Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We're not allowed to, you have to declare:
Quote:I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.Never mind out own rule 6. Personally, I think he'd be Harold Wilson warmed up, which just shows where the Labour Party has moved…
stuartw2112 wrote:So, no one else here joining up in order to vote Corbyn? Surely you're all secretly hoping he wins? Either because you agree with the Tories that it'll destroy Labour (and good riddance), or because you think there's some hope for the reemergence of some kind of party of labour?Rules aside, I don't think it works like that from a sociological perspective anyway. Generally the motivations of those in a mass organisation wanting a labour-friendly sort of capitalism will never be outweighed, outvoted or tricked out of their object. Entryism doesn't work, whether Toby 'Tory' Young's malevolent conservatives supporting Corbyn, Militant Tendency or League of Empire Loyalists. Despite what some members here fear of open primaries as opening a dangerous backdoor, I don't think entryism is even successful at all with open primaries. Successful entryists, and I would like to hear of examples, tend to just encourage the members joined up for the original purpose to split away and regroup. Another reason it is better to vote for what you want and not get it.
Although, thinking about it, not relevant, at least to me. Labour is inviting people to join – people who do not anyway have other memberships or oppose their aims and values – and people who do join get to vote for the leader. So not entryism, but accepting an invitation, playing a role in the democratic process.
stuartw2112 wrote:Although, thinking about it, not relevant, at least to me. Labour is inviting people to join – people who do not anyway have other memberships or oppose their aims and values – and people who do join get to vote for the leader. So not entryism, but accepting an invitation, playing a role in the democratic process.Fair enough if you're not entryist or suggesting other entryists should join Labour, but then Labour's aims and values members are subscribing to are strike-breaking and war-mongering. The Labour party is not even an exemplary example of open primaries for candidates representing democracy at work. Don't be dazzled by this watered-down import of American politics. The Democrats and even the Republicans hold open primaries for candidates and you don't even have to register as a supporter of those parties (as far as I understand). Young Master Smeet here insists this is the state co-opting workers who don't support those parties but I think that's more about YMS's fear of open primaries and my enthusiasm for using them in the SPGB.
Well, not really, its aim and values have always been socialist, guided by the idea that a workers party must win power to pursue reforms within capitalism that will better workers' situation. If you accept that idea, then compromises with capitalist reality are inevitable. I think Corbyn winning would be a good thing, so am prepared to vote for him, knowing full well that the result won't be utopia instantly.
Is the Labour Party a workers' party, despite the claims and what people say? Hasn't that always been the debate since it formed? And hasn't the question been answered repeatedly?No doubt Bernie Sanders also considers the Democratic Party to be a party of the workers. Wouldn't it be interesting to have Sanders as president and Corbyn as prime minister?…Or will they learn from Tspiras that you cannot manage capitalism in the interest of the workers… If we do not demand utopia and present it as an immediate achievable goal, it will always be an unrealisable dream.I'm fond of the James Connolly's quote "Our demands most moderate are – We only want the Earth!"
stuartw2112 wrote:Well, not really, its aim and values have always been socialist, guided by the idea that a workers party must win power to pursue reforms within capitalism that will better workers' situation. If you accept that idea, then compromises with capitalist reality are inevitable. I think Corbyn winning would be a good thing, so am prepared to vote for him, knowing full well that the result won't be utopia instantly.I'm not looking for utopia, but I have a feeling Prime Minister Corbyn might tell a striking worker to get back to work for the good of the country/employers/industry/their salary or like Tony Benn find his arm being twisted by international banks.
But you've both missed my point. As I said, such compromises are inevitable, given its outlook and practice. You can dismiss the whole project, as you do. I don't – and I think it's reasonable not to, from a socialist and working-class point of view.
Twitter has exploded since Blair's intervention, and, say what you like, Corbyn has class: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-slaps-down-silly-6113455%5B
Quote:The left-winger was confronted with the claim Tony Blair won more elections than any Labour leader – and butted in: "Harold Wilson won more actually."Blairs intervention today
Quote:Labour is heading for four election defeats if it continues to believe it can win by stepping away from the centre and offering old-school tax-and-spend policies, Tony Blair has said. He described the Labour campaign in this year’s election as old-fashioned enough to be from Star Trek and argued that shifting the party further to the left would just lengthen the period before Labour could win again. Blair said those who said their hearts are with the leftwing candidate Jeremy Corbyn should “get a transplant”."Jeremy" has launched his reformist economic programme:https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/jeremyforlabour/pages/70/attachments/original/1437556345/TheEconomyIn2020_JeremyCorbyn-220715.pdf?1437556345As can be seen, it assumes the continued existence of capitalism, even of production for private profit and the continued existence of the rich but with more government intervention.He seems to be advocating the Bank of England printing (well, creating electronic) money for the government to invest:
Quote:The ‘rebalancing’ I have talked about here today means rebalancing away from finance towards the high-growth, sustainable sectors of the future.How do we do this? One option would be for the Bank of England to be given a new mandate to upgrade our economy to invest in new large scale housing, energy, transport and digital projects: Quantitative easing for people instead of banks.It's Keynes warmed up and won't work of course. Zimbabwe (or Venezuela), here we come.
I'll concede that printing money to invest in infrastructure seems like a crazy idea. But then, ordinary quantitative easing and all the monetary policy we've seen over the past seven years or so would have been considered crazy before it became the norm. Thatcherism seemed crazy before it became the norm. Perhaps Jezza can make social solidarity seem normal. Though whether he could do that by not assuming the continued existence for quite some time of capitalism is doubtful – that really would be crazy!Syriza was not cowed by the banks. It got the best deal it could without Grexit, which it had no mandate for. That "best deal" was, I admit, shockingly worse than I would have predicted.
Just dug up what we said the last time a leftwinger wanted to stand in the Labour leadership contest — John MacDonell in 2007. But never got on the ballot (not enough support from fellow Labour MPs):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2007/no-1231-march-2007/greasy-pole-if-john-were-prime-ministerI see we were suggesting that he might appoint Jeremy as his Foreign Minister. Actually, I think he'd have made a better Old Labourite standard-bearer this time (he's still an MP) than Jeremy (trade union background, no so quirky, can't see him expressing support for Hamas, even a couple of years younger) but it's not our job to advise the Labour Left what to do than it is to advise capitalist governments.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.