Movements

The Corbyn Movement: What Path Forward for the Left?

Tom Barnard and Stephan Kimmerleby Tom Barnard and Stephan Kimmerle
Sophie Brown, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Today, October 29, the Labour Party suspended its former leader Jeremy Corbyn. We stand in solidarity with Jeremy and reject the accusations that the Labour Party under his leadership was institutionally antisemitic. There is no basis for these accusations as the British website Counterfire points out in exploring the allegations in detail. But clearly this marks another milestone in the revenge of the right wing against the left leadership Corbyn represented between 2015 and 2019. We publish here some articles to shed some light on the strength and weaknesses of the Corbyn movement that are of international importance for those who want to rebuild a socialist and a combative working class movement.

In 2016, and again in 2020, the U.S. left, and especially the socialist left, was excited and inspired by the Bernie Sanders campaign. For the first time in decades, a candidate referring to himself as a socialist was espousing policies well to the left of the mainstream of the Democratic Party: Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, taxing the rich, while calling for a political revolution against the Billionaire Class.

On the other side of the Atlantic, a similar experiment was taking place. In the summer of 2015 Jeremy Corbyn, a left, social democratic Member of Parliament of the British Labour Party, was nominated to run for the Party’s leadership. Though regarded as a fringe candidate, centrist Labour MPs who did not politically support him wanted to make a show of broadening the debate by including a socialist voice. Normally Corbyn would not even have made it on the ballot, but what happened next almost nobody expected.

Changes in the rules of the party by the moderate wing of the party made it very easy for new people to vote within the Labour Party leadership election. These changes were initiated to limit the influence of trade unions and the membership of the party to consolidate the neoliberal orientation of the party that former Prime Minister Tony Blair had championed.

Blair’s leadership of the Labour Party had mirrored the policies of the Democratic Party’s neoliberal Clinton wing. Blair moved the party towards openly neoliberal and anti-working class positions such as “ending welfare” and supporting globalization. Blair’s “New Labour” also abandoned a working class agenda, introducing market-based reforms in the education and health sectors, instituting student tuition fees and reducing certain categories of welfare payments, and refusing to reverse the privatisation of the railways enacted by his Conservative Party leaders John Major. Later Blair even acted as junior partner to the U.S. in its invasion of Iraq.

Unlike the through and through pro-capitalist Democratic Party in the US that Blair tried to mirror, the Labour Party was originally launched as a working class party in the struggle to overcome capitalism. Blair tried to get rid of all the remnants in its program and the links of the party to the trade unions and working class militants.

However, in 2015 the backlash against Blair’s neoliberal policies of austerity and “New Labour’s” neoliberal politics resulted in hundreds of thousands joining the party in support of Corbyn. He was elected in 2015 with 59 percent and re-elected in 2016 with 61 percent, despite opposition from the parliamentary wing of the Labour Party. Membership in the Labour Party grew from 200,000 in May 2015 to more than 580,000 by 2020, making it the largest party in Europe. Under his leadership Labour’s positions moved to the left, opposing the British involvement in the Syrian war, demanding the renationalization of the railways as well as an end to austerity.

In addition to the growth of the Labour Party itself, a grassroots organization called Momentum was founded as an activist organization of left Labour Party supporters. Controversial since its inception, it operated similarly to the DSA in the U.S. focused on developing grassroots electoral activism. Unlike DSA however, it was in its internal structure a very top down run organization with no real say of its members over its policies and without democratic structures to give chapters a say and develop its own campaigning. While initially carried forward by the enthusiasm of hundreds of thousands, this lack of democracy limited its ability to become a real force on a much larger scale in electoral politics.

Momentum polarized the Labour Party, with Blairites accusing it of infiltrating the party to purge parliamentary leaders it found too conservative. Unfortunately, this was untrue, as for all it’s social media and electoral presence, Momentum members did not attempt any systematic campaigns against Labour Party Councillors and members of parliament, nor did Corbyn mount any serious battles against Blairites in the party.

Nonetheless, the Conservative and Liberal parties, as well as Blairite Labour Party parliamentary figures struck back hard at Corbyn. A vicious campaign by major media outlets, hounded and slandered Corbyn relentlessly. For them, he was much too far left, called “looney”. They said he didn’t represent Labour’s base. There was even a major campaign mounted against his so-called antisemitism, based on Corbyn’s long-standing support for the Palestinian people.

Looming over all of this was the Brexit referendum calling for Britain to leave the European Union, a huge issue for the British people. As the real hit of a hard Brexit is now looming for the end of the year, we will produce and publish more material on Brexit in the coming weeks.

Under the impact of the dominance of Brexit in the discussions in society and an indecisive stance that Corbyn himself took (see article here), , Labour suffered a historic defeat in the election in December 2019, and Conservative Party Leader Boris Johnson was reelected. Then in April 2020, Corbyn resigned and Keir Starmer, a moderate candidate who presented himself as ‘centre-left’ candidate won the Labour Party’s leadership election with 56 percent of the vote.

