Labour’s break with Corbyn is now almost certain
Labour will almost inevitably break with Corbyn, and Corbynism. The Centre — and the Left — cannot hold.
Sir Keir Starmer has had a good 2022 so far. That much is true. Riding high in the polls (still), a defection netted (with suggestions of continued Tory MP dissatisfaction being made in late February), and Johnson’s gold wallpaper and numerous parties finally catching up with him.
So much, so predictable. The attacks by Sir John Major, the feeble excuses made by Number 10 supporters, and the slow decline into “battery acid” territory. Seems so inevitable. Yet acres of copy is dedicated to it.
Unlike the almost inevitable final Corbyn-Starmer breach. A May 2022 likely date, following results of the locals, followed by “real alternative needed” type comments, seems predictable yet is hardly mentioned.
But how did we get here? Corbyn left the Party in safe Corbynite hands. And yet it’s all gone now.
The Leader, General Secretary, NEC, Leftist media (with the exception of one or two columnists), Unions (the majority), the Scottish leadership, and the membership, have all switched from Corbynite-controlled to Starmerite (or at least Starmerlite a la the Deputy Leader and Mayor of Manchester).
The utter humiliation of Laura Pidcock’s self-pitying resignation from the NEC was unexpected but changed nothing — a Momentum candidate replaced her seat but any reelection for that seat by Momentum seems unlikely.
Yet, what seems so strange is that this is all so different from what Labour has seen before. Tony Benn’s wilderness was from within Labour. There was no Peace and Justice organisations established.
Every action was seized as proof of the Left’s (waning) influence. Yet now, Starmer does no right in the eyes of Corbynites.
Take his 10 Pledges (the members I spoke to at the time barely cared but this is by-the-by). His alleged switch over energy nationalisation (as demonstrated with a swift slapdown of Ed Miliband) was howled at. This despite Reeves’ decarbonisation and workers’ rights agenda feeling very Miliband-esque.
In fact, the only true 180 switch for Sir Keir, and the Party has been the messaging on foreign policy. Sir Keir even highlighted his work fighting the 2003 invasion of Iraq and pledged an end to “illegal” wars when running for leader. All that is gone.
Yet it was this policy area most exorcised Corbyn, and most alienated Labour from the general public.
Now the commitment to Nato, the armed forces, and our allies are a cypher to attack Corbyn.
Sir Keir has blasted his predecessor’s views on Nato with Laura K; reminded voters of his immediate rejection of the Corbyn over Salisbury; and now attacks the proto-Corbynite group StW.
I think it’s worth quoting the latter in depth:
“Labour’s commitment to Nato is unshakable… It was to prevent such needless wars that the generation of Attlee and his foreign secretary, the formidable trade union leader Ernest Bevin, were the midwives of Nato…
“That Bevinite internationalism will guide Labour’s approach to Britain’s security every day of my leadership…
“That’s why the likes of the Stop the War coalition are not benign voices for peace. At best they are naive; at worst they actively give succour to authoritarian leaders who directly threaten democracies… [They’re] unthinking conservatism at its worst.
“To truly stop war, you need to show you are serious about standing up for peace...
“Denis Healey, as Labour’s international secretary in 1947, wrote the pamphlet Cards on the Table, which demolished the argument of those on the left…
“Attlee, Bevin and Healey saw communism for what it was, and were prepared to stand up to its aggression… Today’s Labour party has the same clear-eyed view of the current regime in the Kremlin.”
Corbyn’s own ego on foreign policy (his confused notions of the Arab-Israeli conflict is what drives his antisemitic actions) means these attacks from Starmer hit a lot harder than changes to policies around, say, the DWP (especially as Corbyn on welfare cuts was hardly great).
This is all before we search for actual policy “betrayals.” Take the conspiracy theory of membership numbers being in terminal decline.
Debunked by Ann Black on the NEC (“My best guess is that paid-up membership is currently still around 400,000, more than double that during most of the Blair-Brown era, and relatively stable”), the Party’s public accounts report Labour peaked in membership in February 2020, presumably bolstered by people wanting to oust Corbynism forever.
Indeed, Sir Keir doesn’t share the foreign policy of Corbyn, nor his focus on membership. But other than that — where does the sheer rage actually come from? It seems strange that so few actual analytical articles have been produced beyond the simmering rage of the egotistical and obsessive.
So, what is to be done? Will Labour dare to oust Corbyn from Islington North, as was reported this weekend?
It wouldn’t be too hard to see a Labour victory (Batley and Spen suggests soft Tories will loan votes to Sir Keir to stop far-Leftists). Sir Keir laughed about the threat of Corbyn in Islington on LBC.
Yet, Corbyn loves the limelight too much. So, I predict a splintering.
A few holdouts from the Socialist Campaign Group, money from some of the more factional unions (but presumably not actually Unite), adulation from certain accounts on Twitter. And hey-presto you are Alex Salmond circa 2020.
Sir Keir will be delighted.
