So the ugly face of entitlement has been revealed in the Labour leadership campaigning

In the Labour leadership debacle we have seen exposed the levels of the sense of entitlement that those who dwell within the ‘establishment’ politico/media bubble suffer from. Within Labour, the neoliberal zombies do not just hold an ideological position at odds with current party leadership or party membership. Through their intractability and very well evidenced contentment to brief against the party and undermine it within in public consciousness, the zombies have demonstrated utter contempt for Labour as a democratic party. For them, only their viewpoint is valid, is worthwhile, should be heard and represented. They shroud their sense of entitlement within a narrative of ‘winning’. The story goes that they want to win and the current leadership do not want to win. The obvious question is why they think they hold the keys to winning and, if they do, why have they not employed them in the past two general elections? They have no credible answer, there is no credible answer, they have no keys, they are not ‘winners’.

What have our ‘winners’ demonstrated to their PLP colleagues?

They have relationships within the media and have and continue to brief against the party, its leadership and its membership. Why haven’t they employed those relationships to positive effect during the past two general elections? Do those relationships exist only because they are negative? We have seen little/no evidence to the contrary. Who’s using whom?

What else?

They have support from major donors. At what cost?

Not to harp on but Tony Blair had both of those things and we all saw what road was traveled there. Is that Labour’s future, where leadership isolates itself from the diversity of the voices of its party members and the PLP is whipped by a small coterie of entitled ideologues?

Many within the PLP will disagree with Corbyn’s leadership and that is a perfectly healthy state for the party to be in; Corbyn himself has opposed Labour leaderships on many occasions. Those within the PLP will know precisely who the intractable colleagues are, will have witnessed to what lengths they are prepared to go to wrest control of the party, to apply a disproportionate influence, and have seen the damage they are doing.

172 has become 171, I hope we will see that figure reduced to reflect the true state of “coup” before more damage is done to the party.

In recruitment it is well known that interviews are not a very good gauge of a candidate’s suitability for a role. Generally, many people are better at getting jobs than they are at doing jobs.

(Originally written 26/07/2016 including link to )