Jezza Corbyn is actually Joe Biden

Revealed: Jeremy Corbyn’s speech used words written for Neil Kinnock in 1980s

50 thoughts on “Jezza Corbyn is actually Joe Biden”

  1. Trouble is….. I’ve just read the extract in the Torygraph & there’s not a word I’d disagree with.
    Even the final sentence.
    What we’re told are competitive markets don’t bear the slightest resemblance to the real thing.
    Some sort of libertarian, is he?

  2. BiS: it’s possible that you don’t disagree with his speech because the text comprises blandishments and platitudes, rather than actual plans that can be dissected and analysed.

  3. BiS. Don’t make the mistake of equating what he says to calm the sheeple with what he will do if by any mischance he gets hold of the reins of power. His economic advisors include “Lord” Murphy and M. Picketty – two more ardent Marxist “economists” would be hard to find.

  4. KJ

    You are wrong that he says he hasn’t read Marx. In the interview, he says:

     “The Communist Manifesto of 1848 is a short and strong piece. Das Kapital, I think, is very difficult to read and for me it was not very influential.”

  5. Don’t get me wrong. I wouldn’t touch Corbyn & his coterie of pocket fascists with a barge pole.
    But it’s that he can use that passage without my disagreement makes me think he might just end up in the comfy chair.
    “blandishments and platitudes?”
    OK. Show me the pol isn’t full of blandishments and platitudes…or bullshit as it’s known out here… and you win a prize.
    They may have plans, or crafty schemes, more like it. But they’re gonna fuck-up big time & give him his chance.

  6. bloke in spain,

    The problem is that it just isn’t that true, the bit about “accepting their place”. A Labour politician will never say that some people work harder than others. Mostly because the harder workers are already voting Conservative and the lazy people/plodders don’t like it.

  7. Theophrastus

    You missed out this bit “I never managed really to read it. I mean I don’t know if you’ve tried to read it. Have you tried?”

    Then there’s also… [Interviewer] “Because your book, obviously with the title, it seemed like you were tipping your hat to him in some ways.”

    TP: “No not at all, not at all! The big difference is that my book is a book about the history of capital. In the books of Marx there’s no data.”

    So as I said, NOT a Marxist then.

  8. In a soundbite age semi-sensible-sounding snippets from this puke and his gang are a real danger. Esp as the leftist infiltrated media will take great pains to dig over Corbyn’s deserts of clichéd red drivel to find a few words that can be made to sound “sensible”.

    “That doesn’t sound too bad” thinks Mr Numpty.” Maybe he is an alternative to the Pig-Fucker.”

    Since he is born of the same poison-socialistique that nurtures even the Eton coprolite now masquerading as Prime Minister —-Jezza might be an alternative to that unworthy.

    But what he is most certainly is an alternative to is freedom, prosperity and the quiet enjoyment of a decent life with your loved ones, ALL of which he and his gang will fuck up badly PDQ Venezuela-style and worse.

  9. So Much For Subtlety

    Sorry BiS but WTF?

    Since the dawn of history, in virtually every human society there are some people who are given a great deal and many more people who are given little or nothing. Some people have property and power, class and capital, status and even sanctity, which are denied to the multitude. And time and time again, the people who receive a great deal tell the multitude to be grateful to be given anything at all. They say that the world cannot be changed and the multitude must accept the terms on which they are allowed to live in it.

    “And time and time again, the people who receive a great deal tell the many to be grateful to be given anything at all. They say that the world cannot be changed and the many must accept the terms on which they are allowed to live in it.

    “These days this attitude is justified by economic theory. The many with little or nothing are told they live in a global economy whose terms cannot be changed. They must accept the place assigned to them by competitive markets.”

    How can you not agree with that? Right down to every comma and full stop? Especially as the Tories since Thatcher have been telling the poor to get on their bikes and *not* accept what they have been given.

    Promised to renationalise the railways
    • Put the housing crisis at the top of his agenda, promising a massive council house building programme
    • Promised to end the “stigma and discrimination” around mental health
    • Wants to extend statutory maternity and paternity pay to self-employed people
    • Asked David Cameron to help Teeside steel workers facing job losses
    • Vowed to make every school accountable to local education authorities
    • Savaged the Conservatives’ “shocking” broken promises on child tax credits

    There is not a single part of that list that any sane person can endorse.

