Your Corbyn/Sultana Party - Discussion thread

[fromorbit]

The new left party is going to have significant implications for gender and sex discussions on the left in the UK and in wider political debate as well. Lets talk about it.

Four of its prospective MPs are Gaza independents whose votes and comments in the Commons indicate a social conservative background . One of them Adnan Hussain has already got into a row on X with prospective members over his social conservatism.

The hilarious breakdown of the Islamo-left alliance
The progressive left has suddenly noticed that most British Muslims are not exactly woke.
This uneasy marriage got a reality check last week when a Green Party councillor and practising Muslim, Mothin Ali, appeared reluctant to sign a set of ‘pledges’ on behalf of the LGBTQIA+ Greens, Feminist Greens and other similar groups. The MP for Blackburn, ‘Gaza Independent’ Adnan Hussain, then waded into the debate. ‘It’s no secret that Muslims tend to be socially conservative’, Hussain said. ‘Is there a space on the left to create a broad enough church to allow Muslims an authentic space, just as it does other minority groups?’
https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/08/04/the-hilarious-breakdown-of-the-islamo-left-alliance/

The initial statement for Your Party focuses on poverty, fighting the system and Gaza, but makes no mention of progressive social issues, . This already signals something significant.
https://www.yourparty.uk/statement

Zarah Sultana on the other hand has already signaled out trans rights as a key principal in a recent interview which has received push back from others. Discussion here:

The Elephant in the Room for Zara Sultana’s “Your Party”
https://labourheartlands.com/the-elephant-in-the-room/
But here’s the rub. Sultana also pledged to “resolutely” advocate for a pro-trans socialist programme. She insists these discussions must happen openly and democratically.

That sounds fine in theory. In practice, the left has already shown itself utterly incapable of having this conversation without collapsing into authoritarian cancel culture.

Can the Left Have an Honest Trans Debate Without Cancelling Women?

For years, women who raise legitimate questions about the impact of gender self-ID on female-only spaces, or about the safeguarding implications highlighted by the Cass Review, have been branded as bigots and driven out of the movement. “Demonising trans people” is often code for “asking difficult but necessary questions.” If Your Party repeats this mistake, it will bleed support from countless socialist women before it even begins.

The truth is, many women will not get involved in this project precisely because of the Corbyn–Sultana line on trans issues. Others may hope the problem quietly goes away. It won’t. Nor is this a side issue: women’s rights are not negotiable add-ons to socialism; they are foundational. To ignore them is to build on sand.

TAs online and who are planning to join are already girding up for war, it is looking messy.

I can see a number of factions inside the new party who are going to make things complicated:

Muslim social conservatives - as mentioned they will be a major part of the party's voting bloc.

Old school Marxists who regard gender ideology as neo liberal capitalist identity politics and a distraction from class.

Realists who will see gender stuff as a marginal issue which needs to be sidelined because it is so toxic and unpopular with the general public.

Last but certainly not least actual left wing feminists who see through gender nonsense and are not going to be quiet about it !!

I expect fireworks over gender at the the party's initial conference supposedly to be held in November. TAs will attempt to make genderism a key principal of the party and will face resistance. Whether it happens or not it will be another nail in the TAs attempt to pretend the left inherently back neoliberal capitalist ideas like genderism. The big terfy mother elephant is going to be at the conference because women keep doing awkward things like existing and saying things.

Corbyn's position is going to be a focus in this because for all his occasional signalling on trans issues like stating pronouns and saying mantras it is not a core issue for him, and moreover he doesn't believe in it narrowly . His circles have long contained gender critical people who he has refused to cancel, because Corbyn for all his faults believes in open debate. So I think this could be a wedge issue between those around Sultana and Corbyn. There are already signs of disagreements between them over other issues like antisemitism:
Sultana: Corbyn 'capitulated' on antisemitism definition
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79lr40rqelo

About 2 years ago there was an AMA thread claiming to be from a woman whose fiancé was in a grooming gang. They were 2nd cousins or near relatives and knew each other from childhood. The gang primarily dealt drugs and enforced discipline by molesting the younger members, who in turn were tasked with "getting girls for parties".

