Robert Reich: "You might call Corbyn the Bernie Sanders of British politics."

[kpete]

There’s been an important parallel in recent years between what’s happened to the Democratic Party in America and to Britain’s Labour Party. In the 1990s, for example, Bill Clinton’s “New Democrat” triangulation toward America’s political center was mirrored in Tony Blair’s “New Labour” movement toward a so-called “Third Way.” So it’s interesting to note that Jeremy Corbyn was today elected leader of the British Labour Party in a surprising landslide — the rough equivalent of gaining the Democratic nomination for president.

You might call Corbyn the Bernie Sanders of British politics. He began as an outsider; the initial odds of his winning were around 100 to 1. But he packed rallies and halls, where he gave speeches to gatherings that spilled over into the streets. He spoke of reversing Britain’s widening inequality, and he inspired a huge following. After his win today he said the message was the people are “fed up with the injustice and the inequality” of Britain, and that the Labour Party needed to reject the New Labour era of Tony Blair and become a “movement” to ensure “everyone has a decent place in society.”

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/photos/a.404595876219681.103599.142474049098533/1070119109667351/?type=1&theater

[NorthCarolina]

1. Call Bernie whatever you wanty, but I hope to one day

call him Mr. President.

[sabrina 1]

4. Me too.

[NorthCarolina]

6. Can't believe

I typed "wantY" in my post. Oh spellcheck, why don't you work in the subject field. LOL

Glad you're on board....lets do this.

[hifiguy]

22. Oh, yeah!

[appalachiablue]

31. Same here! 'President Sanders' has a wonderful ring to it doesn't it!

Go Bernie Go!

[appalachiablue]

32. The 'Democracy Now!' program with Amy Goodman has a lot of good Jeremy Corbyn coverage today.

Check it out on the Free Speech TV Channel online, or on Dish or Direct TV.

[okojo]

2. Corbyn is a disaster for the Labour Party...

Corbyn isn’t the Bernie Sanders of the Labour Party. He is pretty much a nut. It has nothing to do with his support for Putin, or against intervention in Syria. It has to be with his stance on the EU.. He is very cagey about the UK and EU membership.

It was stupid to elect Corbyn as head of Labour Party. His election means David Cameron has another five year term as Prime Minister when he calls elections.

[ljm2002]

3. Please provide a link...

...showing where Corbyn states his "support for Putin".

Thanks.

[okojo]

8. Corbin’s stance on the Ukrainian conflict is disturbing.

Look at his viewpoint on the Ukrainian Conflict...

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/news/at-the-root-of-the-ukraine-crisis-is-america-s-belligerent-drive-eastwards
http://www.hscentre.org/russia-and-eurasia/corbyn-wrong-says-ukrainian-human-rights-legend/

[ljm2002]

10. Well your first link...

...is an article written by Corbyn that does not say anything at all about Putin. The second is an article by a Ukrainian author who disagrees with Corbyn's analysis and who claims Corbyn's positions are similar to Putin's.

Basically it is a standard tactic used in politics -- both here and in the UK (and elsewhere I'm sure) -- where you find a point of agreement between your political foe and some bad guy, and use that to claim that your political foe "agrees with the Bad Guy".

To claim there is no historical context for the Ukrainian situation is nonsense. To claim that NATO has not acted aggressively, and has not ignored its own agreements made with Gorbachev, is nonsense. To claim that NATO's actions have not aggravated an already-tense situation there is nonsense. To claim that by pointing these things out, Corbyn is "supporting Putin" is nonsense.

[okojo]

11. Hold on..

talking about swallowing Vladimir Putin’s talking points hook line and sinker..

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2014/11/06-nato-no-promise-enlarge-gorbachev-pifer


The first article was Jeremy Corbyn stating many of RT’s talking points on the Ukrainian Crisis, (fascists and NATO played a part in the Maidan Protests)

The second is that Corbyn acts like a huge apologists for Russia’s actions, giving mild criticism, while ignoring some huge problems with Russia’s Land grab.

Corby has stated he doesn’t support Putin, but then he spouts some many things that Putin wants for the UK, unilateral disarmament, getting the UK out of NATO, closer ties to Russia, no intervention in Syria. I would be all for those things if also demanding Russia curtails some of their arms programs, like their submarine building, to stop supporting the Assad regime..

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/17/how-putin-is-meddling-in-england-s-elections.html


NATO has its issues, and used Military Force readily, but it hasn’t try to poison a Ukrainian Presidential Candidate at the time with Dioxin, nor has tried to browbeat its near abroads, with some pretty big military and economic threats, as Russia has done to the Ukraine.

The EU is a much bigger threat Russia’s influence on its near abroads than NATO, and the Ukraine tried to get closer to the EU started the Ukrainian Crisis, not any NATO meddling...

