By the way, I don't see why there's all this fuss about 'Labour must win back Scotland' in order to win a general election.

That's utter bull****. Scotland is 59 seats. Labour must define a clear vision to win back the voters who left them for UKIP and the Tories across the rUK.

Without checking, I think the result in Scotland has made a difference to the overall outcome of a general election only 3 times since the war.

DiegoArmando, there's a thing called multi-quote and it if you learned to use it I'd be eternally grateful.

If he was around the Militant in the 80's I'd expect to know him by sight at least.

In any case DiegoArmando has a point the revolutionary left spends at least as much time on internecine battles as they do capitalism, maybe not on the picket lines but in print and argument. What Jeremy Corbyn does have is the support of his constituency and is contributing to a large number of people getting involved in the Labour movement. Socialists should be generally in agreement that this is a good thing whether in moving the Labour Party left of providing larger numbers of politicised youth they can look to recruit.

I've voted once in my life in a general election and it was for Labour.

Sorry man. I do apologise. I've always been conscious of it but it has never worked for me. I know it's me and not it. If you could help me I would be eternally grateful.

Aye, exactly. You're a Tory.

Click the multi-quote button (the middle one on the bottom-right of the post) on every post but the last one you wish to quote, on which you just click quote (the left one).

For instance, like this.

This doesn't even remotely follow, and I say this as someone who is sufficiently left-wing that it takes six beers for me to even begin talking politics with people outside of the internet.

So you claim, but the sorting hat has spoken.

Oh no? Red Tories, blue Tories, they're all the same. Voting Labour doesn't necessarily make you left wing. They're so stinking of the neoliberal agenda it doesn't make any difference. Guys like Jim Murphy are as Tory as Thatcher herself. Thankfully we're all wisening up to them these days.

So Tories are now 'anyone right of centre'? Are UKIP tories? How about the US republican party?

Actually even the centre is tories by his def.

Republican party and democratic party clearly both tories. Every party in Australia, most in Europe, New Labour were tories etc etc

****ing pathetic. Obv.

Tories getting tough...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/s...-2014091590610

If you want to get technical we could start using 'neoliberals'. I prefer Tory though for its pejorative flavour. Of course it's not in every circle that it is pejorative, but there ye go - that's how it is around mine. Red Tories out!

Neoliberal is more accurate but unfair on decent liberals. It's the triumph of Thatcherism - they may not all be tories but they are all thatchers children.

Charles Kennedy wasn't.

It's not inaccurate to suggest that in most of the western world the two major parties are neoliberal.

Just talking UK and even then making a generalisation

They all lick the arse of the IMF. It's their triumph rather than Thatcher's. The same would have happened regardless of who led the Conservative Party.

I read this Corbyn guy thinks labour should admit Iraq was bull****. He is an extremist communist imo, somebody has to stop him.

His also keen on Tony Blair being tried for war crimes. Someone will stop him.

(that's not meant to sound quite as sinister as it sounds, not quite anyway)

Tony Blair apparently is 100% sure that Corbyn has weapons of mass destruction.

So he's got some good ideas then...

I don't see where Corbyn's said that, though I wouldn't put it past him, given that he's temperamentally in line with the various Holocaust-deniers and Hizbollah terrorists he hobnobs with (and then pretends he's forgotten hobnobbing with), rather than, say, Clem Attlee.

But in any case the ICC has no jurisdiction in 'crimes of aggression' as yet, and won't have, unless an amendment scheduled for 2017 is passed by two-thirds of State Parties to the Rome Statute and subsequently ratified by at least 30 of them. And even then, any such prosecution would be legally and politically problematic to a rare degree. What with the Attorney General, the Cabinet and Parliament itself authorising Tony Blair's actions, and the UN Security Council authorising the occupation of Iraq after the initial invasion and 36 countries taking part, and so on.

My understanding is that this is debatable at best.

There's that illegal rendition torture thing as well. Not that I think JC expects or intends to have TB tried as a war criminal because of the practical reality. He is just keen on it like many of us

That doesn't mean there couldn't be some proper inquiry in the UK with Tony Blair and others having to lie testify under oath while all the evidence is properly examined and the very real threat of perjury charges hangs over them.

There was lots of anecdotal evidence yesterday that JC voters are being excluded from the ballot based on flimsy evidence of supporting other parties, but none of the other candidates' voters are.

It will be interesting to see what happens if JC loses by a very narrow margin. Could run and run....