Hence the pursuing of local care home girls. She said her fiancé had been raped by his assorted uncles. It's the endogenous nature of ultra tight knit Mirpuri community where this is most prevalent. It's also part of a dark triad of this, forced marriage/ cousin marriage and honour violence to enforce kinship loyalty. Zarah Sultana is actually from the Mirpuri community so you'd think she'd be aware of many of the issues (only just occurred to me. Ppl of my parents generation would socialise with cousins rather than a concept as nebulous as "friends"). I don't think she's been very vocal on it though.

What a terrible story...raped by his uncles? I wonder if other boys were abused...

Mirpur in Kashmir is a hub of forced & child marriage even now 😢

https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/feature/2013/11/18/girls-still-sent-kashmir-forced-weddings

Maybe Zarah's parents are unusually liberal? I suspect she is afraid to speak out. She's no Shabanna Mahmood, or for that matter Laila Cunningham of Reform, who I disagree with on some things but like how vocal she has been about these kinds of crimes and problems.

This one?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/AMA/4947378-my-ex-was-a-grooming-gang-member-ama
Assuming it's true (seems like it) very hard to read but important.

Interested in the SWP's tortured history & this makes a lot of sense.

It's sad but telling that in today's world 'men cannot become women' is 'traditional wisdom'. 🙈

Yes! Thanks @CleopatraSelene

What I can’t get over is that Zarah has been caught telling a barefaced lie that the email sent cautioning against her payment portal was ‘sent by bad faith right wing actors’ when she knew full well it was Jeremy bloody Corbyn.

That is an absolute whopper of a lie and I won’t believe her when she blames something on malign right wing forces again.

She hasn’t even apologised or confessed!

I think a lot of Americans, and especially white Americans on the left, struggle to see race as separate to class.

It's been a correlation that holds a lot of the time within the US for generations. If you are black there was a good chance you were poor or at best new middle class. Same with Hispanics who mainly had mixed ancestry within the US. (And there they have race, language grouping, and class all smushed together.)

They struggle when the fact is that in many parts of South America there are significant class and race differernces, but everyone is Hispanic.

They also struggle with the fact that there is a significant home grown black middle class - even upper middle class, some have had that status for two or three generations, and there are enough quite wealthy, educated black American families that it's not all that remarkable to have met kids from families like that especially in some geographic areas.

Not to mention all the newer immigrant black populations who are often highly educated and in high performing jobs, and do not see themselves within the Americamn history of black oppression.

I suppose at some point the old thinking won't survive, but right now they seem to be holding pretty tight to those associations.

Yes on the Latin American diaspora. The Cuban community were all staunchly Trump. Plus expat Venezuelans, whereas iirc the Puerto Rican Mexican community (AOC for example) is more unquestionably Democrat

Comrade Sultana says all disputes resolved. Joy of joys!

nitter.net/charliemansell/status/1974853040974041275#m

Multiple post mania

A "no more public spats" directive has been issued

https://nitter.net/charliemansell/status/1976610837654593699#m

Canary/ skwawkbox

https://www.thecanary.co/skwawkbox/2025/10/10/corbyn-sultana-liverpool-event/

There is footage of the livestream from yesterday, but there's no sound for the 1st 8 minutes then it cuts out the minute Sultana is introduced, at the moment. They might get round to uploading a better version soon

https://www.youtube.com/live/hGJN8PJXjlo?si=v0ReqOJ0XFBMR5Aq .

The interesting thing is that you almost seem to have two or three separate parties. In fact I see little difference from the meetings Corbyn has been addressing for the past couple of years, before the party has launched.

There's the hard core of people around Corbyn, who have been pretty stable for a long time now. We know them from his period as Labour leader.

There are the Muslim voters around the Independent Alliance MPs, who like Corbyn for his foreign policy stances but don't necessarily buy his domestic policy bill of goods. This is the same tension we had in Respect.

