Jeremy Corbyn

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
agreed 😁



The implied point of the above quote being that you're an idiot.
Every time you get like this it reconfirms for me the fact that the biggest drawback of Corbyn was never an aspect of the man himself, but his army of glassy-eyed drones. You're as bad as the MAGA lot.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
Every time you get like this it reconfirms for me the fact that the biggest drawback of Corbyn was never an aspect of the man himself, but his army of glassy-eyed drones. You're as bad as the MAGA lot.

There you go again :rolleyes: , same old, same old, confirming what I just posted.

I've said many times that it was never about Corbyn. It was the centre and right who were fixated on Corbyn. For us he was just the foot in the door, the facilitator of political change, which the centre and right combined ruthlessly to prevent. And thus you got Boris, to be followed by (I'm expecting) Liz Truss, and eventually (at best) Keith – who will change nothing at all, probably not even to overturn the current rabid Tory excesses.

I despise the whole fucking lot of you.
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
There you go again :rolleyes: , same old, same old, confirming what I just posted.

I've said many times that it was never about Corbyn. It was the centre and right who were fixated on Corbyn. For us he was just the foot in the door, the facilitator of political change, which the centre and right combined ruthlessly to prevent. And thus you got Boris, to be followed by (I'm expecting) Liz Truss, and eventually (at best) Keith – who will change nothing at all, probably not even to overturn the current rabid Tory excesses.

I despise the whole fucking lot of you.
^definitely not part of a toxic personality cult or anything like that, oh no
 

sufi

lala
There you go again :rolleyes: , same old, same old, confirming what I just posted.

I've said many times that it was never about Corbyn. It was the centre and right who were fixated on Corbyn. For us he was just the foot in the door, the facilitator of political change, which the centre and right combined ruthlessly to prevent. And thus you got Boris, to be followed by (I'm expecting) Liz Truss, and eventually (at best) Keith – who will change nothing at all, probably not even to overturn the current rabid Tory excesses.

I despise the whole fucking lot of you.
It's worse - Corbyn now represents such a shameful chapter in UK history, his legacy is the short but awful Boris era, and he is now an establishment hate figure and that hatred, fear and shame transfers onto the left, the left of labour, his policies, anyone who dares utter a word of support, they must be anathematised along with any mention of a government that isn't in thrall to business/the establishment,

the scapegoat must be cast out to the wilderness, beaten to a bloody pulp and the centrists are happy to wield the first stone
 

sufi

lala
sorry i had a shocking and traumatic conversation recently with s'one who really freaked out at the mention of the name of jc, becoming incoherent and furiously angry, the remainer boris hating centre are completely adrift but cannot abide to hear his very name or to think of the disgraces that they have heaped upon themselves and the rest of us
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
The sections he quotes about whole sections of the party seeing others as illegitimate seems to precisely articulate what you see in any number of these arguments.
 

forclosure

Well-known member
I mean didn't Diane Abbot and Bernie Grant say this EXACTLY about the Labour party deades ago?

Not only that but in a way a perfect example of how white people like to think of themselves as "individuals" while every other group is just one hegemonic block? ( although I'm supposed to believe the spread of Tory leadership nominees put an end to all that)
 

thirdform

Well-known member
I've said many times that it was never about Corbyn. It was the centre and right who were fixated on Corbyn. For us he was just the foot in the door, the facilitator of political change, which the centre and right combined ruthlessly to prevent. And thus you got Boris, to be followed by (I'm expecting) Liz Truss, and eventually (at best) Keith – who will change nothing at all, probably not even to overturn the current rabid Tory excesses.

And this is why I'm not a parliamentary socialist. the labour party, even its left, does not have the political culture to fight tooth and nail, in a quite despotic way in fact (and let us reclaim a certain kind of despotism as a positive here without hesitation) to institute political change. I predicted in 2015 that this project would end in failure, long before the media sneers started.

The problem is much broader than corbyn, labour, as you rightly say. But let us not hesitate from saying what is apparent to those who are not English. The orderly independence of Powell and Powellism, that is to say, the anglo-saxon gens living within its own means has been victorious. The average Brit is socially conservative with a moderate degree of (what is perceived as) soft paternalist economic leftism. Nationalisation but only to a rudimentary extent. National spending but not for those on benefits, and the 'undeserving poor' etc. Austerity as a mechanism for instilling British patriotism.

Part of why right wing tories such as Truss and to a lesser extent Badenoch are taking a vaguely indifferent line to the British empire is not because they are gun toading nostalgics but because they rightly see the empire as needing to have been abolished to fashion the modern British national subject. When one is an imperial power that tends to create a core/periphery division and this was especially exaserbated by many of the ex-colonial countries having much tighter communal bonds (it's no coincidence that many of our parents from middle east, India, Caribbean etc etc have a victorian level of conservative morality that would horrify the average white tory even.) Because, the essence of colonialism isn't just cultural imperialism (that is surface level) the actual economic integument of colonialism is to preclude the abolition of the dominance of landed property, I.E: to retard the development of the capitalist state and create a class of bourgeois intellectuals and informants who utilise the colonial bureaucracy to retain their socially elevated positions of caste. Again, this should be no surprise when looking at the British far right criticising pakistanis and muslims for retaining their village-like ways, but as orderly and obedient british subjects they don't see that it was their own politicking which created this despicable, parochial situation.

