You can't be a student of Irish history (I am) and not be aware of the role that Michael Collins played in its history.
A fervent Republican who was at the Easter Rising and went on to leading roles in its armed forces fighting for indepdence and in its first governments he was, against his will, made a member of the delegation that agreed the creation of the Free State that left the six counties of the North a part of the U.K. Collins knew that this was probably his death sentence, and so it proved to be. He was killed months later.
I make no comparisons bar one with the decision I had to make in the last few days. It would have been easy to have stuck with the line that because Jeremy Corbyn had used my ideas I should support him come what may. Or I could have simply said nothing. But reluctantly I realised that was not an option and that I had to compromise for three reasons.
Firstly, I do no think the ideas Jeremy used, that were not written for him or indeed for Labour alone, will now have no relevance. They are economic ideas whose relevance has grown post Brexit. If anyone is likely to use People's QE now it is most likely to be a new Tory chancellor. I have long predicted it.
Second, saying nothing would have kept some people happy in the short term but it would have ducked the issue, which is the need to create a viable government that can get the UK out of the mess it is in. Like it or not, it is clear that whilst Jeremy Corbyn could (and should, as should John McDonnell) play a role in any such government Jeremy cannot do so as Labour Party leader as for whatever the reason (and a lot of nonsense is being said about this) he cannot command the support of Labour's MPs.
Third, the facts have changed. As Owen Jones has said, it was never the plan (and I cannot confirm or deny the truth of this, because I do not know) for Jeremy to ever fight a general election. The expectation was that there would be a change of leader before then. But now that election may well come sooner than expected the change is required now.
So I had a choice to make, and I made it: as I said on Radio Cambridegshire this morning, although I knew that I was saying something that would alienate some I felt, because of the role I played last summer, the need to say what I thought now. This does not mean I have changed my views. Nor have I sold out to anyone. But, in my most important role in life, as a dad, I see it as my duty to create the best world I can for my children. There is no way that can be served by having an opposition wholly unable to oppose at present. So, it may be a compromise, as was Collin's support for the Free State, but I think it the right compromise that reflects the biggest democracy in the UK - that of the general electorate and their decision to appoint Labour MPs.
I will continue to argue for tax justice, truly progressive taxation, country-by-country reporting, the ending of large corporate tax abuse and investment in HMRC to make sure all these things can be delivered.
I know austerity does not make sense.
I know we need People's QE to fund the investment we need if, for any reason.(unlikely as it appears at present), the markets will not.
I am convinced we need to change the priority of government to put people, their protection, their employment chances, their training and their life prospects at the heart of any government of any hue.
And we need to be sustainable.
None of these will ever be delivered in a way I will be happy with. That would be true even if I was PM (heaven forbid). Even they do not get their own way, by any means. All politics is ultimately the art of compromising the ideal with the possible. If it was not it would be easy.
I may well be unhappy with some things any future Labour government does. And I will say so. But then I was not happy with everything Labour had done since last September either. But, and it is a massive and yet wholly appropriate but, the goal of delivering the best possible for the people of this country has to be paramount and I can see no way that Labour fighting itself over ideology can now help achieve that goal.
Some, I know, will never accept this. I am sorry. We saw the cost in Ireland. Can we learn the lesson of history and achieve the best that is possible now?
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:
of course, the Irish situation involved bloodshed. I have just been reading a very good biography of Marx and his wife with vivid descriptions of the tremendous loss of life and horror (involving the bludgeoning of members of the ruling class) in Paris and Prussia. It got me thinking along these lines as well. We tend to see history as something that happened then, as if we have evolved beyond that but I think we all see this present time as dangerous in that we have complex divisions in our society, politicians that can’t read the signs and political Parties in a state of almost gormless shock.
It could turn nasty. I hope not. The exponential increase in aggression towards marginalised groups (disabled/ill/foreign workers) has been building for some years and well before the E.U issue. Anger finds a channel when politics fails and politics is failing.
I’m very worried. We’ve been a one Party state for some years -now we seem to be a No-Party State. If only politicians could come together and see that some sort of collective effort is needed -whoops, there go the pigs flying past, again.
