Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[TepidT2O]

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn’t read Real Rasta’s post properly, rather than take this as a deliberate twisting of words. They didn’t claim that Starmer “supports right wing racists”, they expressed disappointment in the weakness of his response to right wing racists. Even our PM - an actual racist - managed to call them what they were.

Starmer’s comments are linked below, and start with a nice bit of both-sidesery about the police. Weak as piss, if you ask me.

https://www.indy100.com/article/keir-starmer-london-protest-far-right-racist-racism-9565111

No one was trying to twist his words (or that wasnt my impression anyway),  they just didn’t know what incident he was referring to.

As it was a single tweet, and contained the words ‘sowing hatred‘ I think it would be a push to say there was anything wrong with that.  If it was a speech and didn’t mention it I’d be much more worried though. And that may be the case, but I haven’t seen it.

The rise of far right extremism is a huge issue though, you're right. The targeting of BAME groups seems to be far more prevalent of late (although maybe social media just makes it more obvious, it’s difficult to know).   Tackling it will take determination and policies that marginalise people with those views rather than policies that breed resentment and push people to those extremes.
Looking at the US, we’ve seen how overly confrontational and populist politics can actually push more people to the right, avoiding this in the UK is paramount.  It will be interesting to see how Starmer tackles these issues as his leadership builds.  To stop BAME people being discriminated against is something that needs to not be a ‘moment’ but needs to be a philosophy.  Actions will speak loudest here. Right now I’d trust him to take action far more than Johnson, but we need to watch out for subconscious bias in our leaders, we’ve seen under Corbyn how discrimination can flourish if dealt with weakly.

[The Gulleysucker]

And a good question.  I saw the blue tick and the words 'Official page for #BlackLivesMatterUK' in the bio and assumed some kind of official status.  But I think you're asking what gives these people the right to make that claim and why Twitter has deemed them worth of the blue tick and I have no idea to be honest.

It's all a bit shrouded as to who is behind it now (The UK one)

It seemed to be formed back in 2016 and first came to prominence with the London City Airport closure

This led to charges of those involved (at that time).

They were found guilty

Following the blockade it emerged that several of those arrested were veterans of climate change protests and their involvement at City airport led to accusations that the British offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement has been hijacked by middle-class white activists.

There are photos of them there, some undoubtedly likely trust fund kids.

A quick google on their names reveals several seem to be still active in a give me a cause and I will agitate sort of way, CV's stating writing for Novara and such.

There is also a reference in this book here that anti racist campaigners accused them at the time of being "white left wing activists hijacking the Black Lives Matter Banner" though I can't find who that was.

I have no idea if any of these, or their fellow anarcho left political travellers are still involved, but it's always a bit of a problem when these sort of professional agitators find a noble cause to latch onto and then try to twist it to their own ends.

[Cpt_Reina]

The leaked report is still under investigation, i assume Starmer is waiting for that. Ive not heard of this bullying matter, ive searched but cant find anything, do you have any links?

The report is available online for you to read at your leisure.

[Snail]

The report is available online for you to read at your leisure.

[Zeb]

The report is available online for you to read at your leisure.

Many people did, me included. The claims for the 'report' are unfaithful to the edited highlights of whatsapp communications. That it wasn't actioned by the GLU and GS responsible for drawing it up says a great deal. That it wasn't investigated properly does too. And so we must wait for someone to actually do the investigative part and write a real report, with some of those named suspended in the meantime.

[Bobsackamano]

The report is available online for you to read at your leisure.

Ive read the report. I was on about the seperate bullying matter you alluded to?

[Sangria]

As Israel moves forward with the annexation of the West Bank, and mainstream British politics is gagged of the right to critique Zionism, and Israel’s settler colonial pursuits, we loudly and clearly stand beside our Palestinian comrades.

FREE PALESTINE.

More than 40 Jewish groups around the world in 2018 opposed "cynical and false accusations of antisemitism that dangerously conflate anti-Jewish racism with opposition to Israel’s policies and system of occupation and apartheid".

