5 ms·

I'm sorry, but I find this kind of ridiculous - Starmer is being pretty clear about the kind of man he is. Fervent capitalist, previous member of the CIA-linked

I'm sorry, but I find this kind of ridiculous - Starmer is being pretty clear about the kind of man he is. Fervent capitalist, previous member of the CIA-linked Trilateral Commission, notorious U-turner, War on Drugs(TM) supporter, outright liar, genocide supporter, and absolutely completely beholden to Israel (he has even said he'll put Israel lobbiests into the highest echelons of gov - he's practically a foreign agent at this point). He's telling you who he is, so please believe him - the idea that this man will become PM and then suddenly turn into Jeremy Corbyn is, frankly, delusional. I can understand why someone would want to believe that, but in all likelihood we're just getting more of the same.

Closi 2y ago
People on the whole don't want a Jeremy Corbyn anyway - he led his party to the biggest labour defeat since 1935. Don't know why the labour party would want to replicate that shit-show.
- GordonS 2y ago
  He was smeared with false antisemitism claims, hence the massive defeat. One of those involved in the smearing was... Starmer. Corbyn was never going to be "allowed" to be Prime Minister. Also, listen to his recent interview where he says he was asked by a committee if he would guarantee to be 100% behind any military action instigated by Israel.
  - fathyb 2y ago
    If anybody is interesting in learning more about that smearing campaing: https://www.ajiunit.com/investigation/the-labour-files https://www.ajiunit.com/investigation/the-labour-files > An investigation based on the largest leak of documents in British political history. The Labour Files examines thousands of internal documents, emails and social media messages to reveal how senior officials in one of the two parties of government in the UK ran a coup by stealth against the elected leader of the party.
    - Closi 2y ago
      Politician smeared during election? Shock horror, it happens during every election. Leader of the party can't unite their own party so there is a plan to oust them? That's politics. Jeremy couldn't particularly unite the party, didn't take the center ground, and while I don't think he was a true antisemite there were enough mis-steps there that it meant that the claim could stick (along with the IRA sympathizer claims).
- vidarh 2y ago
  People on the whole want the policies, though. That even Corbyn - the most vilified British politician of a generation - got that close to a win is a strong demonstration of that. Since then the Tory party support has collapsed to historic lows. A win on a program close in ambition to the 2017 manifesto - which was not in any way radical - should be a walk in the park for someone like Starmer in current conditions if he actually had dared try.
  - GordonS 2y ago
    I think you're right - people are desperate for anything other than the Tories. We have a political environment where the Greens are smeared as "crazies", people remember the Lib Dems for their deception, and mass media has many believing Reform will win if they don't vote for Labour. A Labour win is all but guaranteed, so Starmer doesn't need to be the other cheek of the Monoparty arse - he chooses to be.
    - lambertsimnel 2y ago
      But would the media have abandoned the Conservatives if Labour were offering something much different?
holbrad 2y ago
>Fervent capitalist That isn't the own you think it is. It's the position of every single successful modern state. >genocide supporter Sigh... >suddenly turn into Jeremy Corbyn is, frankly, delusional. Brillant, people voted for him for exactly this reason.
- GordonS 2y ago
  You're being pedantic; we obviously live in a capitalist world, but Starmer is fully inboard with taking orders from corporate overlords (lobbyists) in the same way as the Tories. More balance is needed.
- vidarh 2y ago
  > That isn't the own you think it is. It is, however, a condition of membership under the rules of the UK Labour Party that you are a democratic socialist, and in favour of goals that include democratic socialism. Whether or not you think that is right, it is what Starmer signed up to when he joined. > Brillant, people voted for him for exactly this reason. His pledges when he was elected leader was to largely be "continuity Corbyn". A lot of the Labour membership voted for him for that reason. The extent to which he has been willing to lie and deceive his own party membership to get his position is quite scary given he'll likely be PM soon.
dralley 2y ago
> genocide supporter If Starmer is a "genocide supporter" for being tepidly pro-Israel, then Corbyn is a genocide supporter for his pathetic Russian apologism on Syria and Ukraine. If that's where your line is, then there's no chance Corbyn hasn't crossed it either.
- GordonS 2y ago
  This is pure whataboutism, but to call Starmer - a rabid member of Labour Friends of Israel who has parachuted an Israel lobbyist into a safe seat, and who plans to staff his new government with pro-Israeli stooges - "tepidly pro-Israel" is beyond disingenuous. I'd ask you to consider that the situations in Syria and Ukraine are not nearly as straightforward as the US would have us believe; indeed, the US and Israel are, as usual, the main instigators. Regardless, Corbyn hasn't "crossed any lines" - he certainly hasn't publicly stated that it's OK to cut a civilian population's water supply as collective punishment, for example. Corbyn takes a more considered, nuanced, sensible view on world politics, which unfortunately doesn't play well with our right-wing press's simplistic "good guy, bad guy" gov-sponsored narrative. This is why Corbyn was smeared - he stands up for what's right, even if it means going against the US and Israel.
  - dralley 2y ago
    >he certainly hasn't publicly stated that it's OK to cut a civilian population's water supply as collective punishment, for example neither has Starmer... also this never happened...
    - GordonS 2y ago
      If you're going to rewrite history, and ask me to ignore what I've seen and heard with my own eyes, then this thread has reached it's end. I bid you adieu.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    > I'd ask you to consider that the situations in Syria and Ukraine are not nearly as straightforward as the US would have us believe; indeed, the US and Israel are, as usual, the main instigators. OK, you've sounded mostly reasonable in this thread so far, but that came to an abrupt halt here.

