Gordon Brown appealed to Labour yesterday to not become a party of protest. I am not a member of the Labour Party and he once led it. Of course he has the right to say just that, and to honestly hold his opinion.
But, I have to say, I think he is missing the point. My evidence comes from the USA. Something quite unexpected is happening there. As The Daily Caller reports (but the sentiments are widely replicated in polls and commentary in the US media):
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders made dueling appearances just hours apart Saturday at the Iowa State Fair in Des Moines. But if an informal straw poll conducted by the Iowa Secretary of State is any reliable measure of whose visit was more successful, the Vermont senator clearly won the day.
According to the Iowa secretary of state's website, which monitors the votes in real-time, more than 52 percent of Democrats who have cast a vote in the straw poll say they support Sanders. Just over 41 percent said they support Clinton.
For those who do not know Sanders Wikipedia says of the 73 year old:
Sanders is the juniorUnited States Senator from Vermont and a candidate for the Democratic Party's nomination for President in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Sanders is the longest-serving independent in U.S. congressional history. A self-described democratic socialist, he favors policies similar to those of social democratic parties in Europe, particularly those of Scandinavia. He caucuses with the Democratic Party and has been the ranking minority member on the Senate Budget Committee since January 2015.
And he is giving Clinton a run for her money. Does that resonate with anyone?
What I suggest is happening is not protest, which is a negative sentiment, but a positive appeal for change, which is something very different. Of course those who represent the system that is being rejected do not like that fact. Why would they? And it is bizarre that it is taking older politicians to lead that process of change on both sides of the Atlantic, except for the fact that both have stood outside the system for so long that they have won the right to do so and be trusted when saying that is what they want. But the fact is that I genuinely believe that the political establishment - and especially the Democrats and Labour, are both reading this incorrectly. I reiterate: this is not a moment of protest, it is a pivot point. After this, I think, everything will be different whoever wins the contest in the US and the UK.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I have followed this situation and agree with your remarks. people do want ‘something different’ and so far Saunders and Corbyn are doing what the breve Greek duo did and provided a visible and viable alternative to TINA.
One of Sanders main platform is that the system is corrupt with the Billionaires buying the laws they want through party financing and lobbying, and there is an interesting grass roots movement which is advocating passing anti-corruption laws – first at the city level, the at the state level with the idea of cleaning their system from the bottom up: – https://represent.us/
I have long said the same thing
Absolutely agree. Instead of fretting about not winning over (or back) the Tory lite vote Labour needs to look to the third of people who didn’t even vote. And then inspire them. I think that is the core of Corbyn’s success. Most odd to me that as supposed radicals the other Labour leadership contenders never seem to consider this. Mind you, did you hear Yvette Cooper on R4 Today this am saying that JC’s economic policy resolved around printing money? Which is a very cheap shot – and one I fear the Tories will not hesitate to use…
I did not hear it
And the truth is it is a cheap shot – because she favours something much more expensive, which is absurd
The so called surge has come from Labour Party and Democratic Party activists (and people to their left). There is no evidence that the rest of the electorate are listening.
It only takes small numbers to change electoral fortunes
Quite. And small numbers can turn into mass campaigns, overnight. Or rather: apparently overnight, if you weren’t looking.
The trick is intelligent campaigning, and the slick, well-funded media and PR machines of the Labour Party and tgeir ‘official’ candidates are beginning to look a bit like dinosaurs.
Deft campaigning, and a groundswell of opinions ignored by the ‘respectable’ candidates and their patrons in the media.
If this sounds a bit like Scotland, there’s because the parallels are obvious: and the ‘official’ Labour leadership contenders do not seem to have confronted their party’s failure there, even with fifty-one SNP MP’s crowding them in Westminster.
There is every reason to believe that they are capable of repeating such a failure today, tomorrow, and repeatedly: and I can only hope that this is to Corbyn and the country’s advantage, rather than to the Conservatives’.
If I may draw your attention back to Scotland. While the majority voted to remain in the UK during the referendum, the “surge” in seats won by SNP MPs was clear for all to see.
Many people were “awakened” and began “listening”. Sure, not everyone, but a great many- it might just be the start. What was made perfectly clear – people wanted “change” – something different, they were sick to the back teeth of the “same old…”.
The electorate are listening and many more could be helped to listen. We are seeing this not just in Scotland, but across Europe and the USA. I agree with Richard here, this is not a protest vote, it is a vote for something different – change.
I`ve been a fan of Bernie`s for some years. Recently I made a deal with an american friend that I would donate (pound for dollar) to Jeremy if he would reciprocate to Bernie.