Your honesty deserves applause; the position you have adopted appears to be the only rational option. The Labour party is condemning itself to probably terminal irrelevance. There is an ideological battle between those who wish in vain to “transform capitalism” (or whose hobby is “fermenting (sic!) the destruction of capitalism”) and those who, unfortunately, have succumbed to its blandishments and fail to understand how it can be shackled and modified to generate economically and socially beneficial outcomes. And this battle has already lost or excluded the vast majority of voters who might be disposed to vote for Labour.
The report of the two-year investigation of the energy market by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) presents an excellent example of a total failure by the Labour party to tackle issues that impact directly on its core supporters. This report was published on 24 June. It was an excellent day to publish finding and recommendations that are a cruel sick joke on the vast majority of electricity and gas consumers who will continue to be ripped off and bamboozled by the Big Six energy suppliers and greedy new entrant suppliers.
It was Ed Miliband at the Labour party conference in Sep. 2013 who got the ball rolling with his proposed energy price freeze to provide an opportunity to “reset the energy market”. Justified public disgust and anger at the exploitative antics of the Big Six was bubbling over and try as it might the then government was running scared. Eventually it gave the nod in June 2014 to Ofgem to refer the matter to the CMA. This initiated an initial 18-month investigation which would kick the problem in to the long grass until well after the May 2015 general election.
The CMA Panel issued its provisional findings and notice of possible remedies in July 2015, with a general intention to finalise its investigation and report before the end of 2015. Most of the possible remedies it proposed were mainly tweaks that would have had minimal impact on the welfare of final consumers. But the proposal to impose a regulated safeguard tariff (RST) to reduce the extent to which the 70% or so of “disengaged” household consumers on Standard Variable Tariffs (SVTs) were being exploited in particular by the Big Six energy suppliers lit the blue touch paper. The concerted opposition by the Big Six forced not only an extension of the time period of the investigation by 6 months – accompanied by a revised “Steer” by Government to the CMA, but also a major retreat by the CMA Panel which redefined the RST to apply to prepayment consumers only. The Deputy Panel Chair, Martin Cave, disagreed with this change — he wanted to retain the original RST – and his dissent is recorded at the very end of the report. The alternative proposed by the Panel is that Ofgem will operate a database of gas and electricity consumers who have been on SVTs for 3 years or longer and their identity will be revealed to all other suppliers who will then be able to bombard them by post with offers to switch.
The most effective means of restricting the rip-off of energy consumers is collective action on behalf of these consumers. There are various collective schemes which secure significant savings for the consumers who participate, but they are small in scale and the consumers who don’t participate continue to be ripped-off and cross-subsidise those who switch. The obvious solution is the establishment of a regulated statutory collective buyer on behalf of energy consumers. All consumers on SVTs would be automatically enrolled unless they specifically opted out and all consumers on other tariffs could enrol if they wished. Auctions would be held to allow suppliers to bid to supply this collective buyer.
This is the sort of initiative that a Labour party in tune with the interests of voters would advance. But both warring wings of the current party are totally incapable of doing so. Their increasing electoral irrelevance is well-deserved.
The choice as I see it is between Jeremy Corbyn who has the right objectives but doesn’t know how to achieve them (but through John McDonnel’s economic panel is trying to identify how) and his rivals who may have similar objectives but who will perpetuate the neoliberali myth that we can’t achieve them because we cant be deficit deniers. I would stick with Jeremy to allow time for someone who can articulate how we are going to achieve the objectives you outline in your blog emerges.
The economic panel have issued a critical statement today
Some have resigned
Piketty has gone and Blanchflower. All this over the EU vote and perceived ‘lacklustre’, ambivalent campaign. But they all knew from Corbyn’s EU voting background that this ambivalence was an historical reality. It doesn’t alter the need for policy and the ability to shape it.
Keep doing what you are doing Richard and don’t pay too much attention to people’s comments on who you should and shouldn’t assist.
I keep coming back to the idea that if there is a general election it will probably be fought on the basis of aligned coalitions.
I just wish we had PR now. The two-party system is a straightjacket on political discourse in the UK and has to be abandoned.