Starmer tried initially to appease the left wing of the Labour Party with promises of inclusion. Corbyn himself stated he wanted to “Make sure our party is always proud to be a socialist party,” but it was not to be. Starmer sacked Corbyn supporter Rebecca Long-Bailey from her position in the Labour Party’s shadow cabinet. And on October 29, Corbyn himself was suspended and de facto expelled from the Labour Party group in the British parliament.

Though a newly elected Momentum leadership has tried to steer this organization in a more radical direction, opportunities to organize the hundreds of thousands inspired by Corbyn´s call for a socialist future seem over. Activists are turning their back to Labour, some try to keep the left organized within Labour, some call to leave the party.

This marks the end of five years of struggle where working class people tried to use the Labour Party again under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership in their defense against the daily hardships of capitalism. With this end of Corbyn-ism, what’s left now from this movement? What could be the next steps in Britain and what are the conclusions the left internationally could draw from the rise and fall of this attempt to fight for working class interests in the political arena?

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

“Labour Party is now much closer to being a socialist party”

Documented: Jeremy Corbyn on his Brexit Policy on August 19, 2020

In the Podcast of the British magazine Tribune Jeremy Corbyn explains to Grace Blakeley:

“I think the issue that dominated everything was obviously Brexit, in the end. I campaigned for a yes vote in the referendum because I felt we should remain and reform the European Union.

We didn’t win that referendum. The result was what it was. And after that, the party then went into a long, serious debate and there was huge pressure for a second referendum, in order to try and bring about a remain position.

I tried to navigate all of this and it was extremely difficult. No question about that. because the majority of party members, probably 70% maybe around that I suspect voted remain. […] I tried to bring people together and the words I used were: if you live in Tottenham or Mansfield and you’re in the private rented sector, along universal credit, you’ve got a problem which is called a Tory government. Your problem is not caused by the EU, it is caused by the Tory government. And so trying to bring about unity.

And then we reached the compromise we did at the 2019 conference, which went through overwhelmingly almost unanimously. And that was: negotiate a trade deal with the European Union and put the whole thing to a referendum within six months. Almost as soon as we’d agreed that compromise motion, people – particularly on the remain side – said, well, actually, we’re going to continue to campaign. And quite a lot on the leave side wanted to continue to campaign to leave.

And so I was left in a position of being, I felt sometimes, like almost the last person defending the party position.

I did challenge the government on this. When Boris Johnson said during the TV debates I will get Brexit done. I said, no, you won’t, you will not get Brexit done. You go into years of negotiations with the EU, or you’re going to hand over all our social and working conditions to the Americans, what’s it going to be? Johnson didn’t answer that and the media didn’t press him on it. And the result was what it was.

Could we have done things differently, hard to see, but I regret the amount of time and energy that was taken up with endless, almost repetitive debates. I kept notes of every shadow cabinet discussion on Brexit and there’s loads and loads of hieroglyphics. I can barely read myself except the same words, keep coming up in them.”

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

Too Much Mobilizing, Not Enough Organizing

Interview with Natasha Josette, a Corbyn movement organizer and Momentum activist

You’ve been involved at different levels within the Corbyn movement over the past five years. Please share with us how you got involved in the “Corbyn moment” and what your experiences were.

Five years ago, in the summer of 2015, I heard on the radio about a person called Jeremy Corbyn who had a chance to become the next Labour Party leader. The name sounded somewhat familiar. As a single mother of two young children, I didn’t have much time to spend on politics. However, I grew up as a daughter of two political parents. And when I asked my mother that day about this guy called Corbyn, she almost got a bit angry at me for forgetting about Jeremy. Corbyn had sent a letter in support of my father when he was imprisoned as a political activist back in Malaysia. That was at the end of the 1980s, when I was around eight years old.

So there was already a bond of solidarity, an interest and enthusiasm with Corbyn that was somehow rooted in my family’s history. However, my excitement came from the changes I saw developing on the ground with the rise of Corbyn. I joined Momentum and got involved.

And you quickly immersed yourself in the movement. You were one of the organizers of “The World Transformed” in 2016, a political festival, a cultural gathering, and an open space to exchange views and meet people – something for your mind, your heart, and your soul. How did this develop?

That all grew out of the discussions when we wanted to organize a Momentum conference. But conferences are not very accessible to people. We wanted more folk to get involved and open it up for people like me, for single mothers, for working-class people, for people of color. That’s when we came up with the idea to do something different. “The World Transformed” became a political and cultural gathering, opening the space for the growing number of people who were suddenly becoming engaged in politics to support Jeremy Corbyn’s agenda. It became a space where politics and kids running around could be brought together.

All of that was linked to your activism in Momentum. Could you explain a bit more about Momentum? You were part of its leadership in 2018, the “National Coordinating Group”?