I urge others to do the same (I hope it`s legal!)
Ruth
Sorry not a `reply` to you just a general comment,hit the wrong button.
Whatever the “rest of the electorate” (including the 16 million who either did not vote or who spoiled our ballot papers in May 2015) are or are not listening to at the moment or in the near future there is one thing they will hear loud and clear.
It is that there is within the hierarchy and decision making echelons of the Labour Party and amongst their media mouthpieces an influential bloc of people, many of whom are (currently) sitting MP’S, who cannot abide and therefore cannot be trusted with democracy. This group of people have made it crystal clear in words and deeds which cannot be misunderstood or mistaken that if the “wrong” candidate is elected, from a popular membership voting system rather than the previous electoral college type system, they will do everything they can to undermine and remove that candidate.
No serious voter, voting in any democratic election at Parish, District, Urban, City, County, Mayoral, Devolved, or General Westminster Election is going to put their cross against any individual or Party who is prepared to treat the democratic process in this way. This means, regardless of who wins the leadership election, Labour are going to be unelectable until that bloc of people are no longer involved in the Party.
These anti democratic people are not stupid inasmuch as they must know this to be the case. Which tells one everything one needs to know about their priorities.
That may be true today
4.5 years is a long time in politics
In reply to Glen.
No the electorate may not be listening yet! They don’t need to.
This why this is all happening at the perfect moment, we are 4 1/2 years from the next election. Don’t be impatient, if we are fortunate enough to see someone with JC’s views elected leader of a mainstream political party that in my opinion will be the biggest hurdle cleared, who ever thought a few months ago we may see this situation arise?
Furthermore it will take those 4 1/2 years to allow the Labour party to come to terms with thier new outlook and convey a meaningful message.
Make no mistake if Mr Corbyn becomes leader and can influence opinion first inside the party and then to the wider world this is going dwarf anything politicaly most of us have ever seen. I wish him, his team and therefore the rest of us the best of luck because as things stand at the moment were going to need it.
I am currently reading P.G.M Dickinson’s book “The Financial Revolution In England” and you are absolutely right People’s QE (Green QE) is “revolutionary change” tearing down the whole rotten and corrupt edifice going all the way back to 1694. Indeed it goes back to Henry I, England’s Norman king, starting to issue tally sticks in 1100AD as a form of money creation to purchase goods and services from the citizens only to happy to supply them to the state to pay their tax “tribute” back in pieces of wood, the abstract representation of resources!
They burned all the tally sticks in 1834 and took down the both houses of parliament at the same time.
A rather potent symbol of how sovreignty changed.
As I’ve noted in my interaction with people face to face about these topics since the election – there is a HUGE unmet need out there (in the UK) for something more than the ‘Tory Lite/Blue Labour approach of the current Labour Party.
I get the impression that many did not vote for Milliband because he was not Left-wing enough. Yes – I do!
I watched an interesting documentary on the ‘UndergroundDocumentaries,com’ website: Lifting the Veil – Barack Obama and the Failure of Capitalist Democracy:
http://undergrounddocumentaries.com/lifting-the-veil-barack-obama-and-the-failure-of-capitalist-democracy/
The ideas and opinions expressed in this documentary are very powerful and indicate that this unmet need for social justice exits in America too. There are lots of common themes that resonate over here in this film. I recommend it whole heartedly.
Bernie Sanders features in this film too.
As for the Underground Documentaries website itself – it has the usual mix of garish conspiracy stories but also very good material indeed resourced from a wide range of bona fide sources.
And Gordon? Well, is he is just another Labour politician who has lost faith in the people? Is he working for the establishment now? Oh dear.
What I think is that Corbyn is now being taken seriously as a real threat. This must mean that Corbyn is close to something ‘they’ want to portray as impossible. It will only be impossible if those who say they support Corbyn do not hold the line and waiver at the last minute.
I’d say to those Labour members backing Corbyn only this: Hold fast. realise the impossible.
Richard – you speak of hope often – please listen to Steve Hedge’s speech about hope at the end of this film – its very moving.
Will try to get to it
Brown has a cheek to talk about credibility-one need only quote the following to demolish him:
“I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the recovery” (1997).
The Labour party is failing to damage Corbyn because the contempt they have for the electorate is now egregious and they are illuminating the infamous ‘bubble’ they live in which is Westminster. Many of us are rightly angry with Labour and I’m afraid I take pleasure that every word they utter against Corbyn betrays them as irrelevant, out of touch and pure time-servers of the worst sort. When Corbyn refers to Labour as Tory-Lite he has it spot on despite Burnham going into high-dudgeon about this.