I actually work up this morning thinking of joining the Labour Party under and to support Jerrmy Corbyn’s leadership. Had a Facebook friend post that she just did. Many others joined prior to the Labour leadership in which JC won as it was a something they could back. My friends pretty much operate from a standpoint of integrity and fairness – for real (lucky me). For me I think this is an integrity call. If we are shaking everything up – which we have and are – then I think it is even more important to take a stand for principle, integrity and fairness – s great cleansing if you will. This is not business as usual. A part from which I still think JC will win a leadership contest if put to party members. Whether it looks like how you think it should look – that is still the how democracy has been determined within the Labour Party. I am also over looking my leaders looking ‘statesman-like’. They are distinct. I am not yet saying I will join – like you I would prefer not to be linked to any party politically – and in this time that may be required.
If, as the economic advisory panel appear to think, the country is facing a difficult period when it will need sound economic advice it is a strange time to resign. Fortunately there are plenty others who can fill the shoes of those who have resigned. By now John McDonnel and Jeremy Corbyn should be clear on the policies required such as those you write about on your blog. What is still needed is someone who can articulate them clearly in a way that voters relate to. I am not confident that any of the supposed alternatives will do better than Jeremy.
You are an optimist
Have you seen this, Richard?
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/28/truth-behind-labour-coup-really-began-manufactured-exclusive/
Not unexpected.
I’m not sure if an analysis from an Irish perspective (well an Irishman who has lived in the UK for 35 years) will help but here is a letter I sent to a good “ex-Pat” friend of mine living in the US earlier today. The Big Man (Collins) indeed paid dearly. Sorry for the length. I appreciate fully your almost superhuman work rate but hopefully this may make a positive contribution.
__________________
Hi Pat
it is happenstance I ended up in England rather than the US, as you have, but on balance till last Thursday I thought I had the best of the deal.
Many people who voted in the Brexit referendum hardly knew anyone who voted out and visa versa. Passions are running high on both sides and the country has never felt more divided. Friends are falling out. Children are disowning their parents. There is a very nasty feel in the air. One of my friends (both in reality and Facebook) has had so much abuse from the Brexit side after a very well thought out and heartfelt post that he called it a day on Facebook. Promised to buy him a few pints of Guinness tomorrow night. Racial attacks are on the increase and you will be aware the MP Jo Cox was murdered last week.
People who voted out were older, less well educated (lack of a University degree), poorer (Thatcher did enormous damage to large swathes of the country and they have still not recovered) and authoritarian (which also has a very high correlation with Trump supporters in the US).
The referendum was a stupid mistake by Cameron to shut up the Tory right but badly backfired (He was certain of winning and anyway knew that Nick Clegg would block it when he went back into coalition with the Lib Dems, but there was a surprise Tory majority). In Ireland we are very used to referenda and know they are often used as a protest vote. In Ireland the government would have ignored an advisory referendum with a 52-48% split saying too close to call, knowing full well that many people would have just wanted to give the “establishment” a bloody nose. Not so in the UK where both sides have stated they want to do the “will of the people”. Not quite sure what that is as there are a good half dozen scenarios as to what Brexit might actually mean; varying from a Norway style EU arrange to an Albanian style arrangement or even no arrangement at all with the EU.
The referendum campaign itself was pitiful on both sides. Labour was virtually absent from the debate. The remain side used lots of central mean and representative economic forecasts as reality which backfired (project fear). There was an almost complete lack of positivity towards the EU. The leave side was an absolute disgrace, with elements of project cloud cuckoo land, narrow English nationalism, xenophobia and downright Nazi style propaganda. In terms of facts “Dishonesty on and Industrial Scale” which was Michael Dougan’s verdict (Professor of European Law and Jean Monnet Chair in EU Law at Liverpool) was a fair description.
Many English lack self awareness. Whereas Ireland has always tried hard to make friends and make the EU work, the British have always been begrudging fair weather friends of the EU — always wanting their cake and eating it and demanding exemption after exemption. Earlier this year when the EU was facing the worst refugee crisis since the 2nd world war (and it still is), the UK response was effectively “two fingers mate — its your problem” and by the way we want even more exemptions and special treatment for the UK. I was surprised at the gracious way the EU tried to help the UK and the generous deal Cameron got. It was not however perceived as such by large sections of the UK! I can only imagine the outrage in the British press if say Germany acted in a similar fashion.
