The now so boring Nikkei-owned FT reached a low point: “not good enough for Private Eye though did well in the 6th form news sheet”
An FT subscriber for many years cannot envisage renewing the subscription following the poor performance after its change of ownership. One article reaches a new ‘low’: instead of reading Robert Shrimsley’s cheap gibes about Jeremy Corbyn’s future – ‘the reasons for his failure’, our reader recommends the readers’ comments.
In similar facetious vein:
- Well done Robert! That must have taken you all of about 4 minutes to compose. Easiest day’s work you have done for a while.
- Genuinely surprised the FT published this, but amusing that Shrimsley’s been hanging around replying to comments all morning.
- Was this the same Mr Shrimsley who warned us with all the wealth of his experience about the forthcoming crash of 2008? Thought not.
- What pathetic nonsense. Corbyn must really have you shaking in your shoes if you have to resort to this sort of stuff. Perhaps it’s the fear that real socialism could win that has you worried?
If the FT had conviction in its own intellectual platform then it would welcome Corbyn’s arguments as a widening of the debate and address his policies head on, rather than resorting to this type of churlish, oh-so-clever argument.
The FT would also do well to recognise that Corbyn’s disillusionment and his huge popularity in the Labour leadership race reflects the disillusionment of many others in our society, so to dismiss him as a loon is to ignore huge swathes of our own society and real concerns held by real people over real issues, such as a chronic lack of housing in London. Media-level navel-gazing like the above will fail to address these powerful concerns and the debate will only become more polarised.
There is a very viable choice out there! It is called anti-austerity, it calls into question an economic system deliberately designed to transfer wealth from poor to rich, and it is animating half a dozen fast growing political movements around Europe, including the SNP (one may question how sincere SNP is, since they have another overriding agenda, but there is no doubt they – and Corbyn – have tapped into a major and rumbling disquiet that has all the political elitists on the back foot). This Corbyn phenomenon is larger than perhaps you realise. He is only a mouthpiece (although as a decent principled man a convincing one).
From Shrimsley’s Point 3: “These insular and jingoistic British voters refused to understand that a desire to kill British soldiers needs to be viewed through a wider geopolitical prism”.
Point 3 is also the lowest form of journalism, making quotes deliberately ambiguous, so as to deliberately misattribute comments. Given that the topic in hand is the mass killing of innocent civilians in another country by British forces, the cleverness is especially trite.
Very unfunny. The invasion of Iraq and the violence, wholesale killing, garnished with depleted uranium and other carcinogens, is not the stuff for humour. It is disaster that keeps on giving. When foreign troops invade your country you resist them and count their death as a moral victory. Imagine for a moment Iraqi battalions blowing up large parts of Dorset. You may be sure the locals would express the same view.
You are essentially underwriting the ‘my country right or wrong’ approach. That of course would not be Corbyn’s. The point is to think before sending soldiers into action. You may be sure he would take very seriously the great responsibility placed on a leader before countenancing air strikes and committing British troops to possible death.
A Cameron would have no problem bombing democracy from the skies, and, for example, blasting a Libya apart into total chaos with the horrendous consequences we now have to face. It is only because the painful lessons have finally sunk into the population that men like this now hesitate to jump up and commit troops at America’s bidding.
I must say also I am disturbed at these guilt-by-association attacks, directed particularly at Corbyn. When an Israeli Minister approves, as happened during the attack on Gaza, the deaths of Gazan women as it will result in producing fewer “little vipers”, are we to condemn a Member of the Board of Deputies of British Jews because he later shared the same platform? It is a very dangerous slope.
And back to the economy
Hmmm. Maybe you need to get out a bit more, Robert: Millions of voters may indeed covet an iPhone 7, a nice car and a new kitchen. But the reality they face is zero hours contracts, a public sector pay freeze, diminishing tax credits that will leave them worse off despite Osborne’s ‘living wage’, benefit sanctions, the bedroom tax and foodbanks.
There is a material base for Corbynism. If the Corbynites play their cards right, it may even prevail.