Corbyn 23: Hail Discorbia

[pancreas]

I am not saying contentless things. I am attempting to 'try' him on the grounds that he has been accused. And I find him Not Guilty. You accept he may not have said anything untoward, yet you want him suspended anyway. I don't see how that is defensible in a just society. Finding a lack of evidence, you are now pointing to a (IMO) disingenuous case has been retrospectively constructed against him and I don't think it's good enough. In fact, I think you are doing the job of the Right.

They, of course, would never be so careless as to do this to one of their side. Yet we must hand-wring.

[Howj Begg]

I am not saying contentless things. I am attempting to 'try' him on the grounds that he has been accused. And I find him Not Guilty. You accept he may not have said anything untoward, yet you want him suspended anyway. I don't see how that is defensible in a just society. Finding a lack of evidence, you are now pointing to a (IMO) disingenuous case has been retrospectively constructed against him and I don't think it's good enough. In fact, I think you are doing the job of the Right.

They, of course, would never be so careless as to do this to one of their side. Yet we must hand-wring.

Shortly afterwards, a spokesman for Corbyn announced Williamson had been issued with a "notice of investigation"; but he would remain a Labour member while a "pattern of behaviour" was examined

.
It's not just the Sheffield speech, is it. So you are falsely making it all about that. Why?

To make clear that this

Finding a lack of evidence, you are now pointing to a (IMO) disingenuous case has been retrospectively constructed against him and I don't think it's good enough.

is false, here is the date of the quote: Feb 27th, and it's by a spokesperson for Jeremy Corbyn:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/labour-suspends-chris-williamson-over-antisemitism-remarks


The Right, like Rhea Wolfson, Mike Segalov, Jon Lansmann, Momentum.

[Absorb the anus burn]

Chris Williamson interview....

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/left-can-change-britain-forever-if-it-unites-says-chris-williamson

"The Labour Party and anti-racism are in my DNA, so it was incredibly hurtful to be subject to these vile accusations," he said. "I've spent my life challenging racism and as a member of the Anti-Nazi League in the 1970s I literally fought racist fascists on the streets....."

ANL members tend not to be antisemites.

[pancreas]

I don't think you realise that Momentum is a Stalinist organisation, the personal fiefdom of Lansman. Perhaps you are not a member.

[Howj Begg]

I don't think you realise that Momentum is a Stalinist organisation, the personal fiefdom of Lansman. Perhaps you are not a member.

Lol.

You are right though, I'm not a member. Please do provide your own anecdotes or evidence though, I am interested. 3 weeks ago Momentum were responsible for the win in Peterborough, now they are Stalinists on the right? far left? of the Labour party.

I want to make it clear that I have never accused CW of being an anti semite. I don't think he has conviction enough to be one.

[pancreas]

Out with mother. Will reply later.

[BlodwynPig]

I think your defence of CW in the face of his behaviour is appalling, if you want to have an online slap fight. Not interested however. Your posts in response to the articles I've posted have been contentless. It does rather seem that defending CW has become a matter of personal integrity, for some.

I'm going to make an effort to leave it there, before this becomes a thing. Try and accept that I have a difference of opinion, and do your best not to make it personal.

Difference of opinion between one that is sensible and correct and one that is at best deluded and dangerous.

[Zetetic]

There were two barristers involved.

Is that the minimum or maximum number of barristers for a procedure not be at fault? I can't remember.

[BlodwynPig]

I want to make it clear that I have never accused CW of being an anti semite. I don't think he has conviction enough to be one.

BANG! Shot himself in the foot.

[Johnny Yesno]

Are you making a specific effort to ignore the evidence listed in the new socialist article? Or Mike Segalov's article?

I didn't see any evidence of a 'pattern' in the Segalov article, just complaints about the procedure.

As to the New Socialist article, let's deal with their conclusion first:

Two things are particularly notable in this pattern of behaviour. Firstly, it is deliberately provocative and hurtful, and Williamson persists in this despite having been repeatedly asked by Jewish comrades to stop it. Secondly, none of these comments have anything to do—even in a distorted way—with Palestine. It is concerning that Williamson's supporters seem to confuse aggressively-expressed antisemitism with Palestinian solidarity. This is absolutely not the case, and is a confusion that must be resisted. As we wrote in our previous editorial on antisemitism:
at least anecdotally, antisemitism seems significantly more prevalent within the Labour left than within directly pro-Palestinian campaigns and organisations. It is necessary to insist on an absolute, unconditional rejection of antisemitism and simultaneously an absolute, unconditional solidarity with Palestine. Both these positions are foundational for a meaningful and useful left politics.

The first issue I have with it is the reference to 'Jewish comrades', as if they think as a single entity. As you know, there is huge disagreement within the Jewish membership about the treatment of AS in the party.

