Diane Abbott to be banned from standing for Labour

Seriously? No-one is demanding Labour avoid any impression of racism to the same extent of as the Tories? Are you on drugs?

I agree that it is quite serious. I know that this is not what the thread is about but I would be grateful to know from anyone anywhere if the charges of racism against her by her own colleagues have ever been investigated?
Or have these simply been brushed aside in the same way that she was ignored multiple times in the HoC when she tried to address the Frank Hester racist remarks about her?

"Seriously, do her misjudged words really make her an anti-Semite?"

I'm not sure you've read my post fully.

Some candidates have already been selected & named

https://vote.labour.org.uk/results

@BIWI ah right, thank you! That makes sense - I think that's the bit of the puzzle I was missing!

@soundsys we won't know who any of the Labour candidates are until next week - I think on 4th.

They may be 'misjudged' words - but she's a senior politician. She's also someone who knows what racism and prejudice is. To have written a letter like this (and then claim it was a mistake because it was a draft ) is much more serious than just a misjudgement.

Seriously, do her misjudged words really make her an anti-Semite?

Notions of a hierarchy of racism may be distasteful but as I’ve questioned upthread were her remarks made in the context of the blatant racism she has endured from her own party colleagues?

And were these racist remarks and attitudes toward her ever investigated? Or is that the type of racism that labour is not bothered to investigate?

To have an investigation into a published letter from April 2023 that takes until December to be completed, then a failure to confirm the outcome, then the leader himself claims it isn't complete when it is and even now there is no definite confirmation of what has been decided absolutely stinks. Its not a surprise as it has all the feel of trying to ensure she doesn't get to stand or is so ground down by it she herself decides not to. But its an awful way to treat someone who has dedicated herself to working for the party. And that is whether people like her or agree with her or not.

The real kicker is when there was all that publicity about the Tory donor making awful remarks about her the Labour Party used that as an excuse to send out messages to members asking for donations. The sheer nerve of doing that when they were treating Diane the way they have takes my breath away and is why so many members are even now resigning or standing down from roles.

On top of, you know, the leadership being unable to even define a woman which had already led to many stepping back.

I can't keep up with this tbh. On the 6 o'clock news yesterday she wasn't being reinstated and on the 10 she was. But today they're saying... she's been reinstated into the party but they're not letting her run as an MP? So does that mean... she needs to resign from the party after just getting back in to run as an independent or... just step down? Do we know who labour is putting up for the seat then?

Sorry if this has been answered, I have read the full thread and listened to the news but I'm no clearer!

(I disagree with Diane Abbott on many things but she's undeniably a good constituency MP and would win as an independent)

What a depressing thread and what a mess modern theories have made in the English speaking world. The idea that racism only applies to different skin colour, where it had previously included nationality and thus had a much wider meaning has caused a lot of anger and misunderstanding.

But the thread was really about how the Labour Party has treated Diane Abbot and it does seem shameful. Whatever process was being fallowed, it should have been clear and should have been concluded within a pre-set limited timescale.

As to who else is there? There is no real alternative, I don’t think. The Conservative Party is equally chaotic. My only hope is that the Labour Party, who probably will be elected, are not as awful as seems likely. I won’t be voting for them, and indeed unless more candidates are put up in my ward, I may, for the first time, spoil my ballot paper.

I know all you have just educated me with. Nevertheless, the landowners in Ireland were selling grain (not the British government) and they defined themselves as Irish, indeed identified as such, and were considered such by everyone else in the British Isles. They treated the ordinary Irish badly for the most part. The Scottish Protestants were planted in Ulster in the 16th and 17th centuries but were originally of Irish descent, as it happens, since the Irish invaded Dariada in Scotland from the north of Ireland, in the eighth century. Brian Boru called himself King of Scots, by which he meant the Irish. Dublin was the Vikings, true, but it was the Irish who raided the coasts of Wales, the South West and the coasts of e.g. Lancashire. And the Normans were Vikings, too, for that matter, not English. Please do not tell me I know nothing of the history of my grandparents' homeland.

About twenty years ago, I was in a discussion about anti-semitism. I was not really aware of it and was hearing what a serious problem it was. What surprised me was the examples they cited, largely employment discrimination in banks, was seen as more serious that either the racism faced by Muslims in Britain or by what the working class Catholic community had faced in Derry or Belfast.
In terms of absolutes, what Diane Abbott wrote is absolutely reasonable. But we have an understanding that anti-semitism is far more serious.

Grammarnut Not the Irish Famine again.
Yes the Irish Famine again, sorry if our history and its ongoing consequences are a nuisance.

It was Irish landowners who exported food from Ireland during the famine (i.e. not the British government.
Wow, blaming the Irish for the Famine is quite a stretch!
Do you think that the land of Ireland was owned by Irish landowners in the 19th century? Seriously? Ireland was 'owned' and controlled by the British until the 20th century. The land had been taken from the Irish and given to English and Scottish planters - cf the plantations of Munster and Ulster in the 16th and 17th centuries. By the 19th century, most of the country was owned by a small number of landowners, definitely NOT the native Irish, who had to pay often-exorbitant rents to farm their land, and who were decimated by what may or may not have been a genocide, depending on whether or not one accepts the current definition.
These are all historical facts, Irish History 101.

- largest slave market in Europe was Dublin
True; but Dublin was a Viking and the slave market was a Viking operation, not an Irish one.
the Irish were slaving all around Europe ? ?

Diane Abbott probably knows little of the history of the British Isles
Perhaps; lack of knowledge about the history of Ireland is not uncommon.

In her latter years she has become a walking gaff machine. For someone who has been in politics as long as she has she demonstrates and extraordinary lack of judgement at times. She is clearly a good constituent MP and would probably win her seat as an independent but she would cost Labour votes in a GE campaign.

I think I read that Abbot has Type 2 diabetes? If she is struggling to control blood sugar it may explain the erratic behaviour.

I think she has a poor grasp of history and cultural sensitivities, and is too prone to howlers to hold a senior position, but the Labour party haven't dealt with this well.

It has just been announced by Keir that she hasn't been banned.

Don't be silly. Or maybe you can't help it. Do try, though.

So presumably you also think that the UK Labour Party are akin to the Communist Party of Cuba.

I think she might have a drink problem; the signs are there, to my (ex addict and alcoholic's) eyes.

She's a liability to the party and the fact that she was the first Black female MP should not afford her any partiuclar protection. Labour need to be on the front foot throughout this campaign and cannot let anything weaken it.

I beg to disagree as do thousands of others.

What are "tories"?

Unworthy lowlifes not worth a capital letter.