DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Ok, quick reply as I'm off out. Corbyn was elected leader fair and square by the rules that the Labour Party has - twice. It has been said many times that the Labour MP's do not reflect the will of members of the Party.
Well firstly, it's the job of Labour MPs to represent their constituents. All their constituents, not just party members. (Something I wish a certain Theresa May would remember when she keeps acting as if the concerns of 48% of the population don't matter one jot and can be totally ignored, all the while spinning it as the country supposedly coming together.) MPs are not delegates - they are representatives. That's for the very good reason that they are paid to spend a lot more time studying issues than your average party member (of any party) has. So there are lots of reasons why it may be quite reasonable for MPs to sometimes act in ways that many party members wouldn't have chosen.
Secondly, 10-15 years ago, exactly the same could have been said of Jeremy Corbyn. But you don't seem to be using the same language to describe Corbyn's behaviour then. You seem to be describing it more in terms of him standing up for his principles. Why the difference? Are those Labour MPs who have made it clear when they disagree with Corbyn not also standing up for their principles?
(For what it's worth though, I do agree with you to the extent that perhaps some MPs could have shown a bit more discipline in keeping differences less public, though it is a difficult balance to strike since democracy works by people being free to air their opinions).
The media gave Mandelson plenty of airtime when he said he was working hard every day to undermine Corbyn, is that really fair? Did Corbyn or any of the other rebels say something similar about Blair? Again, showing total lack of respect for the membership.
Actually, if you go to the text of the interview, as far as I can see, Mandelson didn't exactly say he was trying to undermine Corbyn - that's an interpretation that was put on his remarks by some of the media but is not there in his original words. That interpretation seems to have been gleefully picked up by various Corbyn-supporting and left-wing commentators (in an attempt to undermine Mandelson?)
Last edited: