to think that the far left of the Labour Party are doing themselves no favours

[Ohbehave1]

Diane Abbott saying that Chairman Mao did more good than harm.

John McDonnell threw a copy of Maos little read book across the despatch box and said the George Osborne should take a leaf out of Moas book.

Since when has a person who murdered or caused the starvation of over 60 million people been a good man?

I've just looked up what Abbott said and when she was taken to task for it she said she was 'I was just putting the case for Mao'.

Yeah, he was just misunderstood and trying his best, he didn't really mean to kill that many people

(I found this for DD1 when she was wondering whether hitler was the world's worst dictator. I thought it was stalin and couldn't believe how many people died because of mao, it says he killed 78m. (estimates look to be 60m-80m))

McDonnell using mao to make a joke then is in pretty poor taste.

Yes the Chinese Communist party committed atrocities. And continue to this day to commit awful human rights abuses.
And we let his heirs ride in a golden carriage up the Mall to a reception at Buck Palace, feted by the government and deals done to buy their steel produced in conditions we wouldn't allow to build our vanity rail products. To the Northern powerhouse that used to provide our steel.

None of the Labour Party seem to be doing it any favours right now. It's the only mainstream party I've never voted for so I'm not that bothered ;)

Labour seems to be losing its way right now. It's bad times when UKIP looks more organised and together than a main party

That somehow totalitarian murderous dictators are OK (if they're left wing, and their wrupitten word isn't as brutal as their actions) is a very unpleasant stance (to me, at least).

And it does seem to me to be a bit stuck in 1970s, when lefties feted China - excusable then, as scale of atrocities not yet known.

But really, Mao's China wasn't that far from current North Korea.

I thought what one of the political commentators said after Osbornes budget was interesting. That the budget was designed to appeal to the vast centre ground which the Labour Party has now left vacant. Therefore The Tories have sn open door to take support from the far right all the way through to centre left. I don't think Jeremy Corbyn is doing the future Labour Partys prospects any good, going on what has happened so far, his politics don't appeal to more than a minority of the general public and he's causing factions within the party already.

I didn't hear what Diane Abbott said but the McDonnell red book thing has been taken out of context I think. He was implying that Osborne is now in bed with the Chinese re. the nuclear reactors. He didn't tell him to take a leaf out of Mao's book. The "joke" was badly thought out because of course now all the public fed by a gleeful/sanctimonious press are seeing is McDonnell the "Trotskyist" holding Mao's red book.

John McDonnell didn't say Osborne should take a leaf out of Mao's book - he said he might find it useful when dealing with his new friends, making reference to the deals with the Chinese govt. For steel and the new nuclear plant.

I thought it was an ill-judged joke, personally, but get the facts straight, don't spread a lie OhBehave.

but the McDonnell red book thing has been taken out of context I think.

He was on GMB basically saying it was tactics to attract attention to the issue. It was an awful interview. He was happy he did it.

I am pretty sure Jeremy Corbyn said he was putting an end to this sort of things and that theatrical politics was alienating people?

Labour seems so disjointed.

As a long-standing Labour member and activist, I'm finding it excruciating to watch. It's just embarrassing. Yes, the Little Red Book thing was meant to be a pop at Osbourne but anyone with half a brain could have predicted how it would be perceived and known it would backfire.

If a right wing figure had said we should read Mein Kampf because it might be useful in dealing with Germany, would anyone think it was just an ill-judged joke?

The thing about McDonnell is that amid his what could be called gaffes, he does talk some sense - I agree with:

The shadow Chancellor, who frequently struggled to make himself heard in the Commons, claimed the Government had invested so little in skills and infrastructure that the country’s future has been put at risk.

He said: “What we’ve seen today is the launch of a manifesto for the Conservative leadership election.”

from this article:

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/john-mcdonnell-under-fire-by-labour-mps-after-giving-george-osborne-a-copy-of-chairman-maos-little-a6748991.html

What we don't hear enough of IMO, is Labour's strategy for the economy.

I think McDonnell is a good economist with lots of interesting ideas, but an absolutely shit politician in terms of thinking about public/press perception. And yes, Labour is very disjointed - the Corbyn-camp are very loyal, very solid, while everyone else is thinking "what do we do?".

I think you will find that the party in bed with the one-party state, as well as a number of other very unsavoury regimes, is the Tory Party.

(McDonnell's point was a good one but he chose a horribly clumsy way of putting it across that gifted yet another opportunity to newspapers owned by foreigners and fascists).

Tbh the labour party doesn't have a "far left" ... its policies are pretty ordinary by European social democrat standards.

YY Auntie!

"He said: “What we’ve seen today is the launch of a manifesto for the Conservative leadership election.”

Did he say this in his responses speech in the house? Because that's what the TV pundits were saying when Osbourne had barely finished speaking. So he's not really showing unique insight (as everyone else got it) and if not said until later, it might not be his original at all.

Corbyn was too loyal to MPs who are ticking time bombs of foot in mouth, Diane Abbott, Ken Livingston and John McDonnell are disasters waiting to happen verbally. In fairness Abbott made them comments in 2008 and there will probably be more footage for a while of where she has spoke before brain engage.

I started another thread on the red book incident - McDonnell is looking like a liability, and apparently consulted others in labour before doing that "joke" - meaning there's a load of them who don't get how this would be presented to the media ("McDonnell quote Mao" not "McDonnell uses Mao to make a joke at osbornes expense"), or they did get it, and told him to go for it anyway, suggesting some in the party are giving him enough rope, trying to get rid.

Osbornes off the cuff joke back that it was his "personal signed copy" made him look the better politician.

The whole of the message coming out of the opposition feels like student politics, "point scoring" rather than trying to seriously hold the government to account.

Looks like Osborne will be the next PM - labour clearly have given up.

Tbh the labour party doesn't have a "far left" ... its policies are pretty ordinary by European social democrat standards.

^ this.

I am shocked by how petty, judgemental and horribly small minded and traditionalist so much of our press seem to be, focusing on rubbish like whether Corbyn kissed the Queen's hand.

Why is so much of our press right wing and how did Rupert Murdoch get hold og a section of it ??

Worse still - this is what he owns worldwide (shock to me as I didn't know - I am sure everyone else does!):

www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2015/06/11/what-rupert-murdoch-owns/71089066/

Of not og!

What Auntie said.

And I agree that McDonnell as Chancellor was not the best move on Corbyn's part.

The shall we drop bombs on Syria vote may well be Corbyn's unravelling IMO. I do like him and agree with lots of his ideas, but leading a party that essentially doesn't want you there is impossible I think.

Saying that the Torres are in bed with the Chinese so they are worse shows a total lack of understanding of business and how the end customer acts.

The only way to compete these days is to buy producer from China. It's cheaper than buying from Europe (even including freight charges) and in many cases quicker. And the end customer in most cases doesn't care - they simply want the lowest priced product. The company I work had stopped using a supplier 8 miles away in favour of Chinese suppliers. Not because the wanted to but because it was the only option terms of cost. And being a global player my employer has to look at keeping the prices as low as possible of they will lose their world #1 status.

Auntie, no it wouldn't - because the current govt in Germany is not the Nazi party. China, on the other hand, still has a hugely repressive regime, with a dreadful human rights record, and awful conditions for its workers. And yet we're getting them to build a nuclear plant.

China's current regime not a Maoist one.

No, I'm not trying to minimise the issues such as the deplorable human rights issues. But the current regime nothing like the murderous totalitarian Maoist regime, and there is simply no excuse whatsoever for the shadow Chancellor to joke about it. Just as you should never joke about Germans and Hitler.