Can Corbyn’s message of social decency     change our political landscape?

Jeremy Corbyn’s meteoric rise since he entered Labour’s leadership contest has got the world in a tizzy – suppose he actually wins?! Would that make Labour unelectable or a force for radical change? HOT asked two local activists, Rachel Lever and Clive Gross, to write for and against the following proposition: Is it realistic to suppose that the Labour Party, which in the general election endorsed the Tories’ austerity policy and now appears to have difficulty seeing itself as the opposition, can lead the struggle for a society based on a fair distribution of wealth and resources and sustainable environmental policies? Below is Rachel’s argument in favour. Clive’s argument against is here.

Can Corbyn lead Labour to government power? And is Labour, even led by Corbyn, worth electing at all?

The first question comes from the Right, who are actually far more worried that he might win, not lose, in 2020. The second is from the Left, from the social campaigners who have written off Labour.

First question: is Corbyn too far left to be electable?

That depends on whether you think Ed Miliband lost the election for being too far left or for being ineffectual and Tory-lite.

Those who repeat that Corbyn is ‘hard’ left are clearly just desperate to stop him. However, because the ground has shifted so far to the right, and the old Far Left has shrivelled up and almost died out, the ‘hard left’ jibe might have had some credibility – but for the thousands of perfectly normal people queueing up round the block to listen to him.

So the threats of ‘unelectability’ have been about as effective as trying to stop a speeding train with a feather duster. The ‘Corbyn mania”’that gives the lie to ‘unelectability’ has gripped the country and especially the young. The rudeness and abuse against his message of communal decency is just proving his point.

The long-range forecast of electoral disaster is in any case not evidence, but completely unfounded prediction.

They also say he’s about opposing, not governing: but Labour, if it’s doing the job properly, is always in opposition to the system, either in or out of government. And what we desperately need now is a strong opposition.

Such an opposition will demonstrate in practice the clear alternative that people can vote for in 2020, and also in by-elections and local elections en route. So the next election campaign starts here and now, the message constantly reinforced by opposition to a savage slash-and-burn Tory government.

In and of itself, leadership of the Labour Party will lend authority and normality to policies such as a healthy welfare state and mixed economy that were established, fully working, and part of the scenery for decades, before the Thatcher-Blair era. Already Corbyn’s programme of popular, traditional centre-left policies is shifting and extending the perceived political spectrum.

An effective opposition that speaks to millions, forges an anti-austerity alliance, inspires young voters and a high turnout, could create a left bloc to at least demolish the Tories’ 10-seat majority. Only Corbyn could build such an alliance.

But can he pull the centre ground? Surely an army of young idealists can’t win the suburbs and the “aspirational” middle incomes? Or can they?

It’s actually a caricature to see this Centre as smug, cocooned and comfortable. They too are users of services, their parents may need care and their children need education, jobs and affordable housing. They all need the NHS, use the trains, and don’t want to ‘Go Compare’ expensive energy suppliers. Corbyn isn’t tearing up stability but offering a costed redistribution. It’s all standard Labour stuff.

A revealing YouGov poll also finds:
* Over 60%, including recent Tory, Lib Dem and even Ukip voters, agree with Corbyn on controlling private rents, de-privatising rail and energy; on nuclear weapons and Trident, the Iraq war, university fees, a national living wage and a supertax on incomes over £1m.

Harriet Harman, justifying capitulation on the welfare bill, talked about “sending a message” to the electorate that “we are listening to them”. But political parties actually thrive by changing people’s minds as well as listening, and leading by articulating an alternative. They are more likely to fail if they pander to every existing prejudice.

Second question: is Labour, even with a Corbyn leadership, too compromised by running capitalism to fight for justice and equality?

After the toothless Labour abstention on the welfare bill, someone wrote on Facebook that “organising locally is the only socialism that is now available, and direct protest is the only democracy we’ll get”.

Without going into the reform vs revolution question, here are six benefits that we could hope for from a revived Labour Party:

1. Corbyn is a fellow activist on all the issues that matter to the Left beyond Labour. The huge Camden rally “Grassroots for Jeremy” was prefaced: “Jeremy Corbyn believes real social change happens outside parliament. A Labour leader like Jeremy will strengthen our grassroots struggles.” If Labour can “become a social movement again”, it won’t be on its own but allied with these left refuseniks.

2. A democratised Labour Party answerable to its rank and file, that’s responsive to protest movements, can turn their demands into law. Crucial legal reforms and rights (such as the Equal Pay Act) that started out from the grassroots are now taken for granted or are the subject of passionate rearguard defence.

3. Labour may not overthrow capitalism, but it might save the bees, or buy solar power from North Africa or stop arming Israel. A foreign and climate policy independent of Washington and the multinational lobby would be a gain well worth having.

4. However shameful many of its actions and attitudes, the Labour Party, affiliated to major trade unions, is too big a working class resource to walk away from. Together they gave strength, dignity, solidarity and confidence to working class communities, and brought many advances in human rights, gender rights, education and health, and working conditions. If we miss out on the very rare chance Corbyn offers, we will see more and more of these gains wiped out.

5. The unattached radical movement lacks continuity and structural ties with organised workers. A renewed Labour Party could combine the two, to produce a more radical workers’ movement and a more rooted social justice movement. Together at grassroots level they could keep Labour on a radical track: that would be a change of historic proportions.

6. When mainstream social democracy is supine, it can lead to the rise of the Far Right, especially in times of economic upheaval. The pseudo-protest of Ukip is a prime product of a Labour Party that failed as an alternative, that adopted and validated the right-wing ideology designed to divide the working class, and allowed a societal drift to the right and the blaming and hatred of immigrants and claimants.

Corbyn stands out by meeting these issues head-on instead of pandering to them. Apparently this is the way to deal with an attacking shark, and the analogy is apt: reversing course could even collapse the Ukip vote, returning many to Labour who were lured away by Ukip’s “bolshy” veneer.

If Corbyn’s Labour could offer a cohesive, inclusive sense of community, it will be a lot deeper and more meaningful than the sum of his policies. The possibility of changing our societal values and priorities from profits to people is at the root of the Corbyn appeal. And that in itself, at the present time, would be a small revolution.

 

See also Vote, vote, vote for Jeremy Corbyn, Rachel’s account of the Hastings for Corbyn campaign.

 

Also in: Politics

« Yvette Cooper speaks
Forget Labour »