Hi Outrider, sorry I've not got time to split up your reply.
Not a problem - this is a volunteer forum, it would be churlish to complain about anything freely given
Corbyn should have had a strategy ready for the attacks that were bound to come his way. He sounded like he was being bullied, which isn't a good look for a potential PM, I don't think.
He had his strategy - I don't think it's a winning one, but he is to at least some degree a man of principle and I don't think he's suddenly going to try and be the polished media star now.
Corbyn is being portrayed by unquestioning supporters of the state of Israel as a racist.
Importantly, though, that's not what Andrew Neill was accusing him of there, and he was responding to that specific allegation - he needs to do something about the links being made between Labour and anti-Semitism, but he needs to be careful about how it's done. If he pushes too hard he splits the party, if he doesn't push hard enough he risks deepening the attack.
Have a look at Rachel Riley's Twitter account for example.
I generally avoid Twatter - if something's important enough to talk to the world about, chances are it's not simple enough to cover in 280 characters.
The BBC are effectively blaming Corbyn for every allegedly racist comment made by Labour supporters (or supposedly Labour supporters).
No they aren't, they're raising other people's accusations against the party, and they're taking him to task as the leader of the party for the party's response to accusations, that's different. I think he could be well served to invite in an independent investigatory figure - it would take the onus off him, relieve him of the accusation of not showing sufficient leadership and (which I think he genuinely wants) would get to the root of anything that's actually there.
They don't apply the same standards to the right.
The BBC, in their role as the public broadcaster, are somewhat limited to the scope of what is the public discourse, and are therefore to an extent at the mercy of the same generally right-wing press as the rest of us. I think they could be making more of the accusations of Islamophobia against the Tories, for instance, but it's simply not in the public consciousness in the same way, and if they're the only media outlet holding to that line they face the accusation of being partisan from a right-wing media and a Tory party that would love the opportunity to shut them down.
The figure of 19% living in absolute poverty shocked me too, it's in the link I provided from the IFS, from a report on poverty by the Joseph Rowntree Trust. I may have misunderstood, I'll check it out again when I have time and post to correct the figure if I have.
They're citing is as 'Absolute Poverty', but it's a calculation 'After Housing Costs' - so not a direct measurement of absolute poverty, although still an indicator of the state of the low- and unpaid in the country. It's not something you could easily compare to another country's figures, however, which is how I'm used to seeing such measures.
I don't know what would be better than democracy. It generally seems to work OK in Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Norway though, so perhaps we just need a different type.
Perhaps we need a better 'demos'? I don't think Mrs O. would go for the snow, however, and as a Health and Safety Professional I'm pretty much limited to places that apply UK regulations...
O.