Yes, that’s right. I think that Momentum did a great job of pushing Corbyn’s agenda forward in the struggle to transform the Labour Party and advance a socialist agenda. At the moment, I’m excited to see the newly elected leadership of Momentum, coming from a group called “Forward Momentum,” a slate of candidates who ran together this year and got elected to develop Momentum further. Over five years, we were forced to focus so much on electoral politics, on questions of being prepared to be the next government, to be in power. We didn’t focus enough on building the base, on political education, on sinking roots in the communities.

Now, we are in a completely different situation. We are obviously not close to being in the government any more. With all the setbacks, maybe this is a chance for us to sink those roots, to help with the necessary task of educating people.

From afar, it looked like Momentum was more a pressure group and did not organize itself in branches and did not build an activist organization from below. Is this fair to say?

We were always confronted just with the next election, the next situation in which we needed to be able to jump into the government. We did too much mobilizing and not enough organizing. We had some success in running candidates, and won some positions, but we never had enough people.

I chose to focus on community organising and campaigns which for me is more important to working class people. But I understand that the focus at the time was mobilising around elections which Momentum were able to do really well at using new digital tools and campaigning techniques.

Could you explain that a bit more, why did you never have enough people? It looked like hundreds of thousands got involved in the attempt to turn Labour into a tool to fight for the many not the few?

That’s true, but it takes time; it takes organizing, it takes political education.

Five years ago, I wouldn’t have been confident enough to give you this interview, to speak up and play the role I was playing over the last several years. That’s a process. And we need to develop many more new activists. But this takes time. We did not have that time.

And you also need to sink roots in communities.

I became the lead digital community organiser for the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn to coordinate community outreach, building working-class power in communities. Nineteen thousand people went through our program of community organising training, to build working-class power from below. But that was just a start.

Look at Putney in south London. We had an organizer there who found out about horrible living conditions in an apartment block. She went there and did a listening outreach. She went there day after day after day. And already in the first week, she started coughing and struggled with the impact of the mold that was inflicting the apartments.

But, out of that, she developed demands with the tenants and they forced the landlord to basically accept all of them: improve the flats and dramatically change the living conditions of those tenants.

This is one example of campaigns that build roots, trust, and working class community power. That needs time, but you need such roots to stand against the corporate media, against the Tories, and to overcome the resistance that you face when you put forward a socialist agenda.

From outside of Britain it looked as if there was not much ownership given to the activists of Momentum to decide the politics of the organization, to build it up from below and to direct its course. Is that criticism too harsh?

The impact of new members on the national strategy of Momentum was somewhat limited, I agree.

The situations in different local organizations of Momentum differed very much from one place to another. Local organizations did not get much help from the national organization, not enough help. And local organizations had to raise their own funds. The local leaders were often a bit older and whiter than the majority of people coming into Momentum. Older trade-union activists, most of them white, had more weight. There was less of a focus on the input of environmental or anti-racist activists and younger people. Things were not ideal. I hope we can overcome some of those challenges in the future.

What are your hopes for the future?

My biggest hopes come from community organizing, from the movements for a Green New Deal to fight climate change, and from the Black Lives Matter movement. Can we build the roots in communities of color, amongst young people? Can we educate more people politically to stand up, raise their voice and organize, not just mobilize? If we can achieve that, we will overcome the current difficulties.

Interview by Stephan Kimmerle.

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

“A Declaration that we are Here”

Documented: Len McCluskey in an interview with the Observer, July 2020

One of the people who try to push Keir Starmer to the left seems to be Len McCluskey, the leader of Unite, Britain’s largest private sector union and a strong backer of Corbyn. In reference to Keir Starmer’s 10 campaign pledges, which included higher tax on the wealthy, the abolition of tuition fees, the “common ownership” of rail, mail, energy and water, and ending NHS outsourcing Len McCluskey told the Observer: “The fact is that Keir Starmer ran on a radical programme, some might say a Corbyn programme, and of course I keep this to hand,” he says. “I intend to keep that front and centre for the coming months and years.” And later on: “For me, he has to recognise that the ship he is sailing, if it lists too much to the right, then it will go under.”

On Brexit and the setback for the left McClusky told the Observer: “I was trying to persuade Jeremy [Corbyn] and [former shadow chancellor] John [McDonnell] that this perceived move towards a second referendum and Remain was going to be disastrous [at the last election],” he says. “The scale of the defeat was difficult to contemplate and therefore, of course, the left and the so-called Corbyn project, socialism, took a major hit. The election of Keir against the perceived left candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey was a further disappointment. So people have to brush themselves down, but the reports of the left’s death are greatly exaggerated.”

On the way forward: The Guardian summarises McClusky s plans: “In fact, he says there are plans for a rejuvenation of the left – a “major gathering” that is likely to feature Corbyn himself. Won’t it be seen as a rival to Labour’s official conference, reinforcing splits?” McClusky answers: “I’ve no doubt that people may see it as an alternative. It’s not supposed to be an alternative. It’s supposed to be a declaration that we are here. We are going nowhere. And we stand for those principles of radicalism and socialism that we’ve fought for all our lives.”

