No, there’s been some controversy surrounding Corbyn and Sultana’s new party. Corbyn has been bringing certain people like Adnan Hussain on board for this new party, who has socially reactionary views (anti-queer, anti-abortion) and made transphobic statements. Corbyn and Sultana are pro-trans, but because of this controversy, many liberals in the UK trans community have already decided that this new party is going to be transphobic, even though it hasn’t launched yet.
I think Corbyn and Sultana have mishandled the moment tactically though. Which is kind of Corbyn’s biggest weakness, a lack of ruthlessness and his inability to act in the moment.
Lets say even if he didn’t care about trans rights (which I don’t beleive), right now trans rights (alongside Palestine/Gaza) in the UK are the space and the wedge to launch a new radical party. There’s energy and people who will rally around.
The minute Adnan Hussain said he thinks trans women are biological men, Corby and Sutana should have been standing together say “We appreciate and will continue to appreciate Adnan’s support on Palestine but he’s no longer a party member”. If the media is going to portray you as woke Stalin anyway, do woke Stalinism (positive).
The minute Adnan Hussain said he thinks trans women are biological men, Corby and Sutana should have been standing together say “We appreciate and will continue to appreciate Adnan’s support on Palestine but he’s no longer a party member”. If the media is going to portray you as woke Stalin anyway, do woke Stalinism (positive).
What you need to understand about Corbyn and some of the factions involved is that they are extreme believers in democracy, to a fault. They would see this move as fundamentally anti-democratic and it would have potential for some groups that want a democratic party to split from the project without first allowing it to fester into a problem that demonstrably can’t be ignored.
One of the problems in creating this party which caused it to languish in talks for years as just an idea, to my understanding, was the concerns people had that having Corbyn at the center of it made it undemocratic by default.
Oh yeah, I totally agree. I’ve said it before, but Corbyn has been one of the most consistent anti-war and anti-oppression politicians out there, and while his heart is definitely in the right place, his political instincts are pretty terrible.
No, there’s been some controversy surrounding Corbyn and Sultana’s new party. Corbyn has been bringing certain people like Adnan Hussain on board for this new party, who has socially reactionary views (anti-queer, anti-abortion) and made transphobic statements. Corbyn and Sultana are pro-trans, but because of this controversy, many liberals in the UK trans community have already decided that this new party is going to be transphobic, even though it hasn’t launched yet.
I think Corbyn and Sultana have mishandled the moment tactically though. Which is kind of Corbyn’s biggest weakness, a lack of ruthlessness and his inability to act in the moment.
Lets say even if he didn’t care about trans rights (which I don’t beleive), right now trans rights (alongside Palestine/Gaza) in the UK are the space and the wedge to launch a new radical party. There’s energy and people who will rally around.
The minute Adnan Hussain said he thinks trans women are biological men, Corby and Sutana should have been standing together say “We appreciate and will continue to appreciate Adnan’s support on Palestine but he’s no longer a party member”. If the media is going to portray you as woke Stalin anyway, do woke Stalinism (positive).
What you need to understand about Corbyn and some of the factions involved is that they are extreme believers in democracy, to a fault. They would see this move as fundamentally anti-democratic and it would have potential for some groups that want a democratic party to split from the project without first allowing it to fester into a problem that demonstrably can’t be ignored.
One of the problems in creating this party which caused it to languish in talks for years as just an idea, to my understanding, was the concerns people had that having Corbyn at the center of it made it undemocratic by default.
Oh yeah, I totally agree. I’ve said it before, but Corbyn has been one of the most consistent anti-war and anti-oppression politicians out there, and while his heart is definitely in the right place, his political instincts are pretty terrible.