Corbyn has been spouting Russian’s stipulations for some time. He gives pretty weak criticism on Russia’s actions, while paying lip service to many of their demands, especially what they want out of the UK..

[ljm2002]

12. I get that you disagree with his positions...

...but I do not agree with your claim that it means he supports Putin.

It seems to me that anytime a left-leaning politician states a disagreement with foreign policy, it is immediately morphed by their political opponents into "support of the enemy". Just an observation.

I do appreciate your providing links and making reasonable arguments to back up your position. Certainly Putin is a troubling figure. But then so was Bush, and the fact that Tony Blair supported his invasion of Iraq was troubling as well. The Iraq invasion arguably has caused a lot more mischief in the world than Putin's actions to date.

Not knowing a whole lot about UK internal politics, and not knowing anything about Corbyn until very recently, I'll leave it at that.

TTYL

[okojo]

17. there is difference between interesting policy stands and ignoring the consequences...

Putin is not the enemy. Russia is not the enemy.. OECD nations relationship with Russia has to be multi faceted. Russia played a very big role in the Iranian Nuclear Talks. I don’t think Ukraine should be part of NATO, (No country should be part of NATO when their borders are in serious disputes, ditto with Georgia vis a vie Russia) The Ukraine should be tied closer to the EU.

However, Jeremy Corbyn stated points about the Ukrainian conflict, really weak condemnation on Russia’s actions in their near abroads, wanting closer ties with Russia, criticizing sanctions against Russia after the shooting down of the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, non intervention in Syria without demanding Russia stopped propping up the Assad regime or at least stop pouring advisors and arms in the region is a bit troubling, to looking like a big apologist to supporter of the Putin’s Presidency.. I have seen enough of his antics, to downplayed his condemnation of Putin, but acting like a Fox News Contributor or a Fox News Democrat on Russia Today and in his rhetoric..

The Iraqi invasion of 2003 is linked to the rise of ISIS, I don’t deny that. However, Russia is propping up the Assad Regime, which is tad bit less awful than ISIS..

If you want to know anything about the Labour Leadership Elections, there were 420k votes total, Corbyn won 251k, victory for Corbyn, but it is not going to the right choice in a UK General Election in four-five years time..


My main point isn’t that Corbyn’s words seemed to be a match to Russian Interest. My main alarm about Corbyn is hostility to the EU, that could some serious chaos for the UK economy, plus give rise to more Euro Skepticism in all the major political parties, from Conservative Party Yahoos, to the UKIP racists..

[KoKo]

16. ....!

[MisterP]

7. noooo! how dare he oppose creating ISIS!

[okojo]

9. Syria is more than about ISIS..

It also includes Russian Involvement in propping up the Syria, besides Iran’s influence.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. No he is not a nut

He is actually a very competent politician. It is baloney to always be pressurized into the right wing thinking. Blair was a right wing poodle. I met Jeremy some years ago and he had some very solid ideas on fairness and equality.

[okojo]

18. Corbyn has never been in a leadership position..

This is about winning elections. Ideally, I would want Bernie Sanders, but there is no point in wishing vegan eating, banning of cars, making Costco parking lots into organic garden and bike racks, renewable energy transformation of the energy sector, banning of building every south facing porch window on a new home, without winning an election..

Corbyn is an example when a political party wants to be correct in ideology but not in power. The Tories did this in the late 90s, the GOP did this with Goldwater in 1964..

Jeremy Corbyn as HM Opposition Leader and George Galloway as his Shadow Foreign Secretary is not the way to get Labour back into 10 Downing Street..

[Rosa Luxemburg]

19. things are changing

Cameron will be out in the near future

[okojo]

20. Cameron just won an election

He is not going away soon, much like Barack Obama isn’t a one term President.. Cameron won two general elections..

[Rosa Luxemburg]

21. well

we'll see

[appalachiablue]

33. That's so cool meeting Corbyn. Blair as a RW poodle is accurate and pathetic like him.

What a disappointment, and worse Tony was, damn.

[T_i_B]

27. Here's the problem

Last edited Tue Sep 15, 2015, 06:02 AM - Edit history (1)

Who of Corbyn's 3 rivals for the Labour leadership would you have preferred and why?

a) Andy Burnham
b) Yvette Cooper
c) Liz Kendall

[Rosa Luxemburg]

34. Not Kendall, Cooper

Burnham maybe but now he is Corbyn's shadow cabinet.

[T_i_B]

35. The reason why Cooper & Kendall are not in....

....is because they have refused to serve under Corbyn.