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

“The Last Person Defending the Party Position”of Neoliberalism?

Documented: Jeremy Corbyn on his Brexit Policy on August 19, 2020

In the Podcast of the British magazine Tribune Jeremy Corbyn explains to Grace Blakeley:

“I think the issue that dominated everything was obviously Brexit, in the end. I campaigned for a yes vote in the referendum because I felt we should remain and reform the European Union.

We didn’t win that referendum. The result was what it was. And after that, the party then went into a long, serious debate and there was huge pressure for a second referendum, in order to try and bring about a remain position.

I tried to navigate all of this and it was extremely difficult. No question about that. because the majority of party members, probably 70% maybe around that I suspect voted remain. […] I tried to bring people together and the words I used were: if you live in Tottenham or Mansfield and you’re in the private rented sector, along universal credit, you’ve got a problem which is called a Tory government. Your problem is not caused by the EU, it is caused by the Tory government. And so trying to bring about unity.

And then we reached the compromise we did at the 2019 conference, which went through overwhelmingly almost unanimously. And that was: negotiate a trade deal with the European Union and put the whole thing to a referendum within six months. Almost as soon as we’d agreed that compromise motion, people – particularly on the remain side – said, well, actually, we’re going to continue to campaign. And quite a lot on the leave side wanted to continue to campaign to leave.

And so I was left in a position of being, I felt sometimes, like almost the last person defending the party position.

I did challenge the government on this. When Boris Johnson said during the TV debates I will get Brexit done. I said, no, you won’t, you will not get Brexit done. You go into years of negotiations with the EU, or you’re going to hand over all our social and working conditions to the Americans, what’s it going to be? Johnson didn’t answer that and the media didn’t press him on it. And the result was what it was.

Could we have done things differently, hard to see, but I regret the amount of time and energy that was taken up with endless, almost repetitive debates. I kept notes of every shadow cabinet discussion on Brexit and there’s loads and loads of hieroglyphics. I can barely read myself except the same words, keep coming up in them.”

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

“Youth Driven by a Belief in Fairness”

An Interview with Dave Hill, a revolutionary socialist in the Labour Party in the 1980s and again involved in Labour in the course of the Corbyn movement.

Dave Hill is on the national organizing committee of the Labor Left Alliance. A revolutionary Marxist and a member of the Fourth International, he joined the Labour Party in 1961 and became a councillor. He left the party in 2005 after “New Labour” under Blair supported the Iraq war and privatisations. He rejoined Labour in 2015 to support the Corbyn movement in its attempt to transform the party. In between, outside of Labour, Dave ran as a candidate for TUSC, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition, in the 2010 and 2015 general elections in Brighton. He’s been a lifelong trade union activist, and worked as a professor at different universities in Chelmsford, London and Athens.

Could you first of all describe for us the situation when Corbyn was elected? On the one side, hundreds of thousands, mainly young people, flooded the Labour Party at that time. On the other side, their active participation in the party was somewhat limited. Would it be correct to speak about the surge into the Labor Party or/and Momentum as an “internet phenomenon”? Was it more of an internet-based, loose engagement, but with a lack of organizing and fighting?

That’s not completely fair to say. When Corbyn first came in [as party leader], there was an influx of hundreds of thousands of new members. Labour became the biggest political party in Western Europe. There were very large Momentum meetings, full of young people- and a lot got organized in Momentum. Back in 2015, the situation was ripe, huge enthusiasm for Corbyn, and, especially, the left social democratic – for the UK, very radical – Labour Manifesto of 2017. Many of the new members were active on the doorsteps: We’d never seen so many turning up in their tens and in their hundreds during those parliamentary elections in 2015 and 2017.

Nowadays most youth have a basic anti-sexism, anti-racism, and environmental awareness, a strong belief in fairness. As Marx said in the Communist Manifesto, the most important job we have as communists is to develop class consciousness. That means to develop a class analysis of what is happening, what has happened and what should happen. In contrast, Momentum pretty much (though not entirely) restricted itself to electoralism and didn’t do much political education as it should have done.

Since then, the mass of young people has dissipated, partly because of the influence of the media – for example, the BBC and Sky News. The mass media, since Corbyn’s election as Labour Leader in 2015, were absolutely relentless- vicious, personalised, and, of course, right-wing, describing Corbyn and Momentum as `loony left’. Momentum had some political education, but not enough. I do blame Jon Landsman and the leadership of Momentum for that. I think that was a huge mistake.

The mass enthusiasm didn’t last until 2019.

From the outside, it looked like Momentum never dared to open its own structures for democracy, for new people, for new activists taking ownership. Is it fair to say that it looked like a top-down organization?

Yes, it is extremely fair to say that. In fact, Momentum is a private company owned by Jon Lansmann. It’s not a democratic organization, far from it.