  10. ” Wants to extend statutory maternity and paternity pay to self-employed people”

    That is a doozy, isn’t it? I’m trying to work out how I’d get my customers to pay me for doing bugger all because the g/f’s dropped a sprog.

    But in Corbyn I see Podemos, the Greek guys & other parties getting support. There’s a lot of people out here create real wealth are sick to death of the parasites& fairy ring producers living off our backs& leaving us with the crumbs. And no-one else is offering any alternatives.
    Take the 2% managed rate of inflation I’m told is supposed to be good for my health. Like a lot of people produce stuff of real value, I don’t live my life that way round. I accumulate money. I don’t borrow. I’m probably the only person here’s bought houses for cash. Because my pay packet’s never had the security regulatory capture provides.
    So, actually, I don’t see the slightest difference between QE, PQE or xQE. They’re all just ways of shafting the punter.

  11. The problem is that Lab have convinced themselves that the tories don’t also believe that stuff, and that the difference is the means to achieve it.

    And cos Lab and Tories differ (to a degree) on the means, then the tories must believe the opposite.

    It’s a kind of malignant autocondescension.

  12. Parts of the speech were offered by the author, Richard Heller

    As with every other new Labour leader, I offered it to Corbyn shortly after his election, both to him personally and to Neale Coleman, on learning of his appointment as chief of staff.

  13. So Much For Subtlety

    bloke in spain – “But in Corbyn I see Podemos, the Greek guys & other parties getting support. There’s a lot of people out here create real wealth are sick to death of the parasites& fairy ring producers living off our backs& leaving us with the crumbs. And no-one else is offering any alternatives.”

    I see Podemos et al in Corbyn too. But not because people creating real wealth are sick to death of the parasites. But because the parasites fear that the gravy train will be cut off. That is why the keep voting for people who promise to keep making the Germans and the middle class pay.

    Either way the people producing wealth will pay because we lack a genuine conservative party that might do something radical like cut spending.

  14. Bloke in North Dorset

    KJ,

    Not having read Marx doesn’t mean that someone can’t be a supporter of the philosophy of Marx. I suspect very few Marxists have read his works, indeed the only one that I know of is Chris Dillow of Stumbling and Mumbling fame.

    Similarly reading it does not make you a Marxist. My mates flogging through Das Capital and whilst he is on the left socially he’s definitely not a Marxist, yet.

    I’ll also bet that quite a few free market / libertarian types haven’t read Smith or Hayek for the same reasons, its bloody hard work, but it doesn’t stop them grasping the underlying concepts by reading around the subjects.

  15. SMFS: I dunno, I think I can endorse (lukewarmly) two points from that list.

    > end the “stigma and discrimination” around mental health
    I don’t expect that he will achieve it, but it’s definitely a worthy ambition. Mental health is a real problem for lots of people, and there is still stigma around it that needs to be tackled.

    > help Teeside steel workers facing job losses
    I suspect that Mr J Corbyn and I would disagree vigorously on when “helping” happens and what it looks like, though.

    I hope I’m at least mostly sane.

  16. Bloke in North Dorset – “I’ll also bet that quite a few free market / libertarian types haven’t read Smith or Hayek for the same reasons, its bloody hard work, but it doesn’t stop them grasping the underlying concepts by reading around the subjects.”

    Smith is not only easy to read, he is a delight to read. He has a lovely turn of phrase, an interesting way of looking at things, and a wealth of knowledge about pretty much every subject under the sun.

    It is not entirely unheard of for an economist to be readable (I know people who claim Alfred Marshall is for instance) but Smith is in a class by himself.

  17. Philip Walker – “I don’t expect that he will achieve it, but it’s definitely a worthy ambition. Mental health is a real problem for lots of people, and there is still stigma around it that needs to be tackled.”

    Sorry but this is one of those Motherhood statements by the Left that conceals a nasty agenda. What stigma? And why does it need to be tackled? You mean it should be illegal to be a little wary of someone with schitzophrenia? Why precisely?

    What he means is that we all need to be bullied out of perfectly normal and common sense attitudes. How precisely do you end discrimination against the mentally ill and why would you want to? It is a sensible rule never to sleep with a girl crazier than you – you think that ought to be illegal?