And now there's Sultana, and I'm trying to puzzle out what she brings to the table:

• In terms of people linked to her personally, her husband is some kind of big cheese in the FBU, and that's not nothing. From what I've heard, she's never been particularly popular in Coventry Labour Party and was facing almost certain deselected when she jumped ship. She doesn't seem to have the people tied to her personally that Corbyn does.
• She's found herself in alliance with Jamie Driscoll, Andrew Feinstein and Salma Yaqoob, but all of them have been in this project longer than she has, and they all have their own distinct agendas.
• For what it's worth, the SWP have put a lot of energy into getting close to Sultana, and when she speaks at a public event she usually has SWP head honcho Lewis Nielsen in tow. I'm not sure if she's aware how much of a liability these people are, or if she would care if she did know.

I'm still not convinced the new party will survive until this time next year without a massive row which will probably result in Sultana walking away in a huff.

Interesting, possibly.

Polanski has been making overtures to Sultana to join the Greens. But at the world transformed conference she actually criticised the lack of whipping system that green MPs have

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2025/10/greens-and-your-party-jostle-at-the-world-transformed

"Indeed, while Sultana was keen to assert that she is united with her co-founder, the MP for Coventry South has set her sights on drawing lines of contrast with another potential ally: the Green Party. .... “I see the Green Party as an ally in the fight against the far right,” Sultana said, “and so going into the next election, there will have to be cooperation between Your Party and the Green Party.

But she added that the two parties don’t have identical voter bases, describing that fact as important. “I have massive respect for Zack, for Mothin (Ali) and for Rachel (Millward). But we come from very different political traditions,” Sultana said. As a key point of difference, Sultana pointed to the Green Party’s lack of a whipping system: “For example, the whipping system in the Greens is something that people are very proud of, that MPs are able to vote with their conscience… but in a genuinely democratic party, MPs have a duty to uphold the decisions by members held at a sovereign conference.” She added: “What’s the point of conference motions if MPs can just ignore them?”. (At this, several Green Party attendees could be seen squirming in their seats and raising their eyebrows).

Another dividing line drawn by Sultana between Your Party and the Greens was on anti-imperialism. “On the Green Party’s own website, it says it recognises that NATO has an important role, ensuring that its member states can respond to threats to their security,” Sultana said, “I’m sorry, you cannot greenwash NATO, the socialist position is that we must leave NATO immediately.” "

Bit of a smack down for Polanski. Over on the green thread there is a link to the ongoing legal challenge by former green deputy Dr Shahrar Ali over his suspension that looks like it might bankrupt the party.

The incoming ceasefire in Gaza is going to have a big impact on the position of YP going forward. Their very simplistic view of the conflict is not going to last the reality of a situation in which Donald Trump orchestrating the entire Middle East is helping ending violence.

If Trump has done the most to stop what the left seem to be claiming is the most dangerous genocide of the 21st century then that reflects well on his mate Nigel Farage.

It also means as an issue in domestic politics it will drop way down the agenda those obsessed by it, never popular, will look even more out of touch.

Meanwhile despite Sultana's continuing posturing on gender issues another key YP figure Adnan Hussain MP just retweeted this condemnation of the misogynistic violence in Brighton.

Adnan Hussain MP retweeted

Ben Sellers

Oct 10
I have friends & comrades at this conference. To call them transphobes is nonsense akin to the antisemitism weaponisation. When will we learn that the answer to complex differences on the left isn’t simplistic sloganeering, toxic labelling or violence but real, honest discussion?

BEN SELLERS played a major role in Jeremy Corbyn's 2015 Labour leadership campaign and worked for MP Laura Pidcock. Now he is part of a significant Your party faction the Platform for Party Democracy including well known left figures like Ken Loach, Ian Hodson of the Bakers Union, Audrey White, Ben Sellers, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi.

The gender wars inside YP are clearly going to intensify.

The party inaugural conference on Liverpool on Saturday 29 and Sunday 30 November will be very interesting.

In November, thousands of in-person founding conference delegates will be chosen by lottery to ensure a fair balance of gender, region, and background. These delegates will have a big responsibility – to debate the founding documents, propose amendments and vote on them at the conference. The final decision will be up to all members through an online, secure, one-member-one-vote system.

https://www.yourparty.uk/conference/

Already there is potential for conflict. How are you defining gender? What about non binaries, genderfluid etc in the lottery? How do you define background? Will in include religion. If so that advantages the Muslim faction. Lots of uncertainty.

