this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2025
65 points (94.5% liked)

UK Politics

4274 readers
130 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
tom@feddit.uk
GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
flamingos@feddit.uk
frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
65
'Your Party' membership registration opens (feddit.uk)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by javiwhite@feddit.uk to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Following on from the recent controversy, I've created a follow up post regarding the fallout between Zarah and Jeremys respective sides of Your Party. All in all a very disappointing start to what was intended to be a joyous occasion;

https://feddit.uk/post/36527176.

I'm not going to remove any of the below, as I'm not a fan of whitewashing events, nor am I seeking a refund on the money paid into the membership, as quite frankly I'm curious as to what happens next. We may not get a truly democratic party out of this, but at least I've got a front row seat for the fireworks. Sigh

~~Membership has opened for Your Party, with two tiers available; regular and concessionary.~~

~~There isn't much information around the difference between standard and concessionary membership other than the difference in price, and whether all tiers will be eligible for votes or not, so I'm enlisting the aid of my partner who will follow the path of concessionary, whilst I do the same with standard.~~

~~I feel it's right to mention that some people have raised concerns around the legitimacy of the statements that this is a truly democratic 1 person 1 vote as alluded to and not another autocratic party in nature. So I will look to provide an overview of the process from now until the end of the current roadmap highlighted in my previous post.~~

~~As for the membership fees themselves. The regular tier is set at £5 per month, or £55 per year. Whereas the concessionary is exactly half, set to £2.50 per month, or £25 per year. There seems to be no restrictions on who can sign up as concessionary or standard.~~.

Membership link removed due to subsequent updates (full update here).

I should point out that I'm not a journalist, or political expert in any sense. I'm just your run of the mill middle aged British socialist with arguably too much time on his hands. Prior to paying the initial membership fee, I wasn't affiliated with the party in any regard, nor is any of this paid advertising.

Finally, if you see this flamingo's, I'm sorry about the egregious spacing after the first line; it's their API, not me! :p .

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

One of the big issues is that some of those involved in the discussions wouldn't call themselves socialists in any way and are aligned through support for Gaza. I guess Corbyn is trying to win them over and there are those looking at the rise of the far right and starting to realise they need to get a move on.

[–] javiwhite@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

I think the best thing to hope for at this stage is a shift towards greens support from those poised to support Your Party. Polanski seems to be clued up on what's important to socialist minded voters, and has a stable party not sullied by constant infighting amongst it's leaders. Whilst he doesn't have the following Corbyn does, this fallout makes a mockery of 'your party' before it's started, surely even the most devout of followers will begin to question whether it's worth pursuing.

Don't get me wrong, I'll still be watching the developments of this party with bated breath; I haven't sought refunds either as I believe ZS will be truthful in keeping the income for the party for its intended purposes, I just feel this fracture has all but killed any chance of wider adoption of the party.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In case you doubted this is a true leftist party, the only two members have already fallen out.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgkn3v1e7g3o

[–] IcyToes@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

Only 2?

There is Jeremy and the 5 independents, then Zarah "I'm the leader now" Sultana.

[–] Denjin@feddit.uk 13 points 4 days ago

Can I cry if I want to

[–] neonix@reddthat.com 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

The paid‑for “membership portal” appears not to be a democratically ratified decision but a unilateral move by Zarah Sultana, imposed on a movement that promised collective ownership of its direction. By turning entry into a £5‑a‑month subscription, the party treated political belonging as a commodity, reproducing the market logic it claims to oppose and alienating volunteers who expect free, universal access to a socialist organisation. This top‑down imposition sidestepped the pre‑figurative principle of participatory decision‑making and reinforced a Westminster‑style habit of fundraising through mandatory fees rather than genuine solidarity.

A more socialist approach would replace the subscription with a voluntary‑donation model built on transparency and collective control: open‑ended contributions, tiered solidarity pledges tied to specific grassroots projects, and worker‑run funding circles that let supporters decide how money is allocated. By treating money as a means of sustaining collective activity, not as a gate‑keeping ticket, the party could align its finances with democratic planning, reinforce accountability, and turn fundraising itself into a concrete expression of socialist solidarity.