    “I suspect that Mr J Corbyn and I would disagree vigorously on when “helping” happens and what it looks like, though.”

    I will grant that.

    One point then.

  18. “because the parasites fear that the gravy train will be cut off. That is why the keep voting for people who promise to keep making the Germans and the middle class pay.”
    Parasites? Mmmm… There’s a train I catch mornings, just after 6. There’s a whole bunch of parasites get up at 4:30 make that happen. 3am this morning I was watching another bunch doing the nightly refuse collection. Yes. Nightly, English people. Nightly. And seeing the EU economy’s been manipulated to the benefit of the Germans & a section of the middle classes & against most others, my depth of sympathy can be measured in nanometers.

  19. Wants to extend statutory maternity and paternity pay to self-employed people

    I suspect that the unions are moaning that it is unfair that self-employed people can undercut staff employees in terms of overall cost to employ, and want to load up the self-employed with the sort of overheads that have made staff too expensive. Whatever it is, it isn’t in the interests of the self-employed.

  20. Very shrewd Mr Newman @10:22
    I’m wondering where the sting in the tail might be. It’s not as if the Corbynistas exactly like the SE’s is it?

  21. bloke in spain – “Parasites? Mmmm… There’s a train I catch mornings, just after 6. There’s a whole bunch of parasites get up at 4:30 make that happen.”

    I bet they are not the people voting for Podemos.

    “And seeing the EU economy’s been manipulated to the benefit of the Germans & a section of the middle classes & against most others, my depth of sympathy can be measured in nanometers.”

    And for the feckless south who have been getting free cash for decades. While lying about pretty much everything.

  22. Bloke In North Dorset,

    Read the interview and tell me how one can possibly glean from it that Piketty is a Marxist? There’s also NOTHING in his works to suggest he is in any way, shape or form a Marxist. Indeed, it seems to me Piketty has compiled all this data to prove that with the right tweeks capitalism can be saved from itself. Now correct if I’m wrong here but that’s not what Marx advocated.

  23. SMfS
    This is The Wealth of Nations we’re talking about? Page after page of corn prices? A delight to read? I thought it was a real grind.

  24. Odd that Corbyn’s didn’t mention his belief in open borders and unlimited immigration. You would think that was important. Perhaps he wanted to conceal it?

  25. @SMfS
    “And for the feckless south who have been getting free cash for decades. While lying about pretty much everything.”

    We’ve done this one before. Treating everyone south of the Belgian border as uniform.
    If one wanted to go looking for feckless in Europe, SMfS, I’d but you Brit scum way, way up at the top of the list. Practically invented the lifestyle. If we’re treating people uniformly.

  26. Parasites? Mmmm… There’s a train I catch mornings, just after 6. There’s a whole bunch of parasites get up at 4:30 make that happen.

    Maybe it was my misunderstanding, but I read SMFS’s “parasites” to be the diversity coordinators and equality advisors etc. You know, grauniad readers.

  27. Bloke in North Dorset

    BiS,

    “I’m wondering where the sting in the tail might be. It’s not as if the Corbynistas exactly like the SE’s is it?”

    One way would be to make them all for limited company’s and then become employees of that company.

    KJ,

    I wasn’t arguing the point about whether he is or isn’t a Marxist, just pointing to a flaw in the logic.

    Frankly I don’t care either way, I’m just wary that its someone else promising the left a magic money tree.

  28. No, I don’t get the “feckless south” thing either. As for this:

    “to keep making the Germans and the middle class pay”

    Is this “Germans” as in ” Germans”, or “Germans” as in “members of the EU”? It’s usually clear from the context, but not this time.

  29. Mr Ecks – “That doesn’t sound too bad” thinks Mr Numpty.” Maybe he is an alternative to the Pig-Fucker.”

    A spray of coffee and my smartphone were in alignment.

  30. > Sorry but this is one of those Motherhood statements by the Left that conceals a nasty agenda.

    Look, of course, anybody can conceal a bad agenda behind a good idea. I wasn’t saying that Mr J Corbyn MP and I (I’m going to enjoy referring to him in the crustiest tones possible, given how much of a throwback he is; I can’t wait for him to become a Privy Councillor) will agree on everything that flows out of the statement: much like the bit about the Teeside steel workers, really. But as a statement, in itself, I have absolutely nothing but support for it.

