Corbynomics: A Dystopia

davomcdave

Moby wrote: »

You keep saying the same thing. I know who the tory leader is and the fact that she is female. I'm talking about the make up of the parties as a whole. The leader is just one person. Labour is far more diverse.

There are slightly more people of a BAME background (about 15%) sitting as Labour MPs but then there are more Conservatives of a BAME background sitting as MEPs (about 33%).

As has been well noted, no woman has ever been elected to run the Labour party. There are also basically no leaders of Trade Unions that are women which seems to show that there is an endemic problem within the Labour movement as a whole with attitudes towards women leaders.

Moby

Harriet Harman, Frances O Grady

davomcdave

Moby wrote: »

Harriet Harman, Frances O Grady

Harriet Harperson was never elected to run the Labour party. She was appointed on a temporary basis.

As for Ms O' Grady, there are 258 trade unions listed on Wikipedia and a tiny, tiny number are women.

If you are seriously claiming that the Labour movement doesn't have a problem with women in leadership then you are part of that problem:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Leaders_of_British_trade_unions

Male, pale and stale. No wonder they're going the way of the dinosaurs.

setmefree2

Jeremy Corbyn was embarrassed today as dozens of Labour MPs threatened to rebel rather than back Brexit. Labour’s leader wants the party to show it accepts the result of 2016’s referendum but some MPs in areas that voted Remain say they should reflect opinion there. Some frontbenchers may quit.

Mr Corbyn took another blow when his preferred candidate was not selected to fight the Copeland by-election. Labour plans to hold it next month with a by-election for Stoke on Trent Central, which is due to be vacated by Tristram Hunt, who is becoming V&A director.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-negotiations-may-last-beyond-2021-chancellor-philip-hammond-says-a3445666.html

setmefree2

Labour "set date for Copeland and Stoke by-elections"

Two crunch by-elections for seats vacated by Labour MPs will be held on February 23, the Mirror understands.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-set-date-copeland-stoke-9658741

[Deleted User]

setmefree2 wrote: »

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-set-date-copeland-stoke-9658741

Any predictions from the comrades around here? Will 23/2/17 be the start of the Labour Renaissance?

WR

TrickyTree83

Moby wrote: »

You keep saying the same thing. I know who the tory leader is and the fact that she is female. I'm talking about the make up of the parties as a whole. The leader is just one person. Labour is more diverse. 23 Ethnic minority MPs against 17 tories and higher female numbers as well.

http://www.ukpolitical.info/female-members-of-parliament.htm

Diverse by force, at the expense of merit/ability.

That's a bigger problem. You only need to look at what's going on with the candidate selection for the by-elections to see the state Labour is in regarding who makes up the PLP.

davomcdave

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Diverse by force, at the expense of merit/ability.

That's a bigger problem. You only need to look at what's going on with the candidate selection for the by-elections to see the state Labour is in regarding who makes up the PLP.

And not particularly diverse.

The Tories have more women MEPs than Labour for example.

westernpromise

Labour's so-called "diversity" is just Potemkin Village window-dressing. It bespeaks a deep contempt for the minorities they claim to support (not that women are a minority) that Labour thinks the only way a woman can become an MP is if the selection process is rigged so that all the candidates are female. Put them up against a white man and they'd lose, apparently. Now why would that always happen then? Perhaps Andy "We'll have a woman leader when the time is right" Burnham can shed some light?

Labour needs to either 5h.it or get off the pot: either it opposes sexism and racism or it agrees with them, but it can't claim to oppose them while also operating sexist, racist selection procedures. Labour is now a sexist, racist party that is intensely relaxed about anti-semitism and mass immigration. Let's see how that plays at the next general election. The current strategy is denial that it even has a problem, so the signs are that it might take five or six general election defeats for Labour to recognise its own deep moral incompetence, do something about it and and join the Tories in the 21st century. Perhaps while it works on those it could also think about spending less than it takes in tax so as not to dump huge bills for state overspending onto the unborn.

In the meantime Labour women should get back in tut kitchen and cuke tut dinner.

davomcdave

westernpromise wrote: »

Labour's so-called "diversity" is just Potemkin Village window-dressing. It bespeaks a deep contempt for the minorities they claim to support (not that women are a minority) that Labour thinks the only way a woman can become an MP is if the selection process is rigged so that all the candidates are female. Put them up against a white man and they'd lose, apparently. Now why would that always happen then? Perhaps Andy "We'll have a woman leader when the time is right" Burnham can shed some light?

Labour needs to either 5h.it or get off the pot: either it opposes sexism and racism or it agrees with them, but it can't claim to oppose them while also operating sexist, racist selection procedures. Labour is now a sexist, racist party that is intensely relaxed about anti-semitism and mass immigration. Let's see how that plays at the next general election. The current strategy is denial that it even has a problem, so the signs are that it might take five or six general election defeats for Labour to recognise its own deep moral incompetence, do something about it and and join the Tories in the 21st century. Perhaps while it works on those it could also think about spending less than it takes in tax so as not to dump huge bills for state overspending onto the unborn.

In the meantime Labour women should get back in tut kitchen and cuke tut dinner.

I looked up the Labour leader elections over the last 30 years. In all that time no woman has come ahead of a man. The only time a woman hasn't come last is because there is more than one woman standing.

The Labour candidates for the big mayoralities were all men and outside London any women that stood came last in the selection process. It seems that any time a person needs to be popular rather than competent in the Labour Party a man is chosen. There are lots of women in the Shadow Cabinet and, now the first choice men have resigned, there are even some women in senior jobs. The Party has spoken very loudly over the years though: women are not welcome.