I am a member of Momentum. At one early stage, we were electing regional assemblies in Momentum, but nothing came of that. My group, the Labour Left Alliance together with independent Marxists and a huge number of left social democrats within the Labour Party really objected to the lack of democratic control of Momentum.

People felt no ownership. We got called to meetings, very good meetings. We had really big meetings and they were so successful in getting the votes out. But who organized the meetings? There was no democratic involvement.

And Momentum itself is very politically broad. Some of the people aren’t socialists, some of them might even be Blairites. Had there been democratic structures, it might not have been a problem. We could have moved Momentum leftward.

A lot of Momentum members are putting their effort into very worthwhile social movements, like ACORN, which fights against evictions of tenants. They’re doing some good work, but they’re not interested in Labour Party meetings. Of course, it doesn’t help that Labour Party meetings are often hugely bureaucratic.

There were recently elections for the national executive of Momentum and there were two big slates. One was called Forward Momentum; that was the radical one, and I voted for their candidates. The other one was called Momentum Renewal; they’re `centrists’. Forward Momentum won the elections and they are in the leadership now.

Do you have any hope that this could be a turn towards some more radical, more democratic politics?

I don’t take this for gospel, but my understanding is yes. I don’t put much effort and energy into Momentum at the minute, but I know there are many good comrades within Momentum.

Why did Corbyn lose?

One, the power of the national and international – in particular, the national – capitalist class and its ideological state apparatuses, to use a phrase from Louis Althusser.

The media was relentless. I had been a reader of the liberal left Guardian from the age of 16. I stopped reading it in 2015. Corbyn was such a threat that the Guardian became absolutely vicious in its demonization and hatred. But let’s also not exaggerate the role of the media, because most young people don’t ever pick up a newspaper. However, every street you walked along, there were the headlines, “Corbyn fails again.”

Then there’s the power of the capitalist class within the Labour Party. Not just the Blairites, but the social democrats who believe in capitalism. I mean left social democrats. Should I include Corbyn in this? Social democrats do not want to replace capitalism, but want to make it nicer, prettier, fairer. Not only was Corbyn weak in the face of opposition, but he didn’t push for socialism.

Probably more important was the fact that, apart from about 20 or 30 Labour members of parliament, the Parliamentary Labour Party preferred to have a conservative government, or a coalition government, or a Blairite government instead, such was their hatred of Corbyn- and of socialism.

I can give another reason, which is the balance of class forces and the level of political consciousness of the working class, the state of the institutions and organizations of the working class. That plays an important role.

What I understand is that the Labour Party’s credibility under Corbyn was undermined by the fact that local Labour councillors implemented the cuts that were handed down from the Tory government.

Absolutely. And one of the proudest things in my career is that I was a leader of the Labour group on the council of East Sussex in the mid 1980s and we were one of the last three councils to stick out for a deficit budget policy. In other words, to have a policy of carrying out no cuts whatsoever. The other two were Lambeth – led by Ted Knight, who died quite recently – and, of course, Liverpool, which was run by Militant (the predecessor of the Socialist Party [of England and Wales]), and led by Tony Mulhearn, who also, sadly, died recently. Those `deficit budget’ campaigns were for me, inspirational class politics.

So, all those years ago I was called in as the leader of the Labour group by the solicitor for the council, warning me about this type of policy. And, to be honest, I thought, “f*** you, you’re acting on behalf of the Tory council, I’m acting on behalf of the working class.”

To bring it back to today: you are dead right. The lack of enthusiasm for Labour reflected in Labour losing votes, including in 2019 compared to 2017, is because so many Labour-run councils just carry out Tory policy. And it is horrendous; local councils in England and Wales have lost about 50 percent of their budgets. For example, we used to have youth clubs. Now, there are hardly any left. We used to have good libraries. Many libraries closed. The trouble is that so many Labour councillors – many of them for straight-up careerist reasons – are just carrying out the cuts. Others because they are `law-abiding’. They should be organising and leading mass local and national demonstrations against the cuts.

When I ask people in Momentum about this, comrades say councillors did not have many alternatives. And when I ask them why they couldn’t choose the Liverpool way, then comrades don’t know what I’m talking about. Is there a broken history, some lost memory of working-class struggle?

Yes, we have to relearn things. The young have to learn the history of struggles, successes, failures. I mean, old fellows, like me, we’ve seen it in the sixties, the seventies, eighties. But there is that lack of historical knowledge and of course the media is not interested in discussing working-class history. I’m very happy with all those left groups in general, and their online and print presence, the Socialist, Socialist Worker, Weekly Worker, Socialist Resistance, International Viewpoint, that all of them have an impact.