Surely this is all about politicians who are brave enough – and finally have the chance to be heard – to say that neoliberalism is the problem, and that its time has come? Both Corbyn and Sanders have this in common.
This is the crucial policy underlying all else and, as is plain, Corbyn (in the UK) is the only one who has the guts to say “this is completely wrong”. For the other leadership contenders, it doesn’t matter how much finessing they do; if they support neoliberal economics, they might as well be Tories because, until you fix that underlying mega-problem, you are never going to fix anything else properly (as Blair and Brown spent 13 years demonstrating).
I don’t doubt that Burnham, Cooper and Kendall have good intentions – but if they want to go along with this discredited and cruel economic system, all the nice stuff they say they want to do isn’t going to happen.
Corbyn gets this. Many of his supporters get this. Perhaps if they took to calling the other candidates ‘neoliberal stooges’ instead of Tories, that would be fairer?
Either way: the good ship UK is heading right at the minute. Corbyn will make it turn around; the others will keep it moving right, but more slowly. That’s the difference.
You might say the same of austerity; Corbyn (rightly) says “screw austerity; it’s the bankers’ fault”; the others – and the Tories – say “but the little people have to pick up the tab anyway”. I know who I’m voting for; it’s the one who understands that neoliberal policy is (as it always was, to be honest) a busted flush.
I’d urge everyone else to do the same. I think it’s the fact that the entire worldview of the establishment, no matter what colour rosette they wear, is about to be publicly trashed that has the New Labourites so terrified; it’s about to be proven – as Ken Livingston famously and correctly said about Thatcher – that they were basically wrong about practically everything.
I thought the last election taught us the value of these sorts of polls?
I am not saying anyone is winning
I am saying that there is a movement seeking change
I think that is undeniable
I’m a supporter of the “go after the lost vote” strategy, which clearly underpins both the Corbyn and Sanders respective campaigns, and also acts as the sub-text of this post in your Blog, Richard.
However, this article suggests we should exercise some caution over this:
https://medium.com/@AlexWhiteUK/the-non-voter-myth-9162897a7895
This also reinforces the need for caution:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/?page_id=1453
Tom says:
“I don’t doubt that Burnham, Cooper and Kendall have good intentions — but if they want to go along with this discredited and cruel economic system, all the nice stuff they say they want to do isn’t going to happen.” And “austerity; it’s the bankers’ fault”; the others — and the Tories — say “but the little people have to pick up the tab anyway”.
The ‘very clever and so highly paid people in the City’ got us into this mess, but somehow the rest of us have to get them – and us – out of it really never did wash. I have hope that it is now beginning to hit home! For us little people!
I actually think a pivot point you’ve spoken about is here, there is a new generation with all the information in the world at their fingertips that are better informed than members of the shadow cabinet, who all seem to have passed through a wormhole like it’s still 1994. At the moment they are clearly disorientated by the shape of things to come and are flailing around like headless chickens.
The crux of it for me is that the days of supporting a political party like a football fan supports their team, with blind unthinking devotion are over, and i think that’s a good thing. We’re not drones, and we don’t want drones representing us anymore.
Jeremy will (and already has been) targeted on his lack of loyalty (i.e. unthinking devotion) given his voting record as if its a weakness – but its actually one of his great strengths and he should embrace it. Corbyn, if elected, should encourage this dissent and debate further – within the PLP, the membership, the wider public. That’s how you create a movement – by involving people, not just in a superficial David Milliband thoughtless drone shoving leaflets through the publics doors way, but actively engaging people to think and decide the future for themselves.
My only worry about Corbyn (and it is my only worry) is that he may well be too easily baited – especially when the lackey press try to get their teeth into him as his credibility grows.
I hope he rises above this and fends off such attacks which are unfortunately bound to manifest themselves sooner or later.
He is very likeable and sincere but he must retain his composure.
Many years ago (over 40 OMG)I was with Jeremy`s brother Piers trying to persuade a bunch of dossers to leave a newly empty squat. What I remember is not any particular arguments (dialectic has little traction with alkies) but his great patience – it took about two hours to get them to leave peaceably by which time I was fuming but P was just being calm and straight.
Having seen Jeremy speak a few times I get the impression that patience is a family trait.
I am looking forward to PMQ`s, hoping to see a real `quiet man` answering the braying Tory hordes.
It looks to me as though you are right. He seems to be getting some good advice on this matter – his recent clarifications about whom he has been speaking to in the past are very clear and to the point.
Good for him!