Mark Koster

Likewise

Yeah I've just been puzzled looking at these responses haha

Faux opposition to oppression is also a large part of the problem. Thinking that we have to always support one side because otherwise one supports the other contributes to keeping the system that is oppressing people in power. It's not either or in politics, we shape the possibilities too.

But I am not willing to debate whether there should or should not be trans rights, or whether trans people even exist at all. I don't know why you're talking to me as if that is the discussion I am interested in having, or have been having. Again, I am not, and never will be.

I didn't say the word hard enough. Don't know what I can say now that will convince you that I do care, but yes, it would be *way more than hugely dissapointing*. It would be awful and nasty.

I really don't know what gave you the impression that I think you owe me a discussion on anything. I'm just discussing something on a social media website about a topic that I care deeply about. I'm not discussing the merits of LBGT liberation itself. It is not a discussion, it is a necessity.

Thanks for the advice, but I'm not trying to talk over trans people to support a party! I just wanted to discuss specific arguments.

I wasn't responding to people who say 'I'm gonna wait and see until I support the party'. I agree with this... Just wanted to discuss specific arguments is all.

If the pitch of the party is that trans issues are up for debate, while things like economic policy are not, then yes that would be ridiculous!!

2/2. Corbyn or Sultana. I will never back a party that wavers on their support for LGBT liberation, and that includes one that Corbyn has made, because it does not matter who made it.

1/2 I am not expecting anyone to back them, so apologies if I gave that impression. I was merely trying to discuss the arguments about interpreting the relative silence on the LGBT issue as a tactical measure to win over transphobes and leave open whether to support them at all from someone like

Apologies, I am not trying to be obtuse. Is it the fact that I keep referring to his history? If I'm just being dense here, please help me understand!

2/2 And for what it's worth, of course it could turn out differently and that would be hugely disappointing.

1/2 I'm not trying to say that it is a niche issue or that that should be up for discussion. I'm trying to say that these issues are probably non-negotiables for the vast majority of the membership incl. Corbyn, just like other aims, such as socialism, which members also get to 'decide on'.

I see that! But Corbyn himself has always spoken out against these sorts of awful oppressive policies.
jeremycorbyn.org.uk/trans-and-no...
I see that LBGT issues keep getting reversed on, but Corbyn has never been someone to flip flop on issues like these. That is why I keep referring to his history

But isn't his consistency in his opinions and the content of them an important part of estimating the direction and content of any project that he himself is in the process of setting up? A Corbyn-created party is not exactly a black box.

2/2 members that is always an issue. They want to avoid a top down structure that tells everyone what the party is, but if the new party ends up a conservative one, they will obv not support that. It is just my estimate, based on their prev words that transphobic positions will also fall under that.

1/2 I just don't think that Corbyn or Sultana would want to run on a party that is openly transphobic, just like they would not run on a party that wavers support for the environment, for example. Maybe it's the tension between having principles for a party and having them being decided by the...

Which issues would that be? I might just be unaware of them. And I definitely see how silence can be an active strategy against these issues, but aren't you also filling in the gaps with assumptions about his aims here? For me, his positions on these issues in the past just speaks for him.

2/2 ...that disqualify him on his positions on LGBT liberation, with the context of what he has stood for in his political career, just did not seem fair to my eyes. I really hope, like everyone else, that the party is going to be in the right here. I just feel quite optimistic about it, is all!

1/2 For me it's not that I am desperate to sell him, it is more that it seems an exciting new avenue for leftist politics, so I take notice. And It's not that worries or criticism about the handling of LGBT issues is bad or misplaced or should not be agitated for, but the specific critiques I saw...

Institutional capture of that sort I do not think will be happening for a party of these two, but you never know. The second part of what you are saying here is just an assumption. They have not even stated what their platform on all issues will be yet. I do not think it is a 'tactical omission'.

Why is it in his history? You only have to look up how many times he's been a supporter of LGBT liberation in the past. He's consistent on this. Talk about social justice being 'paired 'with economic inequality does not mean that other dimensions are not also included.

2/2 ...not because he does not care about the issue or is leaving the issue open for others who would be swayed away, right? It could all still be the worst case scenario, as everything could, but with Corbyn's political history, it just seems incredibly unlikely to me. But we shall see!

1/2 That's fair, but they have also talked about social justice. Of course someone like Starmer could use the same words, but coming from Corbyn, with his political history, doesn't it seem likely that this includes trans liberation? He also has not talked about anti-semitism explicitly, but that's

Why is it the fault of the left that Harris adopted a position that was not substantially anti-genocide of the Palestinian people, why is the subsequent voter turnout not her fault, and why is one of the most gruesome humanitarian horrors of our lifetime treated here as a fringe issue?

I'm not trying to say that it is illegitimate to agitate for the new party to be making a statement that is on the side of lbgt liberation, on the contrary, it is very important. It just seems strange to me to claim that Corbyn is anything other than an ally based on what I've seen.

Let trans people self-identify their gender, Corbyn urges May Labour leader says party would support any attempt to change law that would remove need for medical checks

www.theguardian.com/society/2017...

He has also not said anything about protecting the jewish community from antisemitism since the launch of the new party. Does that mean that it is suddenly up in the air whether he is an anti semite?

2/2. ...where there was far more pressure to sideline these issues under the guise of political strategy and 'realism', pandering to voters etc. Afaik, Corbyn has never wavered, and him not immediately (re!)affirming his lifelong position does not, to me, immediately mean he just flipped on this.