Corbyn is not the Labour left’s only hope

The Left has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity — we need the best candidate

 

There is a widespread assumption among commentators of all political stripes that Corbyn’s leadership constitutes a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the left.

Should he be deposed, the narrative goes, Labour would return to the Blairite comfort zone of the PLP, complete with all the associated spin, technocratic managerialism, and unquestioned neoliberal assumptions about how the world works and what the electorate wants.

Consequently, the Labour left—including the vast majority of its grassroots membership—is expected to emphatically re-elect the leader that Labour MPs overwhelmingly want to remove.

But there is also a danger for the left here: if Corbyn is the wrong candidate, if he is simply not up to the job, then we are about to squander this once-in-a-generation opportunity.

Should Corbyn lose the next election, the defeat will discredit us and our ideas, and embolden the careerists and architects of despair within the Labour Party to install another Blair.

The post-Brexit landscape presents possibilities for left-wing politics that are unrivalled in recent British political history.

The Leave campaign inspired vast swathes of disillusioned voters with a message of social justice, albeit it directed their righteous indignation towards the European Union, rather than the Westminster politicians who bear much of the blame for decades of underinvestment in public services and damaging social inequality.

The shock of the referendum result has detonated the case for austerity, as well as the career of its chief architect George Osborne.

We on the left need to ask ourselves: in Corbyn, do we have a leader ready to seize this opportunity? Or are we about to pass up on the best chance of radical change many of us have seen in our lifetimes?

This, then, is the left-wing case against Corbyn.

Corbyn and his team alienate their natural allies

True, some of the PLP have never accepted Corbyn’s victory. But looking at the list of MPs who resigned from the shadow cabinet, what is striking is that they came from all parts of the Party, both the New Labour right and the new generation left.

While all Blairites oppose Corbyn, this does not mean that all of Corbyn’s opponents are Blairite. Many Labour MPs genuinely wanted to give Corbyn a chance; many of those genuinely wanted him to succeed. Once these individuals start to say he is not up to the job, it is time for a rethink.

The same pattern of disillusionment can be found outside the PLP. The journalist Owen Jones and the tax activist Richard Murphy, both of whom shared a platform with Corbyn during his leadership campaign, have voiced serious doubts about his leadership – and been trolled for their troubles.

Two of Corbyn’s Economic Advisory Committee have resigned, and all its remaining members criticised the leadership’s performance during the EU referendum.

Corbyn is unable to reach out to a wider audience.

There is a broad constituency for Corbyn’s rejection of austerity, his resistance to cruel cuts to tax credits and disability benefits, his refusal to countenance the pointless academisation of state schools.

By contrast, his support for unilateral nuclear disarmament, unrestricted immigration from EU member states, and withdrawal from NATO is anathema to many voters. Corbyn is all too willing to allow his more controversial views the same amount of air-time as ideas that have genuinely wide-ranging appeal.

He refuses to downplay some of his long-held beliefs, even when doing so would make the achievement of other more important objectives more likely. To admirers, this is evidence of the seriousness of his convictions, and a refreshing lack of spin.

To the wider electorate, it shows a staggering inability to prioritise. A left-wing leader that was able to decide which parts of her platform were vital and which were dispensable, or who simply had fewer controversial commitments in the first place, would stand a much better chance at winning over a sceptical population in the face of a hostile media.

Corbyn has shown minimal interest in revamping left-wing solutions to deal with 21st-century problems

One of many depressing consequences of the New Labour era is that the idea of modernisation itself has become discredited, synonymous with selling out to the right.

However, Corbyn’s statist solutions, in which the nationalisation of industry features heavily, run a risk of centralisation and bureaucratisation that will frustrate rather than fulfil the hopes and aspirations of the working class.

There are ways that the left could empower workers: look at the ideas of stakeholder capitalism and workplace democracy that did the rounds in the 1990s, before Blair decided they sounded too much like socialism.

There are ways that the left could liberate working people from the necessity of work: for example, through the introduction of a Universal Basic Income. But these ideas remain underdeveloped by Corbyn and his team, to the extent that they are being considered at all.

A year ago, I was Corbyn-curious. But because of his inability to win over his natural allies, his inability to speak to the priorities of the wider public, and his inability to face up to the challenges of a post-industrial era, I no longer believe that he can win a general election.

This does not mean that the left is doomed: it just means that we need to find a different candidate.

Principle and competence are not mutually exclusive. Anyone who believes that they are has unwittingly bought in to the foundational assumption of Blairism.

We on the left should know better than that

Neil James writes about British politics and international affairs

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

17 Responses to “Corbyn is not the Labour left’s only hope”

  1. Steve Mizzy

    Pretty much sums up where I am now.
    My early enthusiasm has evaporated. Reality has bitten and Corbyn has showed himself to be ill equipped to take on the leader’s role.
    The party cannot go back and Corbyn will have hopefully given it a major jolt to awaken a radical and reforming agenda, but it’s quite clear to me that he simply isn’t up to the demands of leading a major political party.

  2. Peter L. Griffiths

    Neil James fails to understand that the first priority in any progressive programme is avoidance of wars with foreign countries.
    This is where Tony Blair and his supporters were completely wrong, and Jeremy Corbyn completely right.

  3. Tony

    Corbyn has undoubtedly made mistakes but so would any other new leader. Slowly but surely, he has helped to reverse the damage to the Labour Party and politics caused by the likes of Angela Eagle.
    I suspect that this article is designed to promote the other two possible candidates. In both cases, however, their claims to be a ‘left’ alternative to Corbyn are totally bogus.
    We should not forget that Angela Eagle voted for the invasion of Iraq and against an inquiry on three separate occasions.
    Owen Smith also supported the invasion of Iraq in a 2006 interview.
    Craig Murray has written a very good article which exposes his record:
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/07/entirely-fake-owen-smith/#respond

  4. liz

    Would a different leader with the same policies as Corbyn be accepted by current Labour MPs?

  5. Observer

    Hard to know where to begin with this nonsense.

    Firstly, you shouldn’t imply Piketty’s resignation from the Council of Economic Advisors had anything to do with his lack of available time. Piketty himself made that perfectly clear.

    Secondly, it’s unclear what this refers to: “Corbyn’s statist solutions, in which the nationalisation of industry features heavily, run a risk of centralisation and bureaucratisation that will frustrate rather than fulfil the hopes and aspirations of the working class”. I can’t remember any announcements since he took over as leader about nationalising industry, other than temporary nationalisation if needed to save the steel industry. What is the author referring to?

    Finally on basic income and others, the real news is that these things are even being talked about by front benchers. No, they haven’t been fully worked out and costed and launched within nine months, but guess what? No other opposition leader has ever done anything similar in their first nine months either. Not to mention the fact that – in this case at least – the relevant front bencher responsible for driving UBI forward if at all should have been Shadow DWP…Owen Smith. Has he mentioned it yet?

Comments are closed.