Tens of BAME organisations in the UK condemned efforts "deny Palestinians’ basic humanity by suppressing their entire history and current plight"

The fast-growing US organisation Jewish Voice for Peace on Zionism: "Palestinian dispossession and occupation are by design. Zionism has meant profound trauma for generations, systematically separating Palestinians from their homes, land, and each other."

and many more in that vein.

https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277177624884850689

Why on earth are BLM taking up other causes?

Reading Gulleysucker's post makes more sense for me now.

[The Gulleysucker]

I'm uncertain, but there may also be a strand now involved who are inspired and sympathise with the teachings of Louis Farrakhan.

He does have a bit of anti semitic form, to say the least.

[Dr. Beaker]

Milliband spoke out against this latest Israeli action on Marr on Sunday.

[TSC]

and many more in that vein.

https://twitter.com/ukblm/status/1277177624884850689

Why on earth are BLM taking up other causes?

Reading Gulleysucker's post makes more sense for me now.

Does appear to some extent some group/s behind BLM this side of the Atlantic are focusing on Israel specifically.  Danger of course is that the central message gets diluted or lost.

[So… Howard Philips]

Has anyone come across this website;

https://www.blacklivesmatter.uk/about-us.html

I was looking into the ideas about defunding the police (which have a very American slant i.e stopping the police receiving ex military equipment) and this website came up.

Looking at the disclaimer

 "IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR VISITORS:WE ARE NOT AFFILIATED TO THE ACTIVIST COALITION USING:Twitter @ukblmInstagram @blmuk

We DO NOT have a gofundme page. They do.

THE UKBLM COALITION DO NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL WEBSITE TO DIRECT YOU TO.

For information on BLM protest you need to contact @ukblm or other BLM coalitions, groups to preferred area directly."

Is this some form of commercial site piggybacking off BLM. I'be looked on Whois but thre is no clarity as to who is behind the website.

[TepidT2O]

Milliband spoke out against this latest Israeli action on Marr on Sunday.

He’s right to do so, the actions of the Israeli government have been deplorable

[TSC]

He’s right to do so, the actions of the Israeli government have been deplorable

Agreed. But IMO shouldn’t be conflated with BLM which obviously arose as a result of actions of the police in US.

[killer-heels]

The problem I have with this situation is to me this is all cynical attempts to attack the leader. Actions speak louder than words and if you take Milliband for example, he became a darling to the left and a lot of pro Corbyn commentators recently, despite him signing off on shite like the Immigration Mug when he was leader.

To me it seems loyalty and arse kissing is requirement number 1. If this was Long-Bailey, it wouldn't have been picked up on.

Also describing BLM thing as a moment. I am sure lots of people have used that as a reference to it being a moment in history?

[Red-Soldier]

I'm uncertain, but there may also be a strand now involved who are inspired and sympathise with the teachings of Louis Farrakhan.

He does have a bit of anti semitic form, to say the least.

From Wiki:

During the 2016 Republican Party presidential primaries, Farrakhan praised Republican candidate Donald Trump as the only candidate "who has stood in front of the Jewish community and said 'I don’t want your money.'" While he declined to endorse outright, he said of Trump "I like what I'm looking at."[57] In 2018, Farrakhan again praised Trump for "destroying every enemy that was an enemy of our rise."[58] Conservative pundits Candace Owens and Glenn Beck both took note of Farrakhan's position, with Owens saying it was a "really big deal" that Farrakhan had "aligned himself with Trump's administration" and Beck declaring that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and urging "reconciliation" between conservatives and Farrakhan.[59]

[ljycb]

Another nice summation of how I’m feeling from Dr Charlotte Lydia Riley (@lottelydia) - wish I could articulate myself even half as well, may stand a chance in threads like this if I could!

Exhausted by a politics that cannot move beyond “but millions of people in Britain support the police, so Labour must if it wants to win”. Millions of people in Britain also support the death penalty, too. Where do you draw the line, if your politics is what the people want?

It isn’t right-on left-wing posturing to talk critically about the behaviour of the police. For many (millions of?) people in Britain, disproportionately people of colour, their experience experience of the police is of harassment, violence or, at the very least, frustration.