Corbyn and Momentum did not fight for mandatory reselection. This kept the Parliamentary Labour Party in the hands of the right wing without fundamentally challenging it. In a book that has been widely discussed within the DSA in the USA, Leo Panitch and Sam Gindin write:

For its part, Momentum’s tactical caution to avoid being drawn into a media-fueled hysteria over the “reselection” of all sitting MPs, as had been the case with CLPD’s reform effort in the 1970s, did not divert it from winning support among party branches and conference delegates for concrete proposals for “a democratic selection process for the twenty-first century,” nor from getting many Momentum-backed candidates nominated at the parliamentary as well as the municipal council level.

So, they kind of agree with Momentum to not argue for mandatory reselection, given the experience of the 1970s from the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy (CLPD). You were there and you saw the developments today. What’s your take on this question of mandatory reselection?

A very interesting question, because I think CLPD and various left groups in the party, particularly Militant, took a much stronger attitude towards mandatory reselection in the 1970s and 80s. And there were some successes there, in the seventies. I agree with the analysis that you’ve just put forward and I criticize Momentum hugely. It was an absolutely huge mistake not to push for mandatory reselection, both for councillors and for members of parliament. There were some successes, some very left, socialist new MPs selected and elected in 2019- such as Zarah Sultana.

If we look at the situation today, Len McClusky argues Keir Starmer was elected on a program of continuation of Corbynism and says that he “will hold him accountable to that.” Jeremy Corbyn was asked in an interview with the Tribune podcast: “If you could make one request of Keir Starmer and guarantee that it would be met, what would it be?” Corbyn answered: “Make sure our party is always proud to be a socialist party.” To me, those statements sound delusional. Am I being too sharp here?

When you gave me those two statements, I was going to use a traditional Anglo-Saxon word. Bollocks.

I think Corbyn has recently come out a couple of times in criticism of Starmer, in particular over the leaked report about the activities of the Labour Party bureaucracy, with its sabotage of Corbyn particularly in the 2019 general elections. But those statements, I think they’re ludicrous. It’s ludicrous to imagine Starmer is ever going to lead towards socialism instead of against it. Since his election as Labour Leader he has repeatedly shown he is `a safe pair of hands’ for Capital, with the Labour Party once again, `the reserve team of/ for the capitalist class’. The investigations, suspensions, expulsions of good socialist and Marxist comrades from the Labour Party under spurious, false grounds of supposed anti-semitism, is proceeding apace. I am absolutely amazed I have not yet been expelled, for example over my social media in support of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. A majority of my city’s 10 strong local organising group of the Labour Left Alliance have been suspended or expelled from the Party.

What’s the way forward? Mike Wayne wrote on Counterfire: “Here’s a collective fantasy that a lot of people are having right now […]: that Jeremy Corbyn leads a small phalanx of left-wing Labour MPs out of Labour and collaborates in the formation of a new party. This new party would very quickly attract a mass membership base of hundreds of thousands.” That’s nothing more than a dream, isn’t it?

I do read Counterfire every day, and I agree with them on that. It’s just a dream. A wonderful dream. But a delusion. There is a tiny possibility. A problem for the Left in Labour and the Left of Labour is that it’s pretty crowded out there to the left of the Labour Party, with plenty of organizations who will be fighting each other.

That’s why I’m for the time being in the Labour Left Alliance. We organize both inside and outside of Labour. We need to keep an orientation to Labour, because, at this time, and quite possibly, for a long time to come, that’s where the bulk of the socialist members of the working class are at the minute. I think there’s probably a hundred thousand people who have left the Labour Party since Corbyn’s departure as Leader. I think another one or two hundred thousand will go. My analysis is that the Labour Party will go back to what it has been for nearly all its history, a party with the right-wing firmly in control.

In two years’ time, there might be none left. But, for now, we’re trying to bring those inside the Labour Party and the socialists and communists outside together in a truly democratic organization. Internal party democracy and transparency is a major feature of the LLA. It should be for the Labour Party, too. So, us Marxists who are still inside the Labour Party fight for its internal party democracy, fight for Corbynite – left social democratic – policies but to move them to the left, as a `transitional programme’, but put emphasis and energy and activism in extra-parliamentary, non-electoralist work, in recruiting to socialism left social democrats inside the Labour Party and outside it, and developing class analysis and consciousness. But Counterfire is right, it sure as hell ain’t Starmer who is going to lead a socialist revolution. Or the Labour Party.

Interview by Stephan Kimmerle.

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

Counter-revolution in the Labour Party and the coming storm

First published on August 20 on Counterfire.org

John McInally, long-standing activist and former member of the PCS executive, contributes to the ongoing discussion on the future of the Labour Party and the prospects for the wider left

Corbyn’s defeat and new Labour leader Keir Starmer’s clear intention to extirpate socialism from the party has demoralised many socialists. But fatalism and pessimism is misplaced. Momentous developments are unfolding in Britain and internationally. The coming period will be one of continuous, deepening and irreversible crises. Capitalist strategists are reeling from the triple crises of Covid-19, the eruption of social movements like Black Lives Matter and the devastating economic collapse. Such crises will become the norm not the exception and will unfold not just in long timescales but in coming months and years.