    Your description of your perceptions about mental illness illustrates precisely the problem. To take your example, it is true that people who suffer from schizophrenia are more likely to commit murder, but they are also more likely to be the victims of violent crime, and the suicide rate among people with schizophrenia far exceeds the homicide rate. I’m not, therefore, saying that one oughtn’t be thoughtful in how one speaks to and behaves towards people with certain kinds of mental illness: but even in the starkest cases, that is far more for their safety than your own.

    Now, obviously people who suffer from mental illnesses are more vulnerable to crime and suicide because of their condition — already, this suggests that they need more protection, does it not? — but if social attitudes towards the mentally ill lead criminals to think that they can prey on sufferers with less risk of legal censure then those social attitudes should change. And if those attitudes are making sufferers feel that they cannot get help — that their situation is hopeless and that nobody would be sympathetic if they knew — if those attitudes, in short, contribute to the suicidal tendencies that such people can feel, then it is long past time those attitudes were consigned to the dustbin.

    As for your second point, I doubt that even the wilder fringes of the Left are so insane as to attempt to force people to have sex against their will. Given how implausible it is, I’m not even sure how much to credit it as a genuine concern, to be honest.

  31. > end the “stigma and discrimination” around mental health

    Nice that he wants to destigmatise his core supporters. Very sweet.

  32. What Philip Walker said.

    The problem with the left’s attitude to mental health is that their solution is to throw money we haven’t got at the NHS and direct it to prioritise mental health without any thought as to how this is to be done or if the NHS is even capable of doing it. In this they don’t differ that much from the Tories of course so nothing is likely to change. In any case, as Tim points out elsewhere, in the end it’s as much a question of votes as anything. Few people care enough about mental health to make it worthwhile for any politician to prioritise it, they’d rather be seen opening cancer wards.

  33. “One way would be to make them all for limited company’s and then become employees of that company.”

    North Dorset, I would bet something like an additional tax called an “insurance payment” to pay for benefits for the self employed.

    It will be like Blair and Brown with SMEs ; here’s lots of nice workers goodies, you can pay for it.

  34. > Can people be specific about what these “social attitudes” are and in what way they should be changed?

    Yep, happy to. Let’s start with the insinuation that people with mental health problems pose a significant danger to the public, and particularly, that people with mental health problems are more dangerous to the public than the public is to them. That ties in very closely to the fact that medical terms like “schizophrenic” and “psychotic” get used by people in society as terms of abuse or characters from a horror film. (Less disturbing, but still unhelpful, is the use of phrases like “OCD” to indicate a strong preference over a minor matter.) You can add to that the fact that too many people still seem to think that curing much mental illness (e.g., depression) is simply a matter of thinking better (as though somehow the person’s mind, already not working in proper balance, is able to re-assert control over itself at will). And the portrayal in society, including but not limited to the media, of autism as some kind of idiot-savant thing rather than a spectrum on which a lot of people, almost certainly including some of us commenters here, sit. Oh, and let’s not forget the unbelievable mockery that people with eating disorders sometimes suffer.

    Lots of this is simply ignorant rather than malevolent — goodness knows, we all start out ignorant and I’m not saying I’ve led a blameless life of unalloyed kindness towards the mentally ill in word and deed.

    But I hope the changes that are needed are fairly obvious. Given what I just said about this being mostly ignorance, and given that I’m never going to be a member of the Language Police or the Vicariously Offended Brigade, my best suggestion for the means of changing them is that people, particularly in the media where many of these stereotypes are reinforced, get themselves better informed of the realities of mental illness.

  35. “Let’s start with the insinuation that people with mental health problems pose a significant danger to the public, and particularly, that people with mental health problems are more dangerous to the public than the public is to them.”

    A couple of points:

    People naturally don’t think of some overall danger to the public as a whole, but instead make a personal judgement based on the specific circumstances at the time. What is a ‘significant’ danger to the public? One murder isn’t significant in terms of the general public, but it is quite significant to an individual. If a psychotic individual is in the pub next to me, right now, he isn’t posing a “significant” threat to “the public” but he is posing a specific threat to me.

    Your second point about “the public” being more dangerous to them is also not relevant. If I am making a personal judgement of not going near a psychotic person, I’m not thinking “oh, I’m more of a danger to him than he is to me”. That simply isn’t rational.