The media coverage was in general appalling also. The BBC was supposedly neutral but resembled the Fox Channel on the Climate Change debate. The two papers with the largest circulation in the UK — “The Sun” and “Daily Mail” were, and for decades have been, relentlessly hostile to the EU; printing downright lies and whipping up petty nationalism and xenophobia. The only major national papers which tried to do proper fact based analysis were the “Financial Times” and the “Guardian” but these have a circulation of only about 10% of the big two. Both were not surprisingly very strongly “remain.”
So here we are with a slim Brexit majority. Many (all?) of the Brexit promises were reneged upon within hours. The PM resigned. We already had a Tory government which made me nostalgic for the Thatcher government (which I totally detested) and it will almost certainly become even more right wing. It is clear many on the Brexit side did not expect to win and there is no plan whatsoever as to what to do now. I have learned today that the official Brexit campaign headed by Gove and Borris (the Donald Trump lookalike) didn’t even want to win; it was just internal Tory posturing!
The Labour party is in meltdown. It has a “leader” Corbyn whose policies are extremely good but has been unable to make the transition from a back-bencher to potential PM. Quite frankly he has no leadership skills, poor communication skills and has not remotely adopted to his role. It seems that it may have been largely down to him that the Labour pro EU campaign was so lukewarm and ineffective. He has a vote of no confidence by an overwhelming majority of the parliamentary party but maintains strong support from the idealistic membership. There is nothing wrong with being idealistic but Corbyn has to be able to lead his parliamentary party; which quite frankly he can’t.
I don’t know how things are going to go here. This is a time of national crisis and decent into fascism is a genuine worry, particularly as the likelihood of the UK going into recession is very high.
Meanwhile I suspect many of the other EU members are quietly sniggering behind the UK’s back. There is no way the UK will get a more advantageous deal than they already had. Many I’m sure feel “good riddance to bad rubbish!” Once article 50 is triggered the divorce settlement needs to be completed within two years. What many people seem not to realise however that this is the equivalent of deciding what to do with the children (3M or so of EU citizens in the UK and about 2.1 UK citizens in the rest of the EU — figures vary) and sorting out accounts etc. (Ireland and the UK have a free movement of people treaty in place since 1923 so the 1.2% of Irish citizens by population in the UK and 6% or so of UK citizens living in Ireland don’t have to worry). A new trade deal with the EU could take about a decade to negotiate and till this is done it is unlikely that 3rd countries will even want to start negotiating. This is the official position of the US China and India apparently. In any event there is only capacity in the UK to negotiate about 1-2 trade deals simultaneously ant there will be in the order of 70 needed.
The UK itself could easily break up. Scotland is very likely to leave and is exploring mechanisms to stay in the EU as there was a very clear remain majority. The Scots got a very warm welcome in the European Parliament yesterday (unlike the odious Nigel Farrage). This is a golden opportunity for the SNP to get a 2nd leave UK referendum which they may very well win. Northern Ireland could well descend into chaos again, with hard border to the EU. The likely UK recession will hit NI very hard particularly without EU monies. NI also voted to stay in. The economic case for a United Ireland will look very attractive from the North’s point of view, particularly in a few years, but will be expensive for the South, a bit like East and West Germany. Of course there are still people on the hard Unionist side (the sort that welcomed Enoch Powell with open arms when he was thrown out of Ted Heath’s shadow cabinet after the infamous “rivers of blood” speech) who will fight tooth and nail against it. We may however see a United Ireland in our lifetime.
I must confess to feeling schadenfreude at England’s shock defeat by Iceland in the euros. What surprised me was that many of my English friends felt the same way; they are thoroughly disgusted with their country. FUBAR is what my friend who was hounded off Facebook said.