The second is the argument that Williamson's supporters 'seem to confuse aggressively-expressed antisemitism with Palestinian solidarity'. Perhaps it is his critics that 'seem to' get these things confused. I do agree with the idea that the term Zionism is overused by some people on the left (some of them Jewish), but you also know that it is an absolute minefield, which the far right have no problem traversing. Tommy Robinson has declared himself a Zionist, so it's no wonder people get confused about the term. That doesn't necessarily mean they have malign intent.

As for the list

Signing and promoting a petition in defence of Gilad Atzmon

It was a petition to allow him to play a jazz gig. He's a musician who has played with luminaries such as Robert Wyatt, not known for his far right sympathies. Williamson disowned it and apologised when he discovered what a nutcase Atzmon is. A Jewish nutcase, btw, for those not familiar, if that adds any context.

Referring to claims of antisemitism within Labour as "bullshit" and "smears" (terms that his supporters continue to use to dismiss any suggestions of antisemitism within the Party)

This makes it sound like it's any claims of AS that are deemed to be bullshit and smears. And they wonder why people get angry.

Defending Scott Nelson ('SocialistVoice' on Twitter), who was expelled from Labour after posting antisemitic tweets of which Williamson was aware

This looks to be the most dodgy. Shame the link in the article is broken. I haven't heard of Scott Nelson AFAIAA so I did a bit of googling and the more you drill down, the more unclear it gets.

His continued—and deliberately provocative—endorsement of Pete Willsman, including placing Willsman at the top of a list of NEC candidates to vote for

This was from that time when Labour were railroaded into adopting a definition of AS that the original writer claims is flawed, including all but one disputed example. It's no surprise there was poorly worded pushback against the cynicism of the right of the party.

Defending Ken Livingstone after Livingstone's indefinite suspension, and subsequent resignation, from Labour over antisemitism. (It is interesting that Williamson was more vehement defending Livingstone than Livingstone himself.)

The evidence they've given there is little more than him saying overall Ken's a GBOL. I've not seen anything about the 'interesting' bit in brackets. Perhaps it's all in the timing.

Well, both you and pancs have made somewhat pointed comments at me seemingly because of my comments about CW.
I am probably returning fire in a similar way, though. I do object to you saying I am "usually better" because I'm exactly as bad or good today as I always am and always want to be. The difference is that I am discussing something that you take an opposite opinion on. Only difference.

No, I haven't been making pointed comments at you. I don't know why you think I have. Usually you are better at not perceiving nonexistent things.

[Twed]

The brilliant thing about Twitter is that there's a good chance that if you ever say anything pro-left concerning British politics, TFM will pop up to reply to you and you'll get to call him bald.

[Johnny Yesno]

I tell you what bothers me: the likes of Hodge would love to redefine any anti-capitalist sentiment as antisemitism. Where's your red line, Howj? Because I sure as hell would never pre-emptively apologise for expressing my own hatred of the finance industry and the privations it has wrought on the poor.

[pancreas]

Is that the minimum or maximum number of barristers for a procedure not be at fault? I can't remember.

People don't credit you as readily as they should do for your trolling skills.

In this case, where someone may be expunged from their job on the basis of a 'pattern of behaviour' which may or may not include antisemitism, triggered by a situation which definitely does not involve antisemitism, then I think that two barristers might be sufficient to come to the conclusion that if this ended up in court, then the LP would have egg on their faces and waste a whole bunch of membership funds fighting a really stupid decision.

[honeychile]

if this ended up in court, then the LP would have egg on their faces and waste a whole bunch of membership funds fighting a really stupid decision.

That might actually be a useful investment.

Kick Williamson out - throw a bone to all the right-wingers. Let Williamson take it to court, and let the courts tell the world he was unfairly dismissed, and then we can reinstate him.

Not a remotely principled approach. But could actually get a decent campaigning MP the Labour whip back via means which can't be dismissed as partisan or anti-semitism denying or whatever, and give the usual fair-weather self-proclaimed "allies" of the jewish community a bloody nose.

[Johnny Yesno]

Chris Williamson interview....

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/left-can-change-britain-forever-if-it-unites-says-chris-williamson

"The Labour Party and anti-racism are in my DNA, so it was incredibly hurtful to be subject to these vile accusations," he said. "I've spent my life challenging racism and as a member of the Anti-Nazi League in the 1970s I literally fought racist fascists on the streets....."

ANL members tend not to be antisemites.

That's the thing, isn't it? Has Margaret Hodge literally or even figuratively fought fascists on the streets?

Anyway, the rest of the article is worth posting, if only because it supports the view that not all Jewish members see 'a pattern of behaviour' as implied by New Socialist.

