[Update] Jeremy Corbyn wins Labour Leadership

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Mr K

I'm expecting a story about him eating babies next (it'll be jelly babies, but that will be a minor omitted detail...).

I thought only nasty evil Torys ate babies?

[Ignitionnet]

Corbyn is an atheist republican. God Save the Queen is a no-win for him from the point of view of the media.

When I attend church services I don't join in the prayers, nor do I bow my head. I lower my eyes, stand still and keep schtum. Am I being disrespectful? Would it not be far more disrespectful for me to stand there murmuring words I dislike in worship of a deity I don't believe in?

Easy target, but perspective is good. I'd love not to have the anthem centred around the Queen and God, but rather the nation and country, alongside changing the tune to one that isn't shared with the Imperial German anthem and doesn't sound more like dirge than a rousing expression of national pride, but it is what it is.

---------- Post added at 09:52 ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

It's a pathetic lack of respect and those who don't show respect don't deserve it.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

As for sportsmen not singing it, they aren't leaders of a major political party. Neither are they potentially/possibly going to be leader of the country who's anthem they refused to sing.

As I said, a no win. Had he sung it he'd have been called a hypocrite.

To be fair, though, the man could cure cancer, bring world peace, prosperity and a utopian life to all and certain people would still take a pop.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Corbyn is an atheist republican. God Save the Queen is a no-win for him from the point of view of the media.

When I attend church services I don't join in the prayers, nor do I bow my head. I lower my eyes, stand still and keep schtum. Am I being disrespectful? Would it not be far more disrespectful for me to stand there murmuring words I dislike in worship of a deity I don't believe in?

Easy target, but perspective is good. I'd love not to have the anthem centred around the Queen and God, but rather the nation and country, alongside changing the tune to one that isn't shared with the Imperial German anthem and doesn't sound more like dirge than a rousing expression of national pride, but it is what it is.

As a private citizen with no aspirations to lead this country and represent its people around the world, you are free of many of the expectations that hang round the necks of all our senior public servants.

Corbyn is a republican who nevertheless swore an oath of allegiance to the Queen at the beginning of every Parliament he has ever been elected to. Regardless of his constitutional preferences, he judged that using the form of words that allowed him to take his seat in parliament was the better course of action.

The very act of singing the national anthem is a "thing" in itself, rich in symbolism, quite regardless of the actual words. Plenty of people belt out Flower of Scotland at public occasions north of the border, knowing that the song is an explicit call for independence, and yet having voted No last September.

I would invite all those who don't see a problem with this to consider, in the (highly unlikely) event that Corbyn ever gets to be Prime Minister, how is it going to look to the rest of the world when he is filmed *not* singing along with his national anthem at some major public occasion, when all those around him are doing so?

Of course, the reason why this will never happen is that, like all hard-left nut jobs, he holds his principles so high above reproach that he doesn't know how to compromise. That makes him look irritable and uncouth - not a good look for a PM. So the voters won't give him the job.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

It's the national anthem. He refused to sing it. I'm sure he'd be only too happy to sing "keep the red flag flying" .....speaks volumes about where his allegiance lies

I refuse to sing it.

Not because I don't feel privileged to have been born in the UK, but because:

1) I'm an atheist and it's called God Save the Queen.
2) The most commonly sung version says nothing about our country but instead beseeches God to look after our monarch. If that does say something about our country how depressing.
3) It's crap.

Give me an anthem that celebrates the country rather than our state religion and head of state alone and I can definitely get on board.

---------- Post added at 10:03 ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

As a private citizen with no aspirations to lead this country and represent its people around the world, you are free of many of the expectations that hang round the necks of all our senior public servants.

Corbyn is a republican who nevertheless swore an oath of allegiance to the Queen at the beginning of every Parliament he has ever been elected to. Regardless of his constitutional preferences, he judged that using the form of words that allowed him to take his seat in parliament was the better course of action.

Regarding the first paragraph indeed. Isn't it wonderful?

The second paragraph is quite unfortunate. The only way in which a republican can properly represent their constituents is to compromise on that belief by swearing an oath of allegiance to the monarch. Another no-win situation.

All in all our country isn't the greatest place for an atheist republican to form a part of the legislature. I don't envy anyone with those views that dilemma.

EDIT: That time when you realise you are far more republican than you gave yourself credit for previously. Yikes.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Regarding the first paragraph indeed. Isn't it wonderful?

If I ever harboured any thoughts of running for office, I remind myself of a decade of opining on this website and the feeling quickly goes away.