I’m especially tired to see the repeated idea that — for example — defunding the police is merely “woke” “posturing”. For many people & communities in Britain, the police are a deadly weapon of the state. Their concerns about police violence and harassment are not “posturing”.

[Welshred]

The problem I have with this situation is to me this is all cynical attempts to attack the leader. 

Completely agree with this. Some people have been waiting and waiting for an opportunity to attack Starmar and boy have they taken it!

[The Gulleysucker]

Has anyone come across this website;

https://www.blacklivesmatter.uk/about-us.html

I was looking into the ideas about defunding the police (which have a very American slant i.e stopping the police receiving ex military equipment) and this website came up.

Looking at the disclaimer

 "IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR VISITORS:WE ARE NOT AFFILIATED TO THE ACTIVIST COALITION USING:Twitter @ukblmInstagram @blmuk

We DO NOT have a gofundme page. They do.

THE UKBLM COALITION DO NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL WEBSITE TO DIRECT YOU TO.

For information on BLM protest you need to contact @ukblm or other BLM coalitions, groups to preferred area directly."

Is this some form of commercial site piggybacking off BLM. I'be looked on Whois but thre is no clarity as to who is behind the website.

There seem to be a few spelling mistakes on the pages of that site.

What's a bit odd, is they have that not affiliated disclaimer but then say go to BLMUK for protest details...

For information on BLM protest you need to contact @ukblm or other BLM coalitions, groups to preferred area directly.

So I'm left unsure as to what they are trying to say by stating they don't have a gofundme like the others, but then instead have a paypal donate button.

I'm not sure what the differentiation there is meant to signify.

But there should rightly be a concern that the BLM message may be getting diluted and possibly hijacked, perhaps even for mischief, and it doesn't help when there is an opacity around the background of who is really running these sites.

[jillcwhomever]

Completely agree with this. Some people have been waiting and waiting for an opportunity to attack Starmar and boy have they taken it!

Wasn't this completely predictable though, you could almost set your watch to it.

[Welshred]

Another nice summation of how I’m feeling from Dr Charlotte Lydia Riley (@lottelydia) - wish I could articulate myself even half as well, may stand a chance in threads like this if I could!

She hasn't really commented on the term 'defund the police' though has she? She's said a lot of things that do require much needed systemic change within the police like their harassment and violence towards certain communites. 'Defunding the police' is a ridiculous slogan and it doesn't represent what BLM actually want and will just promote jingoism in certain groups. Like I've said before Starmar was right to say defunding the police is nonsense but he was wrong to then not go on to explain what BLM actually mean.

Look at that the violence in Brixton last week. I saw Snapchat videos of it where they were bragging about chasing the police out of their area after they came to shut down their illegal party but then half an hour later screaming about where the police and paramedics were after rival gangs decided that not having the police around was a good opportunity to start stabbing each other. The lay person in this country will see defunding the police and as removing the police in its entirety, that's the issue, and the slogan needs to be reframed to accurately portray what BLM want.

[ljycb]

Completely agree with this. Some people have been waiting and waiting for an opportunity to attack Starmar and boy have they taken it!

This is probably true for some people but isn’t that just how the world works? There would have been people queuing up for an opportunity to attack any of the other candidates for leadership. Likewise, just like there was under Corbyn, there are some people who are going to back the leader to the hilt and will not accommodate any criticism aimed at him. We needed to move away from this a long time ago but the rot seems to have set in unfortunately.

[Snail]

Completely agree with this. Some people have been waiting and waiting for an opportunity to attack Starmar and boy have they taken it!

We listen to the concerns of Jewish people when it comes to anti-Semitism within the party, and we should listen to the concerns of black people now. It’s not always about Corbyn vs Starmer, you know?

[Jiminy Cricket]

It's all a bit shrouded as to who is behind it now (The UK one)

It seemed to be formed back in 2016 and first came to prominence with the London City Airport closure

This led to charges of those involved (at that time).

They were found guilty

Following the blockade it emerged that several of those arrested were veterans of climate change protests and their involvement at City airport led to accusations that the British offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement has been hijacked by middle-class white activists.