It is increasingly evident to working people capitalism is incapable of resolving the huge problems facing humanity and millions are already searching for solutions to the exploitation, chaos and violence endemic within it. Massive forces will be unleashed as the working class begins to fight back. The right-wing reformism offered by Labour’s “new management” has no solutions.

Campaign to destroy Corbyn

Labour’s Manifesto did not in itself represent a fundamental challenge to capitalism but exposed what decades of cuts and privatisation had wrought on society and presented a vision of a socialist alternative. The establishment’s deep fear of socialist ideas explains the malicious ruthlessness of the anti-Corbyn campaign but this reflected the establishment’s weakness as much as its strength.

When Corbyn became Labour leader the forces of reaction, led by the press and media, with the BBC and the liberal Guardian the most vicious, moved into action. The BBC is the most sophisticated state propaganda outlet on the planet, and the envy of every dictator on it. Even after Corbyn resigned their campaign goes on, the BBC “journalist” suing Corbyn and Blairite demands he is expelled from Labour are a clear message to all socialists – dare challenge us and we’ll hound and destroy you.

Starmer and Labour electability

Framing Labour as the “patriotic” party is Starmer’s strategy for electoral success. His every utterance is designed to assure the establishment he is their man. Under him Labour will never be an effective opposition to the Tories, let alone a radical alternative. His credo that “..now isn’t the time for party politics” and “constructive opposition” is parliamentary cretinism. The Tories are responsible for tens of thousands avoidable Covid-19 deaths and are corruptly channelling billions of pounds to outsourced companies owned by relatives and friends. Starmer’s failure to expose and challenge this explains why Labour is up to ten points behind in opinion polls. Prospects for a surge in support for Labour look grim.

The Red Wall and Scotland

The effect of anti-Corbyn propaganda was a factor but was not the principal reason the so-called Red Wall seats fell – Starmer’s pro-Remain strategy was the main cause. In dismissing Brexit supporters in these areas as stupid racists, the Blairites demonstrated their utter contempt for the working class generally. It is not ruled out Labour can win back these seats but the negative perception of Labour the Blairites created will prove a significant barrier to overcome.

Labour has lost Scotland. In all probability this is irreversible. Starmer is a dyed-in-the-wool British nationalist and chauvinist, and his uncompromising unionist stance shows he and Labour’s tone-deaf Scottish leaders do not understand the underlying class reasons driving demands for independence. They are utterly incapable of addressing the national question in Scotland. They wrongly believe Labour can be the force around which unionism can coalesce but they are in for a big shock. Unionist forces will almost certainly form around the Tories who will ruthlessly appeal to reactionary sectarian elements in Scottish society leaving Labour have no strategy but open class collaboration with the British establishment– exactly what sank them in the 2014 Independence Referendum.

Imperialism, racism and antisemitism

Starmer is wholly committed to the forces of reaction that hold the British establishment together. He gives unconditional support to the police and security services. Ex-MI6 chief Dearlove’s public endorsement of him and his asinine Cold War rhetoric toward Russia and China, while maintaining silence about Russian oligarchs’ donations to the Tories, speaks volumes. He will seek to re-position Labour as loyal supporters of American and Western imperialism.

As an open supporter of right-wing Zionist nationalism, his weasel words designed to distance himself from the more egregious actions and atrocities of the Apartheid Israeli state convinces no-one. Opposition to Israel’s occupation is growing in the West and attempts to re-position Labour as a largely uncritical supporter of Israel puts him on the wrong side of Labour members, and history.

Starmer played a significant role in weaponising antisemitism for factional and political advantage but is now faced with the reality this “strategy” is turning into its opposite and is now a millstone around his neck. Having lost control of their own monstrous creation the Blairites shocking behaviour is increasingly exposed and no amount of spin, lies, interdicts or cover-ups will prevent the truth coming out.

Starmer’s description of the Black Lives Matter movement as a “moment” was no slip of the tongue mendable by Unconscious Bias training. It showed he neither understands nor supports the struggle against institutionalised racism. His silence over revelations in the leaked Labour report of the humiliating and disgusting racist filth thrown at black women MP’s like Diane Abbott is despicable. Cowardly claims these comments were “taken out of context” convinces no-one and all this may well have significant negative electoral consequences for Labour.

Learn the lessons – no “unity” with Blairites

Starmer’s counter-revolution is nowhere near a completed process and success is by no means guaranteed. Premature obituaries for the Labour left assume the future direction of the party is a settled question. But this is not so.The party’s future will be decided by the struggle of living forces in a period of instability in which demands for socialist alternatives will grow and exert a potentially momentous impact on the labour and trade union movement. Blairism has no sustainable future, its only real role now is to serve its big business backers in cleansing Labour of any vestige of socialism.

