The controversial Labour frontbench reshuffle has raised the eyebrows of many pundits and the wider public, with the inclusion of more than 30 positions ,which is more seats than the party possess, and the revelation that shadow cabinet members had not been told what roles they had, meaning they found out via the mainstream news.
Today the Telegraph had the opportunity to speak to one of the victims of the reshuffle, /u/SmashBrosGuys2933, who was fired from the Labour frontbench over controversial comments where he asked people to “name a single POC billionaire”, arguing that the LPUK were a pro-white party, defending a controversial article penned by senior Labour member, RedWolf. RedWolf, has since bagged themselves a role in the shadow cabinet, as shadow leader of the commons.
SmashBros told the Telegraph that he was unaware he had been fired, and the party leadership had not informed him before making a public statement that he had been fired from frontline roles.
It also appeared that SmashBros had not clocked Labour big-whig, ThePootisPower’s, statement 4 days earlier telling the Telegraph that if “he made a statement he forgot to tell me”.
A running theme throughout this reshuffle appears to be a lack of communication with the Labour backbench, and wider party.
SmashBros informed the Telegraph that his comments were not racist and he “will never do anything to demean minorities.” In a shocking revelation he told the Telegraph that the Labour leadership admitted to him that this was a PR move to stop press coverage. This, if true, shows that Labour do not actually find his comments objectionable, but merely commanded an apology as a PR stunt to save their backs, and to oust him from the shadow cabinet. It should also be noted that the decision to announce that Smash was not going to considered for a cabinet posts was during the short lived and quickly botched coalition negotiations with the DRF and TPM for a governing coalition, Labour only appear to care about tackling such comments when they must defend their public image to convince others to coalition with them.
Later on, SmashBros told the Telegraph that he believes that RedWolf should be fired as “the originator of the issue” and he told this paper he believed he was being unfairly treated,stating that the reason RedWolf wasn’t fired was due to him being “a seasoned veteran”. SmashBros also went on to say that newer members across the commons, not only in Labour, are treated with contempt.
The reason he hasn’t is because he’s a seasoned veteran, whereas I am relatively new.
SmashBrosGuys2933 on why RedWolf wasn’t sacked.
SmashBros believed he was getting an unjustified proportion of the blame and argued that “The article was approved by Captainographer, the Press Officer and the leadership before being published in Labour Weekly. “and told us that he felt“they must share some blame for this controversy”.
Labour’s ThePootisPower told us that “SmashBros was removed from cabinet because the comments they made were inappropriate and frankly a bit racist in nature”. He told the Telegraph he believes SmashBros is not racist but “it would not be appropriate to reward that sort of behaviour with a frontbench position.” He also apologised for not talking to SmashBros about his sacking earlier.
If Labour thought firing SmashBros would have reduced press coverage, they couldn’t have been more wrong with the former Chief Whip coming out swinging and speaking out against the Labour Leadership’s decisions.
Gren_Gnat, who defended SmashBros, and denied that they could in any way be wrong before deleting his comments, also got an appointment to the shadow cabinet.
This will add to Labour’s woes and shows that there is a division in the party between older and newer members, most importantly it exposes Labour’s true intentions behind firing SmashBros and shows an image of a party more focused on political expediency and public relations than racism.
Model Telegraph 