I suspect it’s the way you would feel if Trump wins the presidential election, but that won’t happen will it! Please reassure me! I remember when we were in Tucson doing our PhDs and dreading the thought that Regan could be elected; couldn’t happen again surely?
Take care. I’ll be back in Dublin for the Physics reunion next month but I suspect you wont be able to make it. At least my 11 year old son is entitled to an Irish passport and will remain a member of the EU. Nor surprisingly the Irish Passport Office is totally overwhelmed with application at present.
You get it
Sean, you have summed up the situation perfectly. I’m one of the English (to the extent I was born here and have always lived here) you refer to who feels a sense of Schadenfreude at the football result. All I’m feeling at the moment is disgust for the stupidity of many of my fellow countrymen, and a sense of growing despair at the likely future of the UK. I agree that some form of extreme (in the economic and/or political sense) right wing government is very likely. The Labour party seems to be committing political suicide, when it should be using this as an opportunity to rip the Conservatives apart; we will get an even more economically right wing government in the midst of a recession caused by the exit from the EU; and the anger and despair of many of the English and Welsh will then be exploited by someone like Farage to gain power.
You are absolutely right about the lack of self awareness of so many of the English. A hangover from the Empire and being ‘the workshop of the world’ I suppose. A trivial example is the sheer idiocy of English football. The grotesquely overpaid players who can’t play together as a team, the drunken, thuggish, nationalistic supporters, the never ending obsession with 1966…..for God’s sake, to anyone with an ounce of intelligence, it is all ridiculous.
I feel sorry for the Scots and Irish being dragged down by all this rubbish. I now feel the only hope for any form of real democracy and sanity in the UK is Scottish independence. Although I’ve always voted so far, this ghastly referendum has made me wonder whether there’s any point. Perhaps Plato was right in his belief in the philosopher kings………….
Very well.
But not now. On those facts, it still should have been later.
All eyes should be on the so-called victors – their lies, lack of preparedness, duplicity and their foolishness.
People reporting this are instead taken up with reporting on what is happening with Labour. This is a tactical error in my view.
I remain to be convinced that a leadership change will change anything in terms of Labour’s ability to win such an election or act as an effective opposition.
And I say again – I hope I am wrong. But you can smell it in the air. The mood is dark, and with two main parties internally at each others’ throats the question is ‘Who governs Britain at this moment in time’?
For those desperate for change, the travails within Labour do not make sense at the moment. It is the PLP who look self indulgent and out of touch in my view and others I speak to. I fear collateral damage will abound. I’m sorry but I have to say it.
That may be true
But if, as I think, JC did not really campaign for Remain and you knew that would you then still want him as your leader on a day to day basis?
I would not
And that is why, for example, all his economic advisers have withdrawn
Are we all plotting to protect Blair form Chilcott? Of course not. Like the MPs we had enough
But we want the strategy to continue as much as possible
And I think the Tory collateral has a long time to run
Richard
Sean Danaher
“Many English lack self awareness.”
Whilst this doesn’t excuse it, I’d include Wales, Scotland, and France (and the US) in this too.
“Whereas Ireland has always tried hard to make friends and make the EU work, the British have always been begrudging fair weather friends of the EU — always wanting their cake and eating it and demanding exemption after exemption. Earlier this year when the EU was facing the worst refugee crisis since the 2nd world war (and it still is), the UK response was effectively “two fingers mate — its your problem””
I don’t entirely agree – England is the most crowded country in Europe (except probably for Malta) – and has, rightly, taken lone Children from Syrian refugee camps. Taking other immigrants is encouraging ‘trafficers’ and so encouraging the wealthy desperate, which is not a great plan for those countries that they come from.
Britain has made a great contributions to the EU and indeed was the major force for the legislated ‘single market’.
The fact that Britain has now lost its way as badly as it has, is, I would say, to do with the over financialisation of the economy. The lies told by the Brexiteers built upon the lies told about the origin of money.
The fact that immigration helps the economy is not believed when the government insists on reducing expenditure on everything out of dogma. Of course social damage is the rsult and automatically a self fulfilling prophesy.
