Dianne Abbot

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenter...r-policy-cost/

When I meet people who say Corbyn is decent, I always ask 'How about Diane Abbott? '

Responses range from sagebrush to rage. Never, ever positive.

I wondered what all the fuss was about, after all, anyone can get numbers muddled up.

Just heard it on R4 though....

I like Dianne Abbott but no one is pretending she is near first choice for the big jobs.

Unfortunately the division in the Labour party has led to the self-imposed sidelineing of so many of those who should now be stepping up

She's shadow Home Secretary. May not be first choice but that's where she is.

If Diane Abbott was a middle aged white man she would be nowhere near home secretary.

Abbot is incredibly annoying. She has to bring race and identity politics into absolutely everything.

Indeed and it's a great shame so many Labour party MPs have sidelined themselves.

Hesitant to believe anything that comes after this.

Why is this a problem?
And you're confusing identity politics with positive action.

99% of MPs are useless, including the cabinet.

Because people are sick and tired of those on the left playing the race card. No one cares. People care about real issues like the economy, jobs, taxes, pensions and cost of living.

And if you're black you're more likely to unemployed and in a lower paid job. If you insist on ignoring that racial oppression (and along gender lines) exists I will gladly post links to extensive research.

By 'people' you mean 'some people' - some people who for some reason want to ignore that some groups are disadvantaged in the workplace, in education and in society generally.

And what does 'playing the race card' mean exactly? Sounds like something from a Nazi playbook to me.

Not bringing it up every time =! ignoring it.

The above post is the quintessence of why Labour is losing the working class.

So a guy accuses a black woman defending people against racism of 'playing the race card', yet rather than jump on this for the thinly veiled racist slur that it is, you make a point about the Labour party. Pretty poor imo.

What exactly are you saying - that Labour shouldn't stick up for oppressed groups because soft racist working class people might be offended? What about working class black, Muslim, Jewish and Sikh people? Have you forgotten the names of Anthony Walker and Stephen Lawrence? What of homophobic attacks? Should we tell the gays to stop going on about it all the time?

Are you are so full of crap you think people don't turn out to vote because Diane Abbott keeps banging on about equality and diversity? Or could it be decades of industrial decline, falling wages, erosion of conditions, falling living standards, etc etc, presided over by Labour as much as Tory...

"racial oppression" in a country like Britain in 2017. What nonsense.

^ Go read a book and then come and debate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tell-Like-S.../dp/1905192061

You are so horribly infested with black/white false dichotomies. If you dare to even hint at X then you MUST THINK all these Y propositions. Its basically every post you make.

Just so we are clear, this is the statement that kicked things off:

.

To which your reply was so whats the problem.

Just because someone has a problem with the above, does not mean they are instantly against progressive dialogue and action in politics, it just means they have some contextualised preferences for when and how such dialogues take place.

But this is you in a nutshell. There can be not one iota of deviation from the one true path of absolute purity and if you are not on the path of absolute purity, you are against us.

The upshot of which is that most people are against you.

No need. The votes, common sense attitudes and accounts of the vast majority of my fellow black Londoners will do the talking for me.

'Racial oppression' lol. What hysterical silliness.

Yes indeed, why read books when you can rely on baseless assumption and hearsay.

Yes, I asked what's the problem as I suspected there was something lurking, but did not judge right away, and the response was 'because I'm sick of the left playing the race card'.

If you refuse to see the racist undertone here then, well, you're just wrong. And I couldn't care less who disagrees with that.

'contextualised preferences for when dialogues take place' sounds like you want the right to gag people when you deem it inappropriate for them to speak.

You realise its perfectly possible to think racism is not a problem and not be racist?

No it means if we are discussing the common agricultural policy I dont want race mentioned.

I can think of a dozen or so situations where a white man or woman was not grilled like this. Teresa May is like a rabbit in the headlights when she gets asked anything difficult-she never does, she's got away with absolute murder. Jeremy Paxman's "tough" interrogation of David Cameron involved questions about Top Gear. Boris Johnson cannot add two single-digit numbers together without virtually choking to death on his own tongue.

It may or may not be anything to do with racism as such, but she got special treatment that the privileged classes never seem to get. There seems to be an unspoken "we were in the bullingdon club/eton/Goldman Sachs together so we'll throw you a few softballs" attitude.

Nothing wrong with this interview but would be nice to see some government ministers actually interrogated for once.