There are photos of them there, some undoubtedly likely trust fund kids.

A quick google on their names reveals several seem to be still active in a give me a cause and I will agitate sort of way, CV's stating writing for Novara and such.

There is also a reference in this book here that anti racist campaigners accused them at the time of being "white left wing activists hijacking the Black Lives Matter Banner" though I can't find who that was.

I have no idea if any of these, or their fellow anarcho left political travellers are still involved, but it's always a bit of a problem when these sort of professional agitators find a noble cause to latch onto and then try to twist it to their own ends.

If even just part of that is true, they need to be fucked off.

[The Gulleysucker]

We listen to the concerns of Jewish people when it comes to anti-Semitism within the party, and we should listen to the concerns of black people now. It’s not always about Corbyn vs Starmer, you know?

Perhaps it would be the right thing for the Black Community to now propose a meeting with Starmer to enable them to discuss their concerns directly.

Who would be their representatives?

[ljycb]

Like I've said before Starmar was right to say defunding the police is nonsense but he was wrong to then not go on to explain what BLM actually mean.

I just disagree with this. I don’t think he was right to dismiss it as “nonsense”. A lot of people have given good explanations as to why he said what he did and I appreciate and acknowledge the reasons as to why he did it, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with us taking issue with how Starmer approached it. And it’s fine for us to disagree on this too btw.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

Completely agree with this. Some people have been waiting and waiting for an opportunity to attack Starmar and boy have they taken it!

I think that is slightly unfair. Obviously some of the weeping and gnashing of teeth from the usual suspects on Twitter is well out of proportion. But I think its fair to say that the interview was a bit of a mess. Starmer is normally pretty good at thinking on his feet so I'm surprised that he seems to have missed the open goal of pointing out that we have already spent the last decade de-funding the police and it has not solved anything. The 'moment' thing also was a really poor choice of words. You can try and rationalise/justify it as a misunderstanding (and might actually be accurate in doing so) but the point is that he has to get it right first time round and be accountable when he doesn't.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Has anyone come across this website;

https://www.blacklivesmatter.uk/about-us.html

I was looking into the ideas about defunding the police (which have a very American slant i.e stopping the police receiving ex military equipment) and this website came up.

Looking at the disclaimer

 "IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR VISITORS:WE ARE NOT AFFILIATED TO THE ACTIVIST COALITION USING:Twitter @ukblmInstagram @blmuk

We DO NOT have a gofundme page. They do.

THE UKBLM COALITION DO NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL WEBSITE TO DIRECT YOU TO.

For information on BLM protest you need to contact @ukblm or other BLM coalitions, groups to preferred area directly."

Is this some form of commercial site piggybacking off BLM. I'be looked on Whois but thre is no clarity as to who is behind the website.

There are historical whois resources you might use (for a fee) to possibly turn up registrant information. But the website owners, probably, always obfuscated their details. Still, might be worth a try.

[ljycb]

I think that is slightly unfair. Obviously some of the weeping and gnashing of teeth from the usual suspects on Twitter is well out of proportion. But I think its fair to say that the interview was a bit of a mess. Starmer is normally pretty good at thinking on his feet so I'm surprised that he seems to have missed the open goal of pointing out that we have already spent the last decade de-funding the police and it has not solved anything. The 'moment' thing also was a really poor choice of words. You can try and rationalise/justify it as a misunderstanding (and might actually be accurate in doing so) but the point is that he has to get it right first time round and be accountable when he doesn't.

Brilliantly put.

[Welshred]

We listen to the concerns of Jewish people when it comes to anti-Semitism within the party, and we should listen to the concerns of black people now. It’s not always about Corbyn vs Starmer, you know?

I didn't say it was about Corbyn vs Starmer...

[Circa1892]

The interview we're talking about was a mess - and it was unusual for him not to be clear.

The "defund the police" mantra is, in the UK context, quite lazy. One of the key parts of the campaign in America is the fact the police have a fucking ludicrous amount of funding, often at the expense of other things - whereas in the UK the Tories have cut them to the bone over the last few years so there's nothing less to defund, and it'd be incredibly dangerous to do so.