Ironically, the Blairites are more aware than many socialists that a key lesson of Corbyinism is that Labour is capable of transformation, but only if the left pursue their aims with the same ruthlessness they themselves exhibited. The right-wing must be resolutely opposed both inside and outside the party. When they demand unity and say the “Tories are the real enemy” they should be reminded that when Corbyn appealed for unity their response was “No, the Tories are not the main enemy – you are!”

While it is true Johnson has an eighty-seat majority and the Blairites now “lead” Labour, “worship of the established fact” and the idea this is set in stone is mistaken. This kleptomaniac Tory government may well yet implode through further disastrous management of the pandemic and the unfolding economic crisis: they may even be forced into major concessions by mass opposition from the unions and emerging social movements.

Beginnings of a fightback

Labour’s counter-revolution is being carried out with uncompromising ruthlessness. The left must learn the lessons from this, it cannot afford to repeat past mistakes. “Unity” with the Blairites is fantasy and led to Open Selection being kicked into the long grass. 90% of Constituency delegates supported this democratic demand but 90% of union delegates, including the left-led Unite, voted against. Failure to drive through mandatory re-selection for MPs boosted the Blairites who drew the conclusion it was only a matter of time before they re-claimed the party. Mandatory reselection must now be the non-negotiable position of the left and at the very top of its agenda.

Starmer’s attacks are creating a backlash and anger is likely to deepen. The “settlement” to the saboteurs was a misuse of members’ money and stinks to high heaven as those authorising it were the main beneficiaries of this treachery.

The astounding response for Corbyn’s legal defence fund has surpassed £350,000. Unite’s general secretary Len McCluskey’s warning on the legal “settlement” given to those who sabotaged the 2017 general election campaign is welcome and significant – but must be followed through. Left union leaderships should withhold funding from Labour if the leaders pursue witch-hunts, do not support strikes or attempt to drop socialist policies. Union sponsored MPs who do not support strikes or socialist policies should have their sponsorships automatically withdrawn. Big business cash for influence “donations” to pursue anti-working-class interests like privatisation of our public services must be ended. The left must send an uncompromising message to the Blairites – if you don’t support us, we won’t support you. And that goes too for Labour councillors implementing cuts.

Left unity and the United Front – for a socialist programme

Division and demoralisation are natural consequences of defeat. While the fatalism that says there is no point in socialists remaining in Labour is understandable it is a strategic error. Such thinking suits the Blairites: Blair himself stated 300,000 would need to be expelled from the party to make it save. The postponement of meetings due to the pandemic has helped the right but the big battles over policy are yet to come. Effective resistance to the jettisoning of socialist policies can and must be built. Leaving Labour at this stage only strengthens the forces of reaction in the party itself and in the wider establishment.

Fighting for socialist policies within Labour and campaigning in our workplaces, unions and communities are neither mutually exclusive nor contradictory. Blocked on the political front workers will increasingly turn to their trade unions and broader social movements. Labour will not be shielded from the impact of these movements. For socialists, the principal task is to unite the left whether within or outwith Labour and build a united front on a socialist programme that puts the concerns of workers at its core with the aim of challenging and defeating the Tories.

To meet its historic task of building an effective socialist opposition to the Tories and Labour’s right-wing the left must adopt a disciplined approach that rejects sectarianism, prestige politics and the elevation of sectional interests over that of the wider movement and coordination that matches that of our class enemies. Sectarian self-interest could result in multiple left candidates standing in upcoming affiliated union elections allowing right-wingers coming through the middle: this would be a self-indulgent betrayal of every worker in the country. Every effort must be made to have one left candidate in these elections with the criteria a firm commitment to a socialist programme and firm opposition to the Blairites.

There is one clear issue the entire movement can and must unite on- defence of our National Health Service. The putative US trade deal will lead to the full privatisation of the NHS and must be opposed by every union in the country, not just those representing health workers. For too long the cuts and privatisation programmes of successive governments have proceeded without serious challenge. Failure to defeat this deal would represent an historic defeat for the working class a public health catastrophe for generations to come. To oppose it means building for mass, coordinated industrial action, including potentially, a general strike.

Corbynism proved the Labour Party can be transformed but only if the left understands half measures in opposing the forces of Blairism and the Labour bureaucracy will not suffice and only lead to further defeats. The challenges ahead are immense but so too are the opportunities for millions to be won to socialist ideas – the future is ours, not the Blairites.

Below are a variety of views from key figures on the left on these questions:

Tom Barnard
+ posts

Tom Barnard is a Co-convener of the Seattle DSA Housing Justice Work Group. He is also a member of House Our Neighbors and a founding member of Seattle Cruise Control.

Stephan Kimmerle
+ posts

Stephan Kimmerle is a Seattle DSA activist. He's been involved in the labor and socialist movement internationally from being a shop steward in the public sector in Germany to organizing Marxists on an international level.

You might also like

Sign-on: DSA Platform Amendments Promoting Rupture with Capitalism and Working Class Democracy

Audio & Video | Next Big Step Forward for Tacoma Tenant Bill of Rights

Is it Possible to Build a Union at Amazon?