Addition by Subtraction

Have I mentioned I was capo di tutti? Oh yeah, right. Well, one of the things you learn in an organization of volunteers is that some of them are not worth having. I’m not talking about the merely clueless, normally you can put them in charge of something that seems important but really isn’t and mitigate the damage. Nope, I’m talking about the ones that are actively sabotaging your goals.

With them you have to calculate if the damage you’re going to do by removing them is greater than the damage they’re going to cause by persisting in their current role.

In my particular case I had capi that were skimming the take (though to be fair I didn’t know it at the time). What I did know was that they were openly defiant and toxic in that they wasted not a single opportunity to criticize the organization and their fellow members in order to make themselves feel better about their sad, pathetic lives.

Or at least they were pretty sad and pathetic after I got through with them because I accepted their resignations and made sure that they never again held any office of honor, trust or profit. What about di tutti capi are we not understanding here?

Did it hurt me? Oh my yes. Cost me the support of about 40% of the state, turned my term from a glorious resurgence to a frantic delaying action in the face of inevitable decline. Perhaps I’m giving myself too much credit, the force of nature is not to be denied and I already had both hands and nine toes in the dike.

But it could have been worse, I regret it not at all.

Just a club? Corbyn could learn a thing or two.

Jeremy Corbyn and the Syrian Bombing Vote
Ian Welsh
2015 December 2

So, today there will be a vote in the UK House of Commons on whether the UK should bomb Syria.

The Conservatives and the Liberal-Democrats will vote yes. SNP will vote no. And Corbyn has allowed Labour party members to vote their conscience.

This is a close vote. If every Labour party member voted no, then the motion would fail.

Corbyn is now in a position where he can be blamed for the bombing, and I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

One can make the case that there is no way at least a couple Labour members wouldn’t have voted for the bombing, mind you, and that’s all it takes, but by not whipping for it, Corbyn can be seen as complicit.

Seventy-five percent of Labour party members are against bombing Syria, and the logic of not bombing Syria is strong, since interventions in the Middle East since 9/11 have seen an inexorable rise in terrorism rather than a decrease.
…
(L)etting Labour MPs vote against it when the majority of Labour party members are for it may be very smart politics. Smoke them out, let them run up their flags. Then when the time comes for candidate selection, well, everyone knows who is for war, and since the majority of voters selecting candidates are free to make sure that after the next election, Corbyn has a party of MPs who are anti-war, which is a much stronger hand for him.

The Labour party has been rife with backbiting since Corbyn won. The majority of MPs did not want him as leader, do not want him as leader, and have been doing what they can to weaken him.

Corbyn cannot deal with this alone. It must be dealt with by the membership, who must get rid of those members. Corbyn has some ability as leader to do so, but he can hardly refuse to sign nomination papers for 60% of MPs. They have to be sent packing by the membership.

So, if you are a British Labour member, remember who voted for war, and turf them.

“Klotzen, nicht Kleckern!” – Heinz Guderian