I too thought of Jeremy as a temporary holder of the leader position to begin with, accepting that 2020 was the date of the next election. But I changed my mind, liked his style of answering questions honestly without embarrassment and thought that within a couple of years, things could change and people might start to ‘get him’. This can still happen. On the other hand a younger ‘Corbyn’ might emerge who could carry the mantle. But at this moment there is no one in the PLP who is fit to take over and would carry on with his policies. Otherwise he could have found a few established MPs with whom he could have warmly collaborated. I never saw one sign that any of the quitters extended a hand of friendship to him. And the reason for that is that, going by their histories, none of them would have fought for the policies of peace and socialism which Jeremy stands for. We cannot let him go.
Carol
I find it so sad that people I know, like you, want to create such an easy path for the far right
Because that is what you are doing by continuing with a fantasy
Corbyn tried
It was worth trying
He’s failed
Now Labour has to move on or the fault will be his and that of all who stop it doing so
Richard
From the viewpoint of “The Man on The Street”:
He’s a nice guy.
Not the right guy maybe, but better than the rest.
The “rest” waited until the work was paying off, then stabbed him in the back.
Sorry; people just don’t like that.
And labour has loads of history in backstabbing.
Tories do it face to face. Mainly.
I don’t really think Cameron’s successor has much to worry about next election, especially if held within the next year.
‘I find it so sad that people I know, like you, want to create such an easy path for the far right’
Richard -at present that could be argued from both ‘sides of the fence.’ The speech Corbyn gave tonight at a rally ticked every box that should have been ticked BEFORE 2015.
What is different now about the Party that allowed the Tories in again in 2015 with the intention of wrecking the ill/vulnerable even more! -has there been a sea change-NO.
Has there been a significant new intake-No-ergo: what has changed? I can’t see it, perhaps an electron microscope can, but it can’t be done with the naked eye.
It could well be you, Richard that is ‘allowing’ the right to prosper-strange how you didn’t like me imputing incorrect motives to you but you feel free to do that to Carol who you know damned well doesn’t want the Right to prosper. The freedom to ‘impute’ is one sided? prerogative of the blog perhaps. I accept that, your blog, your call.
Let’s not forget, Labour MISSED every open goal in existence UP TO 2015 -what has changed? Has a miracle occured or perhaps you think some Damascene conversion will descend over the next four years?
The sight of Milliband asking Corbyn to go was like something out of a scripted farce completely free of irony! I would have split my sides had it not been so sadly surreal-the Leader of Labour who could barely challenge the most right-wing Tory Government in recent history and who took a year to ditheringly work out he might oppose the Bedroom Tax!!! This is a cruel joke.
I’m someone who has a lot to lose with the continuation of the Right in power, I was hammered during the previous Parliament while Labour snoozed and cringed before the Overton Window and I don’t trust the main body of M.P’s that let that happen and allowed the vicious, divisive marginalisation of the most vulnerable to build as a narrative. This is a crisis that needs to be worked out. If the ‘Saving Labour’ (what’s to save?) want a different Party let them go and let Labour rebuild otherwise we’ll have corporate fascism till kingdom come. And you think these people are the ones to propagate progressive fiscal policy? You must have access to information you are not at liberty to declare at present if you think that.
‘Now Labour has to move on’ But how can it, it’s feet are embedded in neo -liberal concrete -you seem to have forgotten how unspeakably deplorable they were during the last five years.
(Deliberately kept my posts limited-but still felt I needed to speak on this today)
But you miss the point: Jeremy Corbyn cannot deliver
He does not have the skills to do so
He may deliver a good speech
Politics is about vastly more than that
It’s also about more than vision
It’s about communication
And getting people who don’t agree to work with you
All I have said is that even though we may share a vision Jeremy can’t deliver it
So we need to move on
I have not changed my opinion one iota
Including my commitment to success
But what I have learned over many years is that the right person in the wrong place is a mistake
Jeremy never intended to be leader. It was just ‘Buggin’s turn’ that got him there
And unfortunately that was the wrong basis for selecting him for a job he never thought he would get and I suspect does not really want
I have forgotten nothing
But is saying that things have to be done better if they are going to work such a terrible thing to do?
If so, why?
