By Kumar David –
“We are ready and able to put forward a programme that has massive support in the country.” – Jeremy Corbyn
He is knocking on the door at No. 10; but he must not cross the threshold, not yet. Britain needs a strong Labour government with a clear majority, not a pussyfoot contraption. Let Theresa and the Tories eat dirt for a few months, and wet their underpants screwing up Brexit. Fresh elections and a clear Labour majority; that is best. Though negotiating a decent Brexit or an exit-from-Brexit is important the crucial task facing twenty-first century Labour is rebuilding modern social democracy on the ashes of Thatcher-Blair neoliberalism. Mark you I said ‘modern social democratic’. There is no harking back to the 1960s except for values; a caring society, fairness, reinvigorating once renowned universities, more access to education and restoring the health care system. The folly of privatisation of public goods like railways and electricity supply has to be squashed and these services renationalised. I am looking a bit ahead, but not too far. But first let’s take stock of the lay of the land.
The task of this column is not to report the news but to analyse, theorise and prognosticate. My assumption is that readers are familiar with the run-up to the elections and the outcome; that is who lost, who gained, how many seats and where. I am inclined to say ‘I told you so’ referring to my 6 Sept 2015 column, but be that as it may, now the signposts on the landscape are:-
- Theresa May(TM) has been forced to lean on the ultra-conservative Democratic Unionist Party (Ian Paisley’s party) which has agreed to support her, vote-by-vote. For now the DUP will only help the Tories survive the Throne Speech.
- The government is hobbled and TM is shackled on social and economic policies and on Brexit. The 318 seat Tory bench survives by the grace of the 10 seat DUP.
- Coalition with the DUP could endanger the Good Friday Accord and imperil the fragile peace in Ireland. The Irish government and Sinn Fein have sounded warnings.
- TM goes into Brexit negotiations a lame duck. She is fighting on two fronts, at the front and at the rear. Back stabbing by Cabinet colleagues and backbench Tory MPs who judge her a harbinger of calamity may see her off within six months.
- The working class abandoned its brief flirtation with UKIP and came back to Labour.
- Young people voted 2:1 for Labour; the university towns were a landslide; youth enthusiasm propelled Corbin; they impelled each other.
- The post election surge to Labour has been as remarkable as the swing in the election. I see the makings of a Labour victory in an election within two years.
- This means a future Corbyn government is likely to be more rather than less radical and that fits Corbyn’s natural inclinations and his CV.
- Market research shows a loss of business confidence (read capitalist dismay). The well-heeled will put up a fight. Confrontation is expected, leading to further radicalisation of Corbyn’s support base.
- Labour’s right flank must be kept out of the shadow cabinet. Blairism is dead what need is there for its relicts?
I am not writing with the zealous hubris of a contented Corbyn and Labour, in its current avatar, enthusiast, though it may sound like that. I have reflected and concluded that these are sensible comments and prognostications. Where I see danger, and when you reach my vintage it is a recurring experience, is how large the gap between hope and reality will be in say the third, fourth, fifth etc. year of a Corbyn government. This is crucial, Labour needs two consecutive terms to undo the damage of four decades and fashion a new Britain. The challenge is not Jeremy becoming prime minister, on that I am sanguine but I hope not complacent; implementing the programme with necessary and sensible adjustments along the way will be the harder part.
But all is not as rosy as seems. The Labour leadership suffers from congenital sectarianism as acutely as its counterpart in Lanka’s left. The Tories won many marginal seats by majorities of one or two thousand. If only there had been tactical voting agreements! Labour’s former defence spokesman Clive Lewis and Green party co-leader, Caroline Lucas say in the Guardian “the result could have been very different if Labour, Greens and Liberal Democrats agreed to more electoral pacts. If progressives had voted for the best placed left-of-centre candidate” 62 additional seats would have been wrested from the Tories. “The Greens offered to stand aside for Labour in 12 seats in return for Labour standing down in the Isle of Wight, but the Labour leadership refused”.