The second paragraph is quite unfortunate. The only way in which a republican can properly represent their constituents is to compromise on that belief by swearing an oath of allegiance to the monarch. Another no-win situation.

All in all our country isn't the greatest place for an atheist republican to form a part of the legislature. I don't envy anyone with those views that dilemma.

It is unfortunate, but it is an unavoidable consequence of our organic, uncodified constitution. Nevertheless, that constitution has contributed to a level of long-lived political stability that is rare in the world, at any point in history, and on the whole I think we are better off with messy compromises and gradual changes (such as, for example, the right to affirm rather than swear, first guaranteed in the Quaker Act).

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

EDIT: That time when you realise you are far more republican than you gave yourself credit for previously. Yikes.

I had a republican wobble for about six months some time around 2002. The feeling went away by itself.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I refuse to sing it.

Not because I don't feel privileged to have been born in the UK, but because:

1) I'm an atheist and it's called God Save the Queen.
2) The most commonly sung version says nothing about our country but instead beseeches God to look after our monarch. If that does say something about our country how depressing.
3) It's crap.

Give me an anthem that celebrates the country rather than our state religion and head of state alone and I can definitely get on board.

Land of Hope and Glory does it for me.

2006 survey conducted by the BBC suggested that 55% of the English public would rather have "Land of Hope and Glory" than "God Save the Queen" as their national anthem

Wiki

I'm sure Jezzer will be singing his head off to the "Red Flag" though.

[Osem]

Well PMQs was a damp squib. I can't see Corbyn's tactic of asking questions without following them up or challenging the answers given lasting too long. Maybe he chose that approach to deprive the PM of the opportunity to comment on some of the considerable problems and dissent he faces within his own party.

As quaint as it may seem for a day or two, I can't see what value those who sent in the questions he chose to raise will feel they got from Cameron being allowed to give his Government's view without any challenge. Quite the reverse, in fact. If I felt so concerned about govt. policy that I'd been moved to write to the leader of the opposition I'd expect him/her to challenge that policy robustly, not give the other side what amounted to a free party political broadcast on the subject without a word about how Labour would do things differently.

[downquark1]

Yes I was wondering if it was normal to keep using constituency testimonials. On the other hand it is something of a nice idea.

[OLD BOY]

He's even disassociating himself from the questions he asks at PMQs!

He's certainly a strange character. He would soon turn from this 'gentle' person into a monster if he ever he got to the office of Prime Minister. I wonder how quickly he could transform these islands into another North Korea?

[Osem]

Ben from Dover makes the point that Corbyn's preoccupation with questions might be accounted for by his lack of any credible answers to those questions.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

He's even disassociating himself from the questions he asks at PMQs!

He's certainly a strange character. He would soon turn from this 'gentle' person into a monster if he ever he got to the office of Prime Minister. I wonder how quickly he could transform these islands into another North Korea?

I think your hypothesis may not be an optimal interpretation of available information, and your worst-case scenario may not be founded in actuality.

[Osem]

Not sure N. Korea is realistic but I could see Corbyn recreating Tower Hamlets on a national level if he got the chance.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I refuse to sing it.

Not because I don't feel privileged to have been born in the UK, but because:

1) I'm an atheist and it's called God Save the Queen.
2) The most commonly sung version says nothing about our country but instead beseeches God to look after our monarch. If that does say something about our country how depressing.
3) It's crap.

We're not talking about you. You are free to do what you want in that situation. Corbyn on the other hand is the leader of the opposition, has sworn an oath to the Queen and might become prime minister. Hell, even Sturgeon sang the anthem.

Reviewing the BBC reporting of PMQ's today, one thing did spring out at me which I think may damage Mr Corbyn.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-34263142

@13:32 [quote]

During PMQs, the DUP's Nigel Dodds condemned shadow chancellor John McDonnell's 2003 remarks that IRA terrorists should be "honoured". Mr Cameron told Mr Dodds he reflected the views of the "vast majority in this country". In response, a Labour Party spokeswoman has just said:

"Jeremy has clearly condemned all violence on all sides in Northern Ireland. It is because he is opposed to human grief and conflict that he worked for peace and talks. Northern Ireland has been one of the most difficult but inspiring examples of establishing peace and reconciliation after years of conflict. Jeremy Corbyn's approach will be to continue to move forward on that basis. He is opposed to all violence and that is why he backed talks to achieve peace when others refused to."

Compare that to David Cameron's reply to the question from Mr Dodds

people who seek to justify the terrorism Britain faced "should be ashamed of themselves"

Mr Corbyn's not going to have many friends if he keeps giving equivalence to the IRA killings to actions of the Army, imho.