Reform the police and reprioritise funding into communities to address the causes of crime and refocus the justice system so it isn't massively fucking racist - absolutely. That also seems to be the core goal, so using a lazy copied slogan isn't helpful.

I'm not that bright, and don't express myself very clearly on here - but feel that's probably the gist of what Starmer wanted to say, so weird he made such a ballsup of it.

Whether some people on twitter are jumping on this as a deflection tactic ahead of the EHRC report coming out is open to question - but the fact he made a muck up of a fairly simple interview question isn't.

[Snail]

I didn't say it was about Corbyn vs Starmer...

Come on mate, I’m not daft.

[ljycb]

 

I didn't say it was about Corbyn vs Starmer...

Who are the “some people” you’re referring to? I thought it read like you were talking about those sympathetic to the Corbyn leadership who are now taking issue with Starmer. Correct us if we’re wrong though please.

[DelTrotter]

I didn't say it was about Corbyn vs Starmer...

  Haha, indeed.

[Welshred]

I think that is slightly unfair. Obviously some of the weeping and gnashing of teeth from the usual suspects on Twitter is well out of proportion. But I think its fair to say that the interview was a bit of a mess. Starmer is normally pretty good at thinking on his feet so I'm surprised that he seems to have missed the open goal of pointing out that we have already spent the last decade de-funding the police and it has not solved anything. The 'moment' thing also was a really poor choice of words. You can try and rationalise/justify it as a misunderstanding (and might actually be accurate in doing so) but the point is that he has to get it right first time round and be accountable when he doesn't.

Don't disagree with anything you've said here apart from the first sentence. Twitter was what I was talking about and there were a lot of people on there who were waiting for Starmer to slip up just so they could start attacking him and attack him they did with the anti-semitism towards his wife!

I just disagree with this. I don’t think he was right to dismiss it as “nonsense”. A lot of people have given good explanations as to why he said what he did and I appreciate and acknowledge the reasons as to why he did it, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with us taking issue with how Starmer approached it. And it’s fine for us to disagree on this too btw.

Of course it's fine for us to disagree but I do think it all comes down to what people perceive as 'defunding the police' and unfortunately there are a hell of a lot of people who won't research it and just think 'they want to get rid of the police, that's ridiculous'. Starmer could and should have done better though like Sammy said in his post above.

[Welshred]

Come on mate, I’m not daft.

You're putting words in my mouth. You don't like it when people do that to you, don't do that to me please.

[Snail]

You're putting words in my mouth. You don't like it when people do that to you, don't do that to me please.

Yep just seen your reply ljycb where you said you were referring to people on Twitter, apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

The rest of my post still stands - we listen to the concerns of Jewish people, we should listen to the concerns of black people too.

[Welshred]

Yep just seen your reply ljycb where you said you were referring to people on Twitter, apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

The rest of my post still stands - we listen to the concerns of Jewish people, we should listen to the concerns of black people too.

Maybe I could have explained myself better

You're absolutely right though and Starmer does need to reach out to the black community now to allay their fears as I don't think the mistake of using the words he did use regarding BLM automatically means that the Labour party is now institutionally racist. If I were Starmer as well I'd get David Lammy to help him organise and lead it as well, his words and actions over the last month or some have been seriously impressive.

[The Gulleysucker]

Yep just seen your reply ljycb where you said you were referring to people on Twitter, apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick.

The rest of my post still stands - we listen to the concerns of Jewish people, we should listen to the concerns of black people too.

And I replied...

Perhaps it would be the right thing for the Black Community to now propose a meeting with Starmer to enable them to discuss their concerns directly.

Who would be their representatives?

So, I'll ask again, who would be their representatives?

[Snail]

And I replied...

Perhaps it would be the right thing for the Black Community to now propose a meeting with Starmer to enable them to discuss their concerns directly.

Who would be their representatives?

So, I'll ask again, who would be their representatives?

Respectfully, as a white woman that’s not a question I am able to answer.

[The Gulleysucker]

Fair enough.