Closi 2y ago

People on the whole don't want a Jeremy Corbyn anyway - he led his party to the biggest labour defeat since 1935. Don't know why the labour party would want to replicate that shit-show.

GordonS 2y ago
He was smeared with false antisemitism claims, hence the massive defeat. One of those involved in the smearing was... Starmer. Corbyn was never going to be "allowed" to be Prime Minister. Also, listen to his recent interview where he says he was asked by a committee if he would guarantee to be 100% behind any military action instigated by Israel.
- fathyb 2y ago
  If anybody is interesting in learning more about that smearing campaing: https://www.ajiunit.com/investigation/the-labour-files https://www.ajiunit.com/investigation/the-labour-files > An investigation based on the largest leak of documents in British political history. The Labour Files examines thousands of internal documents, emails and social media messages to reveal how senior officials in one of the two parties of government in the UK ran a coup by stealth against the elected leader of the party.
  - Closi 2y ago
    Politician smeared during election? Shock horror, it happens during every election. Leader of the party can't unite their own party so there is a plan to oust them? That's politics. Jeremy couldn't particularly unite the party, didn't take the center ground, and while I don't think he was a true antisemite there were enough mis-steps there that it meant that the claim could stick (along with the IRA sympathizer claims).
vidarh 2y ago
People on the whole want the policies, though. That even Corbyn - the most vilified British politician of a generation - got that close to a win is a strong demonstration of that. Since then the Tory party support has collapsed to historic lows. A win on a program close in ambition to the 2017 manifesto - which was not in any way radical - should be a walk in the park for someone like Starmer in current conditions if he actually had dared try.
- GordonS 2y ago
  I think you're right - people are desperate for anything other than the Tories. We have a political environment where the Greens are smeared as "crazies", people remember the Lib Dems for their deception, and mass media has many believing Reform will win if they don't vote for Labour. A Labour win is all but guaranteed, so Starmer doesn't need to be the other cheek of the Monoparty arse - he chooses to be.
  - lambertsimnel 2y ago
    But would the media have abandoned the Conservatives if Labour were offering something much different?

holbrad 2y ago

>Fervent capitalist That isn't the own you think it is. It's the position of every single successful modern state. >genocide supporter Sigh... >suddenly turn into Jeremy Corbyn is, frankly, delusional. Brillant, people voted for him for exactly this reason.

GordonS 2y ago
You're being pedantic; we obviously live in a capitalist world, but Starmer is fully inboard with taking orders from corporate overlords (lobbyists) in the same way as the Tories. More balance is needed.
vidarh 2y ago
> That isn't the own you think it is. It is, however, a condition of membership under the rules of the UK Labour Party that you are a democratic socialist, and in favour of goals that include democratic socialism. Whether or not you think that is right, it is what Starmer signed up to when he joined. > Brillant, people voted for him for exactly this reason. His pledges when he was elected leader was to largely be "continuity Corbyn". A lot of the Labour membership voted for him for that reason. The extent to which he has been willing to lie and deceive his own party membership to get his position is quite scary given he'll likely be PM soon.

dralley 2y ago

> genocide supporter If Starmer is a "genocide supporter" for being tepidly pro-Israel, then Corbyn is a genocide supporter for his pathetic Russian apologism on Syria and Ukraine. If that's where your line is, then there's no chance Corbyn hasn't crossed it either.

GordonS 2y ago
This is pure whataboutism, but to call Starmer - a rabid member of Labour Friends of Israel who has parachuted an Israel lobbyist into a safe seat, and who plans to staff his new government with pro-Israeli stooges - "tepidly pro-Israel" is beyond disingenuous. I'd ask you to consider that the situations in Syria and Ukraine are not nearly as straightforward as the US would have us believe; indeed, the US and Israel are, as usual, the main instigators. Regardless, Corbyn hasn't "crossed any lines" - he certainly hasn't publicly stated that it's OK to cut a civilian population's water supply as collective punishment, for example. Corbyn takes a more considered, nuanced, sensible view on world politics, which unfortunately doesn't play well with our right-wing press's simplistic "good guy, bad guy" gov-sponsored narrative. This is why Corbyn was smeared - he stands up for what's right, even if it means going against the US and Israel.
- dralley 2y ago
  >he certainly hasn't publicly stated that it's OK to cut a civilian population's water supply as collective punishment, for example neither has Starmer... also this never happened...
  - GordonS 2y ago
    If you're going to rewrite history, and ask me to ignore what I've seen and heard with my own eyes, then this thread has reached it's end. I bid you adieu.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  > I'd ask you to consider that the situations in Syria and Ukraine are not nearly as straightforward as the US would have us believe; indeed, the US and Israel are, as usual, the main instigators. OK, you've sounded mostly reasonable in this thread so far, but that came to an abrupt halt here.