My suspicion is the TAs may possibly end up being sidelined. I think many TA leftists are such bigots they won't even tolerate any debate especially when they can opt to join the Greens instead. This could lead to them being outnumbered and outmaneuvered in a situation where they need to persuade and compromise.

'...you cannot greenwash NATO, the socialist position is that we must leave NATO immediately.”

What's the reasoning, here?!

Sultana may come to regret her enthusiasm for a whipping system.

"When Zinoviev is in the minority he is for party democracy, when he is in the majority he is for the strictest discipline."

None. Listening to too many social media posts by un/ill informed influencers. Anti NATO sentiment seems very popular amongst the younger left, but also older CND types.

A whipping system is not incompatible with the concept of democracy, on the contrary it's necessary in order to put it into action in a party system. An MP within a party system is not just an isolated individual following their conscience; their duty is to represent both the policy positions decided democratically by their party's members, and the needs of their constituents who democratically elected them on the basis of those positions.

Opposition to American (capitalist) imperialism, I suppose. The USA is after all responsible for a far greater number of military aggressions since WWII than any other country.

The former Eastern bloc would like a word…

More seriously, the US and UK’s military interventions are well documented, the former Soviet Union and China not so much.

The whipping system, if applicable to Your Party, might make it awks if Sultana insists there really is no place for "social conservatives" in the party but the progressives all skip off to The Greens, leaving the Corbzy Gaza conservatives, who like Hussain et al will have no truck for gender stuff. She'll have to vote along the lines of the membership, remember.

The former Eastern bloc is not and was not a country.

I'm not sure what you mean - are you suggesting that while the historical record clearly shows the USA attacking far more other countries than the USSR or China in the given time period, that's only because they attacked a whole bunch of them secretly without anyone noticing?

And if that's the case, how come you know about it? Are you the one special individual that they chose to tell?

I'm not sure why some people have such a problem with the fact that the USA post-WWII is a supremely aggressive imperialist power. It's just the way it is. We can choose to align ourselves with that for protection (although even that idea is becoming less compelling under Trump), but it's easy enough to see why it's contrary to the international socialist convictions of someone like Zarah Sultana, which was the original point.

Sultana appeared at an event alongside Zack in Chingford hosted by Faiza Shaheen (the sacked Labour candidate for Woodford and Chingford who then ran as an independent and thus split the vote so IDS was returned as MP). On trans issues a she needs an alliance with the Greens to outnumber the Muslim Corbyn wing.
Sultana needs a winnable seat for the next election. Corbyn is pretty safe. Faiza is probably schmoozing them both to ease herself into a winnable seat also and so I suspect they are pushing things along to establish a brand before the next election.

I don’t know why people have such a problem with the idea that Russia is a supremely aggressive imperialist power. It’s just the way it is. Perhaps it’s because their empire is land based.

Transnistra, Moldova. Afghanistan. Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia. Ukraine, of course. That’s just the post-Soviet ones.

Officially involved - rough count, we’ve got about 58 conflicts for the US and about 40 for the USSR and post Soviet Russia. I haven’t added on China, though. If you consider that the US is often fighting either China or Russia through third party conflicts, you’d expect them to have a fairly high number of conflicts.

Do you understand what ‘not well documented’ means?

No-one tell ZS about the terrible British imperialist vassal state to the US that agreed to join NATO under the hated capitalist government of

Checks

Clement Attlee

www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_162351.htm%3FselectedLocale%3Den#:~:text=In%20spite%20of%20ill%20health,on%20behalf%20of%20his%20country.

Latest proposal for the party from one internal grouping of YP members which includes The Democratic Bloc, Democratic Socialists, Eco-Socialist Horizon, Greater Manchester Left Caucus, Organising for Popular Power, Trans Liberation Group and The People’s Front.

https://prometheusjournal.org/2025/10/13/for-a-member-led-socialist-party/