Richard,
That doesn’t really answer my points -nut I more than appreciate that your time, is very full, so I won’t repeat myself (as I sometimes do!) But I will say this:
Corbyn made it clear early on in his leadership campaign that crescendoed in such a remarkable way that; ‘it is not about me.’ The rest of the Party has made it ‘about him’ when what should have happened , in my view, is that a big shift should have taken inside the party BEFORE a Corbyn departure. Getting rid of Corbyn in this disgusting way with their feet still in neo-liberal concrete is NOT THE RIGHT TIME.
And I put it to you, Richard-that the case you are making is JUST AS LIKELY to preserve the right as the case I make, Carol and PSR have made above. If it turns out I am wrong here (and I hope I am I can assure you) I will be open to saying so on this blog.
But enough of me taking up you time -this is my last post on’t!
Richard
Assuming Jeremy Corbyn steps aside because he doesn wear a tie, or is out of touch with the people, or doesn’t sing the National Anthem, or doesn’t listen to his MPs, where do we go next?
Angela Eagle gets voted in as leader and everyone breathes a sigh of relief. We have an electable leader everyone says. Thank goodness. Of course we also have to change the policies he espoused. Socialism will not win an election or anything with a hint of progression about it. Quantitative Easing? That’s will cause inflation. Public Investment in Green Projects. We can’t afford it because we need to retain Trident. That costs a lot of money. The people want to curtail immigration. We have to do that although most immigration is non EU anyway.
I know I am being negative but I also view myself as a realist.
In the early 1900s no one would have envisaged the election of a Labour Government or the creation of the NHS but it happened. How do you change opinions? I suppose it must through Education and “putting out the message”
Do I think this will happen under Angela Eagle’s party? Unfortunately, not.
I think most change in history has not come from within parliaments. It usually comes from “pressure groups” like the Women’s movement and the public themselves. Unfortunately things usually have to get so bad before governments are forced to change or risk causing riots.
I have bought and read all of your books and agree with all of it. But the Labour PLP doesn’t. Not in their heart of hearts.
I also have children, one of them with autism and I also fear for a future where we descend into the mire of the 1930s again when poverty was rife, the Jews were persecuted and individuals like Einstein had to free Europe to save his life.
I know I am being pessimistic and I admit I do not have the answers on how to move towards progressive politics. But it has happened before and can happen again.
But I don’t it will happen under Angela Eagle
Keep writing your articles because it is comforting to see someone talking sense when so many politicians are incapable of rational thought.
Michael Clews
Michael
I have not changed my views. Not one iota
I know neoliberalism does not work
I have always been committed to making the world better for people who have been unfairly and unreasonably treated by it
But I have not done so in a party political way. Jeremy adopted my ideas. I did not write them for him. And others have over time adopted them too.
I am sad that this has not worked out. But, and I will write more on this, it is because Jeremy has not delivered the leadership needed. The ideas are sound. The conviction is clear. And he did get a team of good people willing to give it a go. But he could not work with them. That was the flaw
And so like it or not there has to be change. And in all change the hope has to be for the best possible at that moment. It will not be perfect. It may be far from it. But a leader of a party without parliamentary support cannot deliver anything
And we definitely need something
Richard
All political careers end in failure: not all campaigns do, nor all campaigners.
The secret is: do not put your faith in any one politician, nor in any party; and campaign for your causes, not for your own advancement.
…And this would seem to be exactly what you are doing.
Those who criticise you – or worse, criticise our cause because of your association with it, after seeing you distance yourself from ‘their’ politician – would do well to ask why they are wedded to one politician, or one party, or part of a party.
If ‘their’ party takes up our cause again – or becomes effective enough for their support to be better than a liability – they will need you and they will return.
Assuming that ‘their’ party or ‘their’ politician is theirs in any meaningful sense; they, too, will learn to never place their faith in politicians: there is no reciprocity in political loyalty and supporters are disposable.
The one true skill of party politics is timing, to switch your loyalties before you’re caught up in the inevitable failure and dragged down with it.
Better, by far, to be a campaigner.
I agree, thanks
I may write more on thus theme in the morning
A draft has existed for many hours