  36. Roue le jour:”SMfS
    This is The Wealth of Nations we’re talking about? Page after page of corn prices? A delight to read? I thought it was a real grind.”

    Even PJ O’Rourke struggles to make it readable in his “Notes on…”

  37. “Bloke not in Cymru

    I was thinking they would just increase NI contributions for SE”

    It’ll be interesting.

    Currently SSP is claimed via the employer and a ‘sick note’ only needed if the illness extends beyond 7 days.

    If the Self-employed can get SSP what’s to stop them claiming to be sick on every single day they don’t have work booked? Or for that matter even on days that they do have work booked? Who would police this and how?

    Could a self-employed person work a 5 day week and claim the other 2 days as sick every week and get SSP? After all, the self-employed can work 7 day weeks, and certainly do on occasion.

    It strikes me as a cheerful sound-bite with not much thought behind it.

  38. Paternity pay? Maternity pay?
    Back when we were self employed if we had a pregnancy and birth we’d have to work all we could.
    Increased costs, decreased ability of one of us to run the business, keeping customers….
    Just thinking of the local shop owner who runs post office within shop with his wife. Shut shop for a few days/weeks? Hire staff for a few days/weeks?

  39. As someone who has had a fairly close up view of the mental health system via the brother of an ex-GF, and also some other friends who have mental health issues, I would have to say there is a world of difference between people who have been sectioned and are put on anti-psychotic drugs, and people who have depression, or other milder forms of mental illness such as bi-polar disorder etc. Having experienced first hand the full-on mania of a man who has stopped taking his anti-psychotics and is under the delusion he is in touch with 2 alien entities who control the earth, and he has to do their bidding, I can honestly say that any public prejudice about such people is entirely understandable, and justified. Such people are a danger to themselves and the general public. I for one was at one point scanning the room looking for anything I could grab to defend myself if the situation went tits up, I was that worried for my safety.

    Whereas for people with low order mental health issues I can fully understand the desire to de stigmatise their issues – they do not pose any danger to the public, and may indeed be more likely to suffer discrimination and abuse as a result of their mental health issues.

    The problem (as ever) is the usual PC people who run the mental health system, who refuse to accept that people like my ex’s brother are stigmatised for a real reason, and try to lump everyone into the same boat, and demand the public regard all mental health patients as alike.

    They aren’t, and we shouldn’t.

  40. So Much For Subtlety

    Philip Walker – “Look, of course, anybody can conceal a bad agenda behind a good idea.”

    Anyone who talks about discrimination is not hiding their bad agenda.

    “To take your example, it is true that people who suffer from schizophrenia are more likely to commit murder, but they are also more likely to be the victims of violent crime, and the suicide rate among people with schizophrenia far exceeds the homicide rate.”

    And so ….. isn’t the solution to discriminate against them just a wee bit by providing them with secure and safe mental health facilities where they can’t hurt anyone and no one can hurt them? The suicide rate is irrelevant to the murder rate unless you think the suicide is being driven by discrimination. As opposed to, for instance, the voices in their heads.

    “but even in the starkest cases, that is far more for their safety than your own.”

    I pose no risk to the mentally ill. They pose a real risk to me. You cannot claim any risk runs equally in both directions as it does not.

    “Now, obviously people who suffer from mental illnesses are more vulnerable to crime and suicide because of their condition — already, this suggests that they need more protection, does it not?”

    Which you want to ban.

    “but if social attitudes towards the mentally ill lead criminals to think that they can prey on sufferers with less risk of legal censure then those social attitudes should change.”

    If. Have you shown this? Have you tried? Are you relying on the SJW’s usual “proof by virtue of being a White heterosexual male”? Criminals can prey on the mentally ill because their testimony is never going to be treated equally in a court of law. I am sorry but it is not discrimination to be dubious of what someone who thinks the CIA is controlling their actions via secret implants in their brain has to say. The solution is to discriminate – protect the mentally ill. Which you want to ban. Just as pretending Black children can all go to Oxbridge has not helped any of them go to Oxbridge, pretending that the mentally ill do not have problem is not going to make those problems go away.

    “And if those attitudes are making sufferers feel that they cannot get help — that their situation is hopeless and that nobody would be sympathetic if they knew — if those attitudes, in short, contribute to the suicidal tendencies that such people can feel, then it is long past time those attitudes were consigned to the dustbin.”