Now, the likes of Thatcher, and now Sunak, Boris, Braverman, Badenoch, Patel, etc, etc, want to push Powellism that one step further. They want to create a black British and an Asian British subject. We can see how successful they have been at this. Not very. which is why racist rhetoric has been on the rise, the few model asians and blacks being contrasted to the majority, for which a hysteria of utter contempt has been deployed since the 80s.

Unfortunately, labour has been complicit in this to a very large extent. Only until labour takes full stock of this, going way back to post WW II reconstruction (approved suppression in Malaya against national liberation movement, under the Atley govt, etc) can labour have any chance of actually offering a sensible counterpart to the tories and avoiding the death traps of the media. But they will not, because they are constitutive of this post-imperial British subject. The majority of labour members do not know about (for instance) the information research department which still persists in ricu to this day, a cold war campaign of misinformation, lies and slander that could only make Vladimir Putin utterly blush.

Lydon was wrong. there is a future for this country. It is to be sunk into the deepest depths of the ocean.
 

forclosure

Well-known member
And this is why I'm not a parliamentary socialist. the labour party, even its left, does not have the political culture to fight tooth and nail, in a quite despotic way in fact (and let us reclaim a certain kind of despotism as a positive here without hesitation) to institute political change. I predicted in 2015 that this project would end in failure, long before the media sneers started.

The problem is much broader than corbyn, labour, as you rightly say. But let us not hesitate from saying what is apparent to those who are not English. The orderly independence of Powell and Powellism, that is to say, the anglo-saxon gens living within its own means has been victorious. The average Brit is socially conservative with a moderate degree of (what is perceived as) soft paternalist economic leftism. Nationalisation but only to a rudimentary extent. National spending but not for those on benefits, and the 'undeserving poor' etc. Austerity as a mechanism for instilling British patriotism.

Part of why right wing tories such as Truss and to a lesser extent Badenoch are taking a vaguely indifferent line to the British empire is not because they are gun toading nostalgics but because they rightly see the empire as needing to have been abolished to fashion the modern British national subject. When one is an imperial power that tends to create a core/periphery division and this was especially exaserbated by many of the ex-colonial countries having much tighter communal bonds (it's no coincidence that many of our parents from middle east, India, Caribbean etc etc have a victorian level of conservative morality that would horrify the average white tory even.) Because, the essence of colonialism isn't just cultural imperialism (that is surface level) the actual economic integument of colonialism is to preclude the abolition of the dominance of landed property, I.E: to retard the development of the capitalist state and create a class of bourgeois intellectuals and informants who utilise the colonial bureaucracy to retain their socially elevated positions of caste. Again, this should be no surprise when looking at the British far right criticising pakistanis and muslims for retaining their village-like ways, but as orderly and obedient british subjects they don't see that it was their own politicking which created this despicable, parochial situation.

Now, the likes of Thatcher, and now Sunak, Boris, Braverman, Badenoch, Patel, etc, etc, want to push Powellism that one step further. They want to create a black British and an Asian British subject. We can see how successful they have been at this. Not very. which is why racist rhetoric has been on the rise, the few model asians and blacks being contrasted to the majority, for which a hysteria of utter contempt has been deployed since the 80s.

Unfortunately, labour has been complicit in this to a very large extent. Only until labour takes full stock of this, going way back to post WW II reconstruction (approved suppression in Malaya against national liberation movement, under the Atley govt, etc) can labour have any chance of actually offering a sensible counterpart to the tories and avoiding the death traps of the media. But they will not, because they are constitutive of this post-imperial British subject. The majority of labour members do not know about (for instance) the information research department which still persists in ricu to this day, a cold war campaign of misinformation, lies and slander that could only make Vladimir Putin utterly blush.

Lydon was wrong. there is a future for this country. It is to be sunk into the deepest depths of the ocean.
all this is true but i'd also like to say that @thirdform for me and you and people in here we have to be wary of the talk about England's decline. I know people in here will be saying the fuck are you talking about but this is a paticular kind of rhetoric that's been a cottage industry since what the 50s? and from the 80s it just went from strength to strength since the 80s with a bunch of different names (capitalist realism anyone?)

If anything the talk of decline and declinism works in tandem with the the nationalists right love of talking about reviving the nation to its former glory and to keep play acting like this is still the 80's. Don't get it twisted i get it against the backdrop of everything it makes sense why anybody would dive headlong into this talk (the fact that i've seen people who consider themselves leftists use the conservative talk of deserved and undeserved doesn't help). I'm not saying this as some kinda soc dem and lets be real for all the talk from both Truss and Sunak about what they want to slash,unleash etc they're still beholden to Tory donors who are the real power players in all this more turns and tweaks towards making Britain the equivalent of an off shore tax haven.

in short mans just saying be wary, Britians not gonna sink but that comment is reflective of much of the thinking now that there's effectively no future for anyone or anything and that some kind of natural disaster serves as "punishment" for all our failings(although the irony behind this is wanting the ocean to claim the land if anything takes responsibility away from the people just leave it up to nature or divine power to do its thing)
 
Top