• 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The leaked report a couple of years ago showed the Blairite wing of the party would rather actively sabotage the party than have Corbyn in.

    Corbyn was voted in by the Labour membership twice, the elected Blairite MPs didn’t like that and decided to work against what their party membership wanted.

    Couple that with the left-wing-hostile British media, and he never stood a chance, despite being at some points entirely capable of being elected, if not for the constant sabotage.

    • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Corbyn could never an election though? So, I really do not see your point. The perverse argument is that Corbyn and his allies were also sabotaging the Labour party. They were nothing that was beneficial to the party or constructive in encouraging people to vote for Labour. Some of Corbyn’s policies were ofc good, but he carried so much baggage that he was untenable.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Corbyn’s Labour was less than 2,500 votes from power in the 2017 election.

        The article I linked in the above comment about the leaked report gives a lot of evidence of the Blairites in the party doing what they could to lose labour votes.

        I think it’s reasonable to conclude that without their sabotage, Labour likely would have won that election with Corbyn as leader.