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

Alan Johnson tells a story about working with him in the Brexit campaign - and yes, we know he's a long-term Eurosceptic who was lukewarm on the whole thing, but that wasn't necessarily a problem. A leader who was a reluctant Remainer could, in theory, be better with voters on the fence than a campaign led by Stephen Fry type luvvies preaching to the converted (looking at you, Yes to AV)

So the way Alan tells it is, he'd go into the meetings and brief Corbyn about how the campaign was going, and the messages they needed to cut through, and how he could intervene, and Corbyn would bustle around making everyone tea. And when Alan had finished Corbyn would turn to Seumas Milne and say "Seumas, what do we think?"

Then when he was criticised for not showing leadership he'd do the very Jeremy thing of becoming incredibly active. But he couldn't disguise that his heart was never in it. On one level that speaks well of his sincerity, but on another level, if you're a leader, sometimes you have to sell a dud proposition for the sake of the party. Blair was great at that. Corbyn has a million single issue causes he's enthusiastic about, but you absolutely can't give him a message he's unenthusiastic about and get him to sell it.

Calling posters discussing Jeremy Corbyns appeal and flaws "Reform members" when as any Corbynite kno they are Actually Literal Fash Zionists.

Slacking, comrade

Agree with all of this. I'd just say yes he put the hours in on rallies and committees, but the reason others wouldn't do it is because its the sort of stuff that doesn't achieve anything. As a constituency MP and a lawmaker in Parliament that was NOT what he was being paid to do. He has nothing much to show for his long stint in Parliament in terms of anything that has improved people's lives outside of routine constituency casework.

Green critique of Sultana, which might be of interest to some on here.

Agree. He became Labour leader because he appealed to Labour members and the unions, because he spent all his time talking to them and telling them what they wanted to hear. So he was telling people who were always going to vote Labour to vote Labour. Anyone with a smaller ego and with a modicum of care for anyone but their own personality cult knows that.
He loved those rallies because a lot of people were there blowing smoke up his ass. He probably thought they'd embalm him and shuffle along worshipping him in death like some kind of shit Lenin.

He also got a lot of 'old' Labour voters back and new members. They were a real pain at meetings frankly because they thought they knew everything and that he had some sort of authentic roots in Labour, which he didn't really. Many have left and found a better home with the Greens and lots will follow him into this party. They are very welcome to each other!

Not to mention the TRAs on Reddit Trans UK who say single-sex bathrooms mean the UK is sliding into fascism.. Presumably we must have been a fascist country until 2004 then.

This new party and the Greens seem to have morphed into the same thing. I don't know what differences they're are between them. Any differences in policy at all? It would save them the bother of finding a new name (watermelon party?)

That would work!

Watermelon Party might work.

The trouble is that Polanski's big win in the leadership ballot obscures that a lot of the Green members out there - including councillors and long term activists, not people who joined this year to back Zack - aren't watermelons but mangos. Your median Green councillor in a rural district is probably closer to the Lib Dems than anything with Corbyn attached.

Also Watermelon 🍉 is a symbol for Palestine activism so that would chime with ppl.

Red ♥️ plus green 💚 does make purple 💜 if it's light which is nabbed already by Reform or brown 🤎 which in political terms is a bit dodgy

https://youtube.com/shorts/pEZodocBRAw?si=h6fT0lyLNxMnykAp

Many years ago, when I was closer to the Green Party than I am now, 'watermelon politics' was a mildly pejorative term for superficially green policies covering the standard leftwing analysis of economics and power structures.

I didn't know that. Multipurpose, that's good.

Ha, that's true in the US too apparently, at least now. Apparently Grindr has crashed more than once during Republican conventions.

www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.newsweek.com/grindr-app-crashes-milwaukee-rnc-1927750&ved=2ahUKEwjgpuW9672PAxU1XEEAHVbeOXQQFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1KbMPNWiW6Plv1Gl6Ctyc-

There was a story in popbitch a few weeks back about Corbyn/ Sultana / Your Party office staffers being prolific shaggers who have all been hooking up with each other.

It's the youth vote I guess

Fascinating thread!

I've been reading the thread about the demonstration for free speech in London on 13th September and the Stand up to Racism counter protest and something struck me. From Wikipedia, the SWP 's ideology states:

"the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves."[129] They see this as distinguishing themselves from other socialist groups, particularly both from reformist parties such as the Labour Party (described as a "capitalist workers' party")[130] and from various forms of what they disparagingly term Stalinism—forms of socialism usually associated with the former Soviet Bloc and the old Communist Parties. These are seen as advocating socialism from above. In contrast Cliff argued: "The heart of Marxism is that the emancipation of the working class is the act of the working class. The Communist Manifesto states: 'All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority.'"

Since the SWP has a strategy of piggybacking on other causes ( including Stand up to Racism ), WHY aren't they trying to get involved with one of the biggest genuinely working class's demonstrations in years? They don't really seem to understand what they are protesting against, posters on that thread just seemed to think they are protesting against fascism. However there is a genuine, grass roots movement going on right now, I've never seen anything like it tbh, and the SWP don't want anything to do with it!
( btw I'm not a Reform voter, just a v disillusioned ex Leftie! )

The swp actually ARE the Corbzy project.

There's a link to the Socialist Worker someone posted up thread that stated "revolutionaries (prrfffft) should join local groups and meeting to seek to put forward class based...."
So they are entering themselves just for good measure

Besides which, I don't think what Cliff was saying about working class self-organisation really comes into their practice. Even in Cliff's lifetime it had become something a zombie piece of ideology.

It was quite funny watching footage of the protest and counter-protest at Canary Wharf. The protest against the migrant hotel was considerably more working class and not nearly as overwhelmingly white as the SUTR counter-protest. The SUTR group might have been younger, but maybe that's a visual illusion created by the presence of blue hair and septum piercings.

There are whole bunch of protest groups SWP avoid - pro-Ukraine for example. Free Speech is not really a core principal in their actions. Though they hugely benefit from it.

The SWP are not going to attach themselves to a rally with Tommy Robinson.

On the wider Free Speech issue the big turn around on the left is the Anarchists. That we see Anarchists backing corporations and individuals firing people for saying things is crazy considering their previous values. Sadly they have been like that for a LONG time now.

I wouldn't attach myself to a rally featuring Tommy Robinson. Nor would I attach myself to a rally featuring the SWP.

Oh, the anarchists have been wild on free speech, but I think a lot of that is driven by Extremely Online people who call themselves anarchists without any understanding of anarchist theory. That's how they end up, say in the Gina Carano saga, cheering on the Walt Disney Company as it cancels an actress and tries to torch her career for some very mildly unfashionable speech.

Well I hope they actually do something useful between all the sex! 🤔

I do agree...would argue that Carano was being a bit more than 'very mildly unfashionable'when comparing Republicans' situation to Jews in Nazi Germany. Shouldn't have been fired, tho.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Carano

That's not what she said. She said that dehumanising people with different beliefs is bad, and this is how it starts.

Which got her cancelled by people whose first instinctive response to a political disagreement is to call you a Nazi.

Adnan Hussain has committed his worst "crime" yet in the eyes of TAs on X. HE REPLIED TO ROSIE DUFFIELD.

Rumour has it the trans debate is now obsessing YP seed groups across the UK. The conference will be interesting.

Repent Adnan REPENT!