Before you get too excited it’s disappointing that this type of obfuscating language is still used as a get out free card.
According to people familiar with a draft, it will say a Palestinian state should be recognised as “part of a peace process”
So basically never because a peace process won’t ever happen the way it currently stands.
when Sir Keir was asked whether a government he leads would follow Spain, Ireland and Norway in recognising a Palestinian state, he said it had to be “at the right time in the [peace] process… what it does need is international backing and consensus about the right point”.
He added: “That’s only going to happen if we work with our partners on it.”
No it’s only going to happen if you show some leadership instead of lagging behind Ireland, Spain, and Norway. Do you want to recognise the state or not? Or do you want to only recognise it when it’s beneficial to you and you’ve calculated that going into an election it’s not beneficial to you?
Disappointing.
Won’t happen. Don’t get your hopes up. Starmer is ride or die in his support of Zionism and subsequently the genocide of the Palestinian people. In fact I’d go one step further and say, if you look at his record, he clearly doesn’t give a fuck about anyone with darker skin than himself.
Let’s look at that record, then.
As a barrister, in addition to the pro bono work defending Caribbean people from the death penalty, which [email protected] has mentioned, Keir Starmer also opposed the Iraq War, marching against it and issuing legal opinions against it. Being opposed to a war largely waged against people with brown skin suggests that he does, in fact, care about at least some people with darker skin than himself. Indeed, even some of his more controversial positions, like defending Hizb ut-Tahrir show the same: he is clearly willing to go out on a limb to defend the human rights of non-white people (I don’t personally think it’s controversial that even terrorists need legal defence, but then nor does Keir Starmer).
As DPP, Starmer did important work tackling FGM, which mainly effects women of colour. He also introduced policies which led to an increase in the number of BAME people working in the CPS. EDIT: Forgot to include this one about his work on the Stephen Lawrence case.
On becoming Labour leader, Starmer appointed the most ethnically diverse shadow cabinet in history (it’s been reshuffled since then, but as far as I can tell, it’s still very diverse, e.g., Lisa Nandy was demoted, but David Lammy was promoted, so the ‘net’ diversity was the same for that move, Thangam Debbonaire and Shabana Mahmood are both still there, etc.). Starmer has continued his work with Baroness Doreen Lawrence, appointing her as race relations adviser. Labour has implemented nearly all of the Forde report (old article, but I couldn’t find anything more recent), which includes training on anti-black racism.
We’ll have to wait to see the full manifesto, but Labour are planning some sort of new race relations law, specifically aiming at achieving equal pay. Finally, the next Parliament, which will probably be mainly made up of Labour MPs led by Keir Starmer, is going to be the most diverse ever.
Also, this isn’t directly down to Starmer, but I think it’s at least worth noting that both Scottish Labour and Welsh Labour elected their first BAME leaders during Starmer’s tenure, which hardly seems compatible with your argument that the party is currently led by a racist.
So, yeah. I have looked at his record, as you suggested. It’s pretty clear.
Before getting into politics he spent most of his professional career as a human rights lawyer. This is a small snippet from his Wikipedia page - He was a member of Doughty Street Chambers from 1990, primarily working on human rights issues. He has been called to the bar in several Caribbean countries, where he has defended convicts sentenced to the death penalty.
Not sure how many white people there are in the Caribbean sentenced to death.
Definitely, if you look at his record as a human right lawyer called to the bar in multiple carribean countries to defend people on death row it’s clear he is a massive racsist. I’m sure you’ve done far more to help “people with darker skin than yourself”
What? Are you Keir Starmer? Starmer’s record at the CPS speaks for itself in ethic communities. Why is that Mister Starmer? Are you going to tell everyone that they’re not ethnic enough or haven’t done enough Mister Starmer? You’re weird Mister Starmer. Go away. Learn how to have discussions without ad hominem attacks.
Also try doing some research, I am neither the first nor last to question Starmer’s commitment to racial equality: https://www.voice-online.co.uk/news/uk-news/2024/02/01/keir-starmer-doesnt-care-about-black-people/
No just some one who is fed up with this teenage “This person doesnt agree with me/go far enough on this one issue so they are literally the devil” which only serves to benefit the right. Notice how they always unite behind their leader even if they dont agree with them on everything as they understand that if you dont win you dont get to do anything.
(Note this applies equally to the labour right who spent 4 years sabotaging Corbyn)
Benefit what right? See, this is what I hate about discussing politics with your mother fuckers with your head up your own arse. Corbyn, for what it’s worth, had policies that attempted to help people and Starmer didn’t keep any of them, instead opting for “electable policies” which fall firmly in the sphere of Conservative politics. I shouldn’t have to justify my race to talk about the failings Starmer has had to minority communities. While Starmer was happy to speak up against antisemitism, he didn’t speak up against Johnson’s anti-black rhetoric or the racism that was directed at Diane Abbott. You wouldn’t dare say to a Jewish person, what have you done for the Jewish community if they called into question someone’s record on antisemitism, so what gives you the right to say that bullshit to me. You’re fucked in the head!
bye