THE left has a chance to "change the balance of power in this country forever" if it comes together to fight for Jeremy Corbyn's socialist vision, Derby North MP Chris Williamson told the Morning Star today.

Mr Williamson, whose suspension from the Labour Party over comments he made defending its record of fighting anti-semitism was lifted yesterday, thanked Labour members and supporters for the "inspiring and at times emotionally overwhelming" support he had received while suspended.

"The Labour Party and anti-racism are in my DNA, so it was incredibly hurtful to be subject to these vile accusations," he said. "I've spent my life challenging racism and as a member of the Anti-Nazi League in the 1970s I literally fought racist fascists on the streets.

"I now want to put this awful experience behind me and focus on making the case for a socialist alternative to the last four decades of neoliberalism."

If socialists unite in the fight for a Labour government, he said, the movement could "eliminate poverty, democratise the economy, rise to the challenge posed by climate changes and export peace and disarmament around the world."

Though a disciplinary hearing ruled that Mr Williamson could return to the Labour benches with a warning for saying Labour had been "too apologetic" about its record of fighting anti-semitism, the decision was attacked by right-wing Labour MP Margaret Hodge, who called it "outrageous," as well as activists Owen Jones and Ash Sarkar.

But Jewish author and Labour member David Rosenberg said he was pleased at the ruling as Labour "needs people with the energy, drive and determination to fight against injustice that he displays, and I note that he has a longer record of campaigning against racism and fascism than his detractors."

Mr Rosenberg said that Mr Williamson's remarks in Sheffield last year had not been "brilliantly phrased" but that their sentiment, that Labour has done more than other political parties to fight anti-semitism, was correct.

[pancreas]

On Momentum's Stalinism. I didn't join at the beginning so have had to have the history explained to me by disaffected parties, but the consensus is very clear, that Momentum was (and still is) driven by a whole bunch of passionate, committed leftists who want to see serious socialist change in this country. But at some point, shortly after Corbyn's election, Lansman was able to effect a coup, registering the company name in his name only and getting enough people on board to be able to seize, if you will, the means of production; i.e. websites and domain names, logos etc. He has then instituted a governance system which is merely ostensibly democratic, but where all major decisions are made by Lansman and a select coterie. (The sort of descriptions I hear of him is that he is Trump-like in his thin-skinnedness, and reluctance to be challenged.)

We have been able to get genuine independently minded lefties elected to Momentum's bodies, like the National Coordination Committee, but they then report that the body has no power and never meets. So Lansman's diktats go de facto uncontested.

Of course, Momentum's staff produce fantastic videos, are amazing at organising activists on a shoe-string budget, and have a great sense of strategy in terms of resources. So I still give them money, I still support the work they do, but I recognise that Momentum also has a political role, in that it effectively chooses who goes on the NEC, and on that count I am very dissatisfied with it.

Onto the somewhat more controversial part. Lansman is Jewish, obviously, and as a high-profile member of that community ends up under enormous pressure to show solidarity with that community. The result of this pressure is that even nominally left-wing Jews end up taking right-wing positions, particularly on Israel; the Jewish Chronicle, very much like the Daily Mail, exists precisely to further this objective. This has evidently worked on Lansman, and you will have no problem finding plenty of examples of Lansman stoking the antisemitism debate in almost as hysterical a manner that the Board of Deputies has been doing. 'Widespread and serious' type stuff, with no evidence and no proportionality. I suspect the unspoken threat to make people like Lansman conform is: if you drift too far from the mainstream, like, for example, JVL has done (in the opinion of the self-appointed mainstream), then you are OUT, and we, the community, will never be there to protect you from the threats that you face in the world. The current Twitter trend is to use #NotAJew to excommunicate Left-wing Jews. All this stuff has a quasi-religious status. You can't question it, since you would be questioning the very tenets of your being.

So my conjecture is that you need an enormous escape velocity to break away from this thinking; you need to be steered by solid rationality and have an unshakeable moral compass. The members of JVL have these things, and that is why they are brilliant. They have thought about politics to an extremely deep degree and for that reason they are impressively eloquent and forceful with their rhetoric. I have never once seen one of them wrong-footed, since they have thought about everything that they could possibly be questioned about.

But Lansman doesn't have that escape velocity, and neither does Rhea Wolfson. Because Lansman is amongst other things, a petty and insecure man. (You'll remember Lansman tried to have Willsman cancelled.)

So these two features together, both of Momentum's fealty to Lansman, and the enormous pressure that anyone Jewish comes under to validate the attacks of the Right, add up to explain Segalov's thread, and Wolfson's thread. They are not intellectually exhaustive in the manner which is evidently needed to condemn a sitting MP who has been a massive supporter of the best chance we have seen for progressive change, and this, at least I see, as evidence that they find themselves under enormous pressure to conform.

