I agree completely; Kiers labour is becoming more and more authoritarian in nature, further expanding on Tory work like the OSA, backdoors in e2e encrypted chats etc... and farages fascists are ripe for cannibalising the disenfranchised Tory and labour voters foolish enough to believe their drivel, so this is a much needed breath of fresh air in British politics.

I'd recommend anyone who reads this and is interested to register for the mailing list if they haven't done so already.

I'd guess it's probable. Both greens leader and YourParty founders are up for it. But say it's down to membership. Most YP supporters in the forums (IE those expected to join) seem very keen.

I'd guess it's more a matter of the form of alliance rather than if.

I agree. The situation in mainland Europe is a boiling pot, and every nation should be prepared for the worst. I think it's a damned if we do, damned if we don't scenario with Putin; we need to be prepared for the worst, as he is shown himself to be tyrannical and unpredictable.

I will say that I don't think a stick or lack thereof will change Putin's approach. He will do what he plans to do, regardless of the perceived threat from NATO countries. He's already shown that he can defeat his enemies without a war (IE trumps appeasement surrounding Russia), so we need to be vigilant in more areas than just military. It's a huge issue spanning multiple avenues.

All of that being said, I think (or hope) a lot of this will be hashed out via membership votes. A general anti-war stance doesn't necessarily mean demilitarisation, as the current climate is undoubtedly a concern for many, and I would imagine the number of people who would be pro-demilitarisation right now are few and far between.

Corbyn's stance on Russia seemed ok when he was up against Theresa May, but in the harsh light of 2025, I fear he's a massive tankie at heart and that's not where most of us are.

The sums being invested in the drive to war are grotesque. There's a difference between making sure the UK is properly defended and the £150 billion+ a year the UK is moving to commit to spending on weapons of mass destruction with little enlargement of the actual armed forces. The drumbeat of war causes only hysteria and it's very hard to discern the difference between fact and fiction.

The first order of business is opening up membership. The official name will be voted on by members as the second point of business. That's laid out in the screenshot ( about 2/3rds down in bold if you're interested. )

Well 2nd or 3rd. Need to open up the membership first. So folks can actually vote on it.

A membership portal and official founding of the party using YourParty will happen over the next 2 weeks. With draft founding docs.

Form there the foundation docs get discussed and voted on. Along with the name.

But all is only confirmed in November when the official membership vote happens.

Changing the party name is not that complex. process and documentation wise. It only becomes an issue once the party is well known by such.

But we have almost 4 years before any general election. So founding a real democratic party that dose not allow the leadership to override democratic rule is more important. Given the recent history of Labour.

I'd imagine mainstream papers will look to smear Corbyn again should the party pose a big enough threat. Threaten the establishment with proportional taxation and every outlet in the country will be told to smear you.

Only if members select him. He is expected to run but has not actually confirmed it. Zarah Sultana has clearly indicated in an interview. That she intends to run. And would like the members to select her and JC as joint leaders. But it is entirely up to the membership.

Personally my choice ATM would be ZS as leader and JC as deputy.

That's interesting. Are you able to share these reports?

As far as I'm aware, there haven't been any official meetings, as the founding process has yet to be kicked off; membership has yet to officially open, so it seems a tad premature to claim stuff like cronyism within the party; but I'm in full support of scrutinizing political groups, so I'll definitely keep an open mind and read through the report you mention.