What we are seeing at the moment is the Blairites complaining that Corbyn's shadow cabinet is not broad based enough when

a) Most of the Blairites have refused to serve, guaranteeing that they will be under represented
b) Non Blairite politicians have been excluded from senior positions in the Labour party for years.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

36. THe Labour Party needs a good shake up

it has had the stagnant people like Blair, Milliband, Cooper, Kendall etc. They are so boring and Tory wannabees. Britain like America needs to get to grips with the problem of inequality between the ultra-rich and the struggling poor. Cameron Tory Prime Minster has imposed austerity - cuts on the British people and they don't like it. Cameron is part of the elite. Cameron foolishly thinks that Corbyn's election will mean that this is the end of the Labour Party. No he doesn't realize Corbyn will tear him apart.

[T_i_B]

37. Whilst I am no fan of Blair

His leadership was not stagnant. He couldn't have won back to back landslide victories if that had been the case.

On the other hand, "stagnant" is a very apt description of Labour under Ed Miliband's leadership.

[dsc]

5. Thankfully Bernie is no such thing

Corbyn has nutty foreign policy ideas that thankfully Bernie doesn't share.

[TubbersUK]

13. It's a remarkable turn of events for the Labour Party and British politics -

a hard left candidate returned as Labour leader by a landslide - never thought I'd see the day. I'd sensed growing disgust with the Blairite/third way careerists but even so I'm surprised by the scale of this.

I'm not sure about electability - I normally tend to the Tribune (soft) rather than Campaign Group (hard) left and have a few issues with some of Corbyns more out there foreign policy positions.

Having said that, as a moderate left Labour activist, I sweated for years to return a Labour Government only to see Blair and his cronies use their time in office to brazenly bolster big business, wealth and privilege at the expense of ordinary people and then dishonestly foist the Iraq war on us - the underlying trend to the economic right in British politics continued with barely a hiccup under Tony and his cohort. For many in the Labour movement it felt just as much like the political wilderness as being out of office does.

This being the case, maybe there's nothing to lose by getting behind Corbyn rather than another Third Way type. Hopefully his emphasis on economic and social justice will, if nothing else, shift the political debate/topography.

The fact that he's been returned with a landslide and there's been an influx of new members/affiliates to the Party looking to get behind Corbyn suggests a generalised impatience with the growing wealth gap, erosion of employment standards etc. In which case, if he makes a reasonable fist of leadership, maybe the electability issue isn't as significant as some pundits seem to think.

It's going to be interesting.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

14. I wouldn't say that Jeremy is that hard left

[TubbersUK]

23. It's all relative I suppose

I think he was/is a member of the Labour Party's Campaign Group which is further left than, say, Michael Foot was when he was elected leader. As a yardstick, Tony Benn was a founding member of the Campaign Group.

That puts Jeremy toward the hard end of the left in Labour party terms I would say. He's a democratic socialist however so, I agree, he's not necessarily 'hard left' in absolute terms.

As an aside, I've met Jeremy Corbyn a couple of times - albeit many moons ago and very briefly. I would had been aghast if someone had told me that he would be party leader one day - not because of any shortcomings on his part, simply because of his positioning within the party relative to the then leading lights and rising stars.

Labour is long overdue for a shakeup and I wish him well though.

[T_i_B]

28. I've seen him speaking up close in 2002

Didn't get to speak to him though, and certainly didn't think at the time that I was watching a future leader of the Labour party.

[okojo]

29. The problem with Jeremy Corbyn is some of his personal stances on issues

Rather than Policy stances.

I don’t agree with putting the Bank of England back under direct Government control, and the coal mines in Wales and York should remain close. However, Corbyn has been basically a complete toady to many Anti US and Anti UK regimes. His responses to the Ukraine turmoil are puzzling, and sound like something out of the Russia Today playbook. Syria non intervention also is a nice gift to Putin, who has no qualms in intervention in Syria, given Russia has put lots of arms and military advisors in Syria.

He has supported or been opened to Hamas and Hezbollah, wanted an inquiry on Jewish “lobbying” in the deportation of known Palestinian Anti Semite, and stated some pretty harsh views on Israel while giving a pass to Hamas..

Even with all that, Corbyn’s stance and views on the IRA would never get him near 10 Downing Street. Corbyn wanted peace, but the peace terms of the IRA when they were bombing the UK, and demanding Northern Ireland unified with Ireland.

[Enthusiast]

26. Huge +1!

[jfern]

24. Corbyn is well to Sanders' left though

[Todays_Illusion]

25. That is a low stoop to tar the rival of Mr. Reich's favorite even as his loyalty can be admired.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton have a lot in common.

[Major Hogwash]

38. Dipsydoodle was from the UK, and he couldn't stand Blair.

He made some real insightful comments here at the DU.