So the JVP and Lanka’s left are not the only loonies. Not one left party, group or sect in Lanka has called for a united left-front, let alone unification of the left movement! Worse still, not one has taken it up in-depth in internal discussions. There is no commitment, nothing but tittle-tattle. The JVP is chief among suicide seekers. It will NEVER have more than 10 to 20 parliamentary seats unless it stands with a left alliance drawing radical and left-liberal support. To do that it has to open discussions. Is it capable of such a thing?
Back to Brexit and Corbyn. It is known that Corbyn has always been ambivalent about the EU. He is concerned about the effect of immigrants on domestic wages and unemployment and critical of the exploitation of imported workers by employers. At the same time he sees that belonging to a European project is agreeable to his internationalist sentiments. We saw this during the Brexit campaign; Corbyn campaigned for Remain but it is hard to say he put his heart into it.
As putative prime minister he is likely to adopt a “soft Brexit” approach and he will put any deal to parliament for ratification. On a second referendum my guess is that he will cross that bridge if and when he reaches it. The crucial point is that both Leave and Remain sections of the British working class will trust him and accept a deal he brings back as the best that could be achieved. His credibility is higher than any other leader, Conservative, Labour or Lib-Dem. He is wise to remain ambivalent rather than hypocritical and see how things pan out. Will the EU allow the UK to Remain if it changes its mind? I don’t know the small type in the rule book, but the political answer is Yes.
Welfare-state social-democracy was facilitated in Europe by the long-boom (1945-1970) of post-war reconstruction, brisk economic activity, rising prosperity, virile capitalism, a sturdy working class, social democratic parties in power and the Marshal Plan. Today it’s as different as night is from day! Global capitalism struggles to climb out of the 2008-crisis, sovereign, corporate and private debt spin out of control, manufacturing is dislocated in its heartlands, unseemly income and wealth gaps poison society, and speculative finance capital dominates. New Social Democracy has to be planted on this soil.
But there is an encouraging side. Remarkable technological advances have broken through, huge productivity gains lie within the grasp of social labour, trade and global supply chains have advanced to an extraordinary extent, guaranteed basic income is talked about (“To each according to his needs”) and economic powerhouses have emerged in Asia and elsewhere. The productive prowess needed to create a society of abundance is at hand.
The old social democratic model of tax and spend is passé; New Social Democracy will be founded on a new social contract. The economy must be on a footing of productivity, technology and basic income for all. The option of a higher retirement age in line with longevity should be offered. The power of finance capital must be pruned. Debt must be trimmed and cuts spread across all society; this is not the same as neo-liberalism’s capitalism-in-crisis austerity. The psychological climate is unlike that of a government answerable to the ruling classes alone. Measures that appear similar will be accepted when implemented by a government people trust; for example Syriza in Greece. Rebuilding the NHS, support for schools and universities, better elderly care, public housing now in the limelight after London’s Grenfell Tower fire – Thatcherism 30 years ago turned its back on public housing – and nationalisations will set a different tone. Confidence will soar if income and wealth iniquities are pruned.
In an era of global capitalism in retreat and neo-populism over its peak and possibly in decline*, Corbynite Labour has the opportunity to be an inspiration for the revival of social democracy. When a Labour government takes office it will be a trendsetter flashing hopes of a younger Bernie Sanders and a stronger Jean-Luc Melenchon.
[*Neo-populism may be past its use-by date in the West because: Trump is in the dumps, the National Front fared poorly in French legislative elections, Brexit needs a fix-it, UKIP did not win a single seat, the German far-right is in the dog-box and the Finns Party split].
Rajash / June 25, 2017
No Chance. I will eat my hat in public >>>>as Paddy Ashdown once famously said on TV, if ohhh Jeremy Corbyn ever becomes the PM.
Jezza Corbyn / June 25, 2017
I look forward to watching you eat it.
Rajash / June 25, 2017
I will upload the video
Native Vedda / June 25, 2017
Jezza Corbyn –“I look forward to watching you eat it.”———————————– ——-Please read the following about Churchill —————————— [A newly elected young Tory MP, eagerly taking up a place on the benches and pointing to the benches opposite, said to Churchill, “So that’s the enemy”. Churchill supposedly replied, “No son, that’s the opposition”, and then pointed to the benches behind and said, “That is the enemy”.]——————————Isn’t it true with Jeremy’s own party? ——————————-After the elections his enemies usually within his own party are grudgingly coming around to accepting his leadership. ——At least he has made a dent among the young disillusioned voters. It is for the young ones to carry the mantle to the next generation. —————————Rajash must be a filthy rich closet conservative because he is a Tamil, like Patels. I don’t think he is willing to pay bit more taxes to help the many.