[–] tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago

Yes, even the concessionary membership was £2.50 a month. If Your Party wants support from the poorest then they need to make it voluntary as you say. Even the old Labour Party charged on £1 for unemployed members.

[–] Duckxon@feddit.uk 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Sorry for the image, but need to be logged in to access the post.

[–] Lastangel@feddit.uk 1 points 19 hours ago

"look alright I'm sorry about the petty fraud thing but I was a victim of sexism. They wouldn't let me have equal access to the accounts, which can only be explained by an old boys club (look I said I'm sorry about the fraud thing, alright?!)"

I was ready for another smear campaign, so at this point it seems obvious that this whole fiasco is a media set-up. Either ZS is a hostile plant playing the long game to discrete the left, or the email list has been hacked and all this is coming from Russian bots.

We've clearly passed the stage of things needing to be realistic or evidenced, I give up. This is a deliberate farce to test the faithful, Davids Attenborough and Bowie founded the party and are taking to announce their little jest soon, musk is lashing out on anger because he only has weeks to live after being infected by a rat bite, and those surgery rumours about Zuckerberg are true.

It doesn't matter. I'm going to do all the right things and follow the rules, but nobody can stop me concocting am alternative reality and it's going to be more ridiculous and imaginative every time I see nonsense like this.

If we make it as a country, probably invest in the mental health market. I suspect it'll have a lot of business

[–] javiwhite@feddit.uk 6 points 4 days ago

The irony of signing off the email with 'in solidarity' and then following up with an admission that she acted independently is palpable.

[–] darko8472@feddit.uk 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Given the more recent email saying not to use the link, might be worth removing the link to the site from here as well?

[–] javiwhite@feddit.uk 2 points 4 days ago

Agreed, only just seen the update. Removing the link asap and providing a full further update for the wider audience.

[–] IanTwenty@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What's going on?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/sep/18/jeremy-corbyn-clashes-zarah-sultana-your-party-split

An extraordinary split has opened between Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana in the formation of their new leftwing party, with the former Labour leader suggesting he will take legal action over an unauthorised membership portal promoted by his co-leader.

[–] CluckN@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Leftist infighting? That can’t be possible!

[–] theskyisfalling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I dunno if it is just me but your link appears to affix the link to the end of my instance URL and thus making it not work.

"https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/www.yourparty-membership.uk"

[–] javiwhite@feddit.uk 3 points 4 days ago

It was the same result for me when I tried, I didn't realise Lemmy requires the protocol to recognise it as an external link. (Makes sense, I just hadn't considered it) Live and learn eh! Thanks for highlighting, I've amended the post so the link should work now.

[–] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

For the love of god change the name

Edit: This registration is unauthorised lol https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgkn3v1e7g3o

[–] withabeard@feddit.uk 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

One of the first orders of business is to choose a name for the party. It'll be going to a vote of party members.

[–] ReCursing@feddit.uk 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Party McPartyface

[–] javiwhite@feddit.uk 5 points 4 days ago

At this stage it feels inevitable.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

On one hand it's great that they're letting the people vote and debate things like this, but I can't help feel like that this just sets the tone for the party: every single detail needs committees, debates and votes that take a painstakingly long time. Is that how they'd operate if they were in government? There's always going to be factions that argue and delay things. They'll become a bit of a joke if they can't make timely decisions on their positions on matters that require an action relatively quickly.

[–] withabeard@feddit.uk 4 points 4 days ago

It's very true that what this party needs is clear, committed leadership. A direction to drive in that instills faith in the currently lost part of the voter pool.

[–] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 1 points 4 days ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgkn3v1e7g3o

Ex-Labour MP Zarah Sultana has accused Jeremy Corbyn of overseeing a "sexist boys' club" locking women out of the founding of a new left-wing party the pair announced earlier this year.

In a statement on social media,, external Sultana said she had been sidelined by other members of the party's working group - despite an agreement that she and Corbyn would jointly authorise key steps.

Her comments come after Your Party supporters got an email on Thursday offering £55 memberships only for Corbyn to later dismisses it as "unauthorised" - telling supporters he was seeking legal advice.

Sultana said she had launched the membership website "in line with the road map" set out by the party officials.

already splitting this early is a great sign agony-deep

[–] oeuf@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 days ago

Let's go!