about policies... most people agree with Labour's. You'll find that the country is actually "far left". It's why a lot of media tries to avoid talking about his policies and focus on scandal, personality and lies. >My take is that overall, he is anti-EU Of course, that's the take that most people who listen to the media and don't look at the voting records take. >Thus I read his whipping against no-deal and his new stance on a referendum as more of a forced concession to his party, and as a tool to beat the Tories over the head with, than as something arising out of his personal convictions. Especially because of how long it took him to arrive at those positions He changed this positions largely because circumstances changed. Our relationship with the EU has changed and our negotiating position has changed and sensible parties react to that. I do wonder why only Labour gets criticized this when every other party has also changed their positions - multiple times.