Rajash / June 25, 2017
Native – I am not filthy rich closet conservative. In our previous exchange on this topic, I said I am not sure who to vote for this election. I abstained. “ohhh Jeremy Corbyn” had a late revival and basking in glory ay the Glastonbury…I admire him but doubt whether he is a prime ministerial material.
Native Vedda / June 25, 2017
Rajash ——–“I admire him but doubt whether he is a prime ministerial material.” —————-Surely this man who has revived Labour fortunes and reinvigorated the youth must have some leadership quality that none of his predecessors had except Tony Benn and Michael Foot, ——-the rare commodity honesty, consistency and determination in the face of adversity. Give him credit where credit is due. ———–Mother Theresa May, come on would you buy an icecream her?
Rajash / June 26, 2017
I give six months for Mother Theresa>>>>>>or will it be sooner?
Mount Meru / June 25, 2017
Bloody Hell! Only a month ago you had written off this man an Corbyn unelectable, fool – waste of time! Is this a risk of basing political judgement on internet rubbish, or pure stupidity and lack of political judgement? There are signs that frequent failures od the second kind are made worse by reliance on the internet. Work to get some credibility, David
Rajash / June 25, 2017
SJ / June 25, 2017
Which person is elected Prime Minister will make no difference unless there is an clear agreed programme on which the government is elected.
It is good to be able to imagine and to dream, but when it comes to action, one’s feet have to be planted firmly on the ground,
Native Vedda / June 26, 2017
SJ———————-“Which person is elected Prime Minister will make no difference unless there is an clear agreed programme on which the government is elected.”—————————— “It doesn’t matter whether a cat is white or black, as long as it catches mice.” –Deng Xiaoping was the paramount leader of the People’s Republic of China.
Kumar Paran / June 28, 2017
Comments should not exceed 300 words.Please read our Comments Policy for further details.
Kumar Paran / June 28, 2017
Dear Kumar David
“Jeremy Corbyn: Britain’s Next Prime Minister”
“The challenge is not Jeremy becoming prime minister, on that I am sanguine….”
You also said:
“If progressives had voted for the best placed left-of-centre candidate” 62 additional seats would have been wrested from the Tories.”
Was this an unintended admission that JC hasn’t got it in him to deliver victory for Labour in his own right, which contradicts your upbeat caption!
Michael Foot led the Labour party to its worst electoral humiliation in 1983. TM has just led the Tories to an ‘even more humiliating’ defeat. Why ‘even more humiliating’? MF was expected to lose badly, and he did. TM was expected to win handsomely, and she didn’t – what’s worse, lost her working majority.
Tories went wrong on three things:
a) Treated the election as a contest between TM and JC.
b) Poor manifesto.
c) Abysmal campaigning.
JC performed much better than many expected but the fact is he still lost. So, when JC couldn’t deliver victory against a weak opposition performance, what chance would he have in the face of an expected stronger performance by the Tories the next time.
The Tories are a ruthless bunch and I expect them to:
a) Allow TM to deliver a successful Brexit.
b) Ditch TM post Brexit, elect a new leader to match or better JC’s election campaigning performance.
c) Ensure the next manifesto is devoid of spooky elements such as those unnerved the elderly voters.
So, instead of assuming JC would win the next time, a more efficacious way is to address those issues that lost him the election. For example, ‘Defence’ – where JC must reconcile his public and private positions on Trident as he says one thing to the many and another thing to the few!
Non PhD / June 28, 2017
I wish to read an analysis by Prof Kumar David . The topic is Deng Xiao Peng’s “one country two system” formula for Hong Kong and whether such a system can work for SL.
SJ / June 28, 2017
The Deng Xiaoping model was to avoid chaos by hastily integrating two vastly different economic and political systems. China has used such approach in other contexts too in earlier decades.
What has any of that to do with Sri Lanka?