I mean, is it? Under his leadership the Labour Party broke the law in relation to racism within the party - that was the finding of the independent Equalities and Human Rights Commission investigation. It found that on Corbyn’s watch, the culture of the Labour Party ‘at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it’. He was the leader, he is accountable. That was his doing.
He then chose to put out a statement rejecting this and dismissing the evidence of racism suffered by Labour members as exaggerated - as a result of which he was suspended. That statement was his doing too.
And now he has chosen to stand against the Labour candidate in an election - this choice was also his doing.
He established the Chakrabarti Inquiry The Forde report concluded that they basically ate themselves over the issue, so to answer your question rather than add to the downvotes yes he was a polarising leader who should have made a lot more of an effort unionising the party, but Labour as a party failed hard during that period a point where they were constantly handed big W’s by the cons. They made sure he knew he wasn’t a Labour leader so it’s not surprising he has no issue running against them as an indie.
Reminder that the Equality and Human Rights Commission is not ‘the media’. It’s a non-governmental public body created by a Labour government in 2006 to promote and enforce equality legislation introduced by said Labour government.
That’s their doing fair play
I mean, is it? Under his leadership the Labour Party broke the law in relation to racism within the party - that was the finding of the independent Equalities and Human Rights Commission investigation. It found that on Corbyn’s watch, the culture of the Labour Party ‘at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it’. He was the leader, he is accountable. That was his doing.
He then chose to put out a statement rejecting this and dismissing the evidence of racism suffered by Labour members as exaggerated - as a result of which he was suspended. That statement was his doing too.
And now he has chosen to stand against the Labour candidate in an election - this choice was also his doing.
So which part of this is ‘their doing’?
He established the Chakrabarti Inquiry The Forde report concluded that they basically ate themselves over the issue, so to answer your question rather than add to the downvotes yes he was a polarising leader who should have made a lot more of an effort unionising the party, but Labour as a party failed hard during that period a point where they were constantly handed big W’s by the cons. They made sure he knew he wasn’t a Labour leader so it’s not surprising he has no issue running against them as an indie.
reminder that the media only found anti semitism in labour under the definition from israel that any criticism of the government is anti semetic
Reminder that the Equality and Human Rights Commission is not ‘the media’. It’s a non-governmental public body created by a Labour government in 2006 to promote and enforce equality legislation introduced by said Labour government.