[Johnny Yesno]

That might actually be a useful investment.

Kick Williamson out - throw a bone to all the right-wingers. Let Williamson take it to court, and let the courts tell the world he was unfairly dismissed, and then we can reinstate him.

Not a remotely principled approach. But could actually get a decent campaigning MP the Labour whip back via means which can't be dismissed as partisan or anti-semitism denying or whatever, and give the usual fair-weather self-proclaimed "allies" of the jewish community a bloody nose.

Yeah, fuck it, I agree with this. There's no way this would stand up in court.

[Kelvin]

Brilliant, informative post, Pancreas. Thanks for writing all that out.

[Johnny Yesno]

Seconded.

[gib]

Brilliant, informative post, Pancreas. Thanks for writing all that out.

Aye.

[Twed]

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1145430490062761985

We're going to just have to cancel all of Big Train, it's the quickest way.

[Johnny Yesno]

I see Clive Lewis has been given the boot from the RMT parliamentary group:

Clive Lewis expelled from RMT parliamentary group for 'defamatory' attack on Eddie Dempsey

CLIVE LEWIS has been expelled from the RMT's parliamentary group after having made a "false and defamatory attack" on a railway worker.

Conference delegates at the union's annual conference in Manchester said that the Norwich South MP was "unfit" to represent the RMT after he compared member Eddie Dempsey to fascist leader Sir Oswald Mosley in a tweet several months ago.

Mr Dempsey was also called a "Tommy Robinson apologist" by Mr Lewis, who recently threatened Jeremy Corbyn that his position as leader is "in peril" if he does not commit to an anti-Brexit position.

Delegates condemned Mr Lewis's attack on Mr Dempsey, a former RMT national executive committee member.

Others accused Mr Lewis of having done too little work in Parliament for railway workers after his name wasn't mentioned in the extensive report given by Labour MP and RMT parliamentary group chair Ian Mearns on Monday.

I've not heard of Dempsey before, but this looks like another of those rabbit holes I don't have the time to explore. Somehow, we get from this to him being a Waxy Lemon supporter. I mean, as far as I can see, he's a lexiter, but on what basis was Lewis making those accusations?

[pancreas]

Such a fucking mess. Ash Sarkar goes after CW then gets the right-wing blue ticks STILL accusing her of fostering antisemitism. Almost makes you wonder if some left wing solidarity might be in order.

[BlodwynPig]

Such a fucking mess. Ash Sarkar goes after CW then gets the right-wing blue ticks STILL accusing her of fostering antisemitism. Almost makes you wonder if some left wing solidarity might be in order.

Too late for that now. If you go against your convictions don't expect sympathy

[Kelvin]

edit: ignore

[Johnny Yesno]

Such a fucking mess. Ash Sarkar goes after CW then gets the right-wing blue ticks STILL accusing her of fostering antisemitism. Almost makes you wonder if some left wing solidarity might be in order.

Fucking hell, though. Tracy Ann Oberman is a piece of shit. 'Playing the race card' indeed.

[BlodwynPig]

edit: ignore

I didnt see that it was an attack by Oberman. Ash does indeed elicit my sympathies here. Hilarious that Oberman's husband once accidentally ate a napkin

[Buelligan]

I didn't see any evidence of a 'pattern' in the Segalov article, just complaints about the procedure.

As to the New Socialist article, let's deal with their conclusion first:

Signing and promoting a petition in defence of Gilad Atzmon

Just catching up with this thread (and not yet caught up) so forgive me if this has already been addressed - Chris Williamson made it clear (Politics Live 27 June 2019 - about minute 30.00) in the face of Baron Falconer of Thoroton's accusation, that he did not sign the petition in question. 

Howj, I think, with these very serious matters, it's extremely important to consider the facts, only the facts.  Corbyn is obliged to make it crystal clear, when dealing with the Williamson accusations, that he is being unbiased (or even a little severe).  The reason for this is because he knows (as do most of us) that this whole thing is happening, not to get rid of Williamson or Jackie Walker or even Red Ken, it's to destroy any chance of Corbyn running the next British government.  If he was gone, all of this would stop.  I think we all know that.

That doesn't mean that there are no problems with AS, it just means that they are no greater than they were under the last five or more Labour leaders.

[NoSleep]

Yup

[sponk]

https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1145430490062761985

We're going to just have to cancel all of Big Train, it's the quickest way.

Looks like Toasty hasn't deleted those tweets, and Sarkar said she'd sue if they weren't gone by morning. Should be an interesting story to follow. Incidentally the Novara Living Wage header on her profile seems a bit misjudged now. If you can afford libel lawyers at the drop of a hat I'm not sure you should be asking your viewers to pay your wages.