    Again that magic if. On the other hand if the system says that it is wrong to offer the mentally ill any special help or consideration, and leaves them dumped on the street and in prisons where they are easy prey for the criminal, they might well kill themselves in despair. That is Corbyn’s agenda.

    “As for your second point, I doubt that even the wilder fringes of the Left are so insane as to attempt to force people to have sex against their will. Given how implausible it is, I’m not even sure how much to credit it as a genuine concern, to be honest.”

    No but they are trying shame. I have already heard people claim anyone who categorically rejects a homosexual approach is homophobic.

  41. So Much For Subtlety

    Philip Walker – “Let’s start with the insinuation that people with mental health problems pose a significant danger to the public, and particularly, that people with mental health problems are more dangerous to the public than the public is to them.”

    Schizophrenics are about eight to ten times more likely to commit murder than a non-mentally-ill person. That is not an insinuation. It is an observed fact. That is a significant increase in risk to the general public.

    Whether the public is a greater threat to them remains to be seen. There are a lot more people in the general public. But the solution in both cases involves putting them behind walls to protect them and us. Which you want to ban.

    “You can add to that the fact that too many people still seem to think that curing much mental illness (e.g., depression) is simply a matter of thinking better ”

    The only method we have for helping the mentally ill is cognitive behavioral therapy. Which is basically a way of helping people think better. It doesn’t help with serious mental illness but even so the Finnish studies in family support have shown that sitting schizophrenics down with their families and talking offers real help. Admittedly with a small and disputed study. And, you know, Finns.

    “Oh, and let’s not forget the unbelievable mockery that people with eating disorders sometimes suffer.”

    Being fat is not an eating disorder. No one else is likely to even notice someone’s eating disorder unless it is near death anorexia and no one laughs at that. Everyone thinks it is HIV or cancer.

  42. > No one else is likely to even notice someone’s eating disorder unless it is near death anorexia and no one laughs at that.

    I think you might be surprised. Some people notice these things more easily, others less. (I’m quite oblivious; my wife is very sharp, having had lots of friends at various points along the scale.) Some people can be genuinely heartless in their attempts at humour; some people simply don’t consider who might be listening to their conversation. But even with the merely careless joking, suppose a particular workplace is somewhere that routine mockery of eating disorders occurs (in general terms): how will an employee there who has an eating disorder feel? Even if they’re not the target in a direct sense, even if nobody else knows because they’re all like you and me and couldn’t spot an eating disorder until the sufferer is knocking on death’s door?

    As for the matters of treatment, things I “wish to ban” and so on, you’re imputing to me views I have certainly not stated and, in the main, do not hold. For example, I never said I wanted to ban discrimination: I said I wanted people to stop stigmatising. If you don’t know the difference, dictionaries are available to help. The point to which I am sticking is simply this: I would like people to know a bit more, to think a bit more, and to consider their words a bit more.

  43. Just went back and checked the quote from Mr J Corbyn MP, representative of the Labour interest and Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.

    I’d forgotten he mentioned discrimination. I’m happy to park that one (it’s a controverted word, what is meant by “around mental health” needs unpacking, etc.) as I was focussing on “stigmatisation”. Even people who need to be sectioned don’t deserve to be stigmatised.

  44. SMfS

    And so ….. isn’t the solution to discriminate against them just a wee bit by providing them with secure and safe mental health facilities where they can’t hurt anyone and no one can hurt them?

    Which ties in with what I said about the political priorities. There are no votes in doing that and no one wants to foot the bill. Even getting access to what treatment there is on the NHS for mental health problems is fraught with difficulty, even getting the right medication can be an uphill struggle.

    As a matter of interest how often have you been menaced by anyone with mental problems ? My guess would be never.

    The suicide rate is irrelevant to the murder rate unless you think the suicide is being driven by discrimination. As opposed to, for instance, the voices in their heads

    If someone can’t get the right treatment for “the voices in their heads” then effectively they are being discriminated against. If you imagine that only schizophrenics suffer from compulsions that can lead to suicide you are mistaken.

    The only method we have for helping the mentally ill is cognitive behavioral therapy

    That’s nonsense and it rather contradicts your notion that loonies should be locked away in assylums.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *