Corbyn’s Dilemma
By William Bowles
‘The
road to hell is paved with
good intentions’
September 18, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" -
I’m really torn writing this, for on the one
hand, Jeremy Corbyn’s (JC) sudden materialisation in the midst of a
rampant, Victorian-style imperialist England, like Doctor Who in the
Tardis, it’s difficult not to join in the euphoria currently
sweeping through what’s left of the left in England (the
current Media Lens has an excellent description) and
bow down before JC, an almost Christ-like apparition in the midst of
the gangster capitalists in Armani suits who rule us.
However, whilst not
wanting to rain on the party,
“I cannot conclude
without an earnest appeal to those Socialists, of whatever section,
who may be drawn towards the vortex of Parliamentarism, to think
better of it while there is yet time. If we ally ourselves to any of
the presen[t] parties they will only use us as a cat’s-paw; and on
the other hand, if by any chance a Socialist slips through into
Parliament, he will do so at the expense of leaving his principles
behind him; he will certainly not be returned as a Socialist, but as
something else; what else is hard to say… Whatever concessions may
be necessary to the progress of the Revolution can be wrung out of
them at least as easily by extra-Parliamentary pressure, which can
be exercised without losing one particle of those principles which
are the treasure and hope of Revolutionary Socialists.” — William
Morris, The Commonweal, Volume 1, Number 10, November 1885, p.
93.[1]
And on the other, as William Morris avers, the
road to Parliament is also paved with good intentions and JC has
been plodding along that road for thirty or so years with no more
impact on the ‘democratic process’ than the rest of us have had
(though a cynic would suggest that the perks and the pension plan
might have something to do with it).
Thus whilst it’s admirable, heart-warming even, to
see JC echo at least some of the left’s hopes and aspirations and
for them to surface in the sea of misery that is, once more,
reactionary and backward-looking Tory England, what is actually
possible without an active, organised extra-Parliamentary
opposition? In fact, things have gone into reverse during JC’s
30-year stint in the House of Commons. His has been a lone voice in
the wilderness of parliamentary procedureness.
This is JC’s dilemma, his ‘Syriza’ moment if you
like; Reformism versus Revolution and JC long ago chose Reform as
did the Labour Movement over one hundred years ago when the Labour
Party was born at the instigation of the trade union movement, to
represent their interests in a capitalist Parliament (women still
didn’t have the vote then), the hope being that capitalism could be
reformed gradually through the democratic process and finally arrive
at socialism (though that bit, the most important bit, hadn’t been
worked out).
This is JC’s reality; he has to work within the
‘system’, a system created by capitalism, for capitalism. Okay, it
(the capitalist state) has been forced to make some accommodation
for the rest of us, well at least it used to during those thirty
years, from 1945 to 1975, and this is the point: Does Jeremy Corbyn
have the Parliamentary Labour Party behind him and what is it
possible for him as an individual, to do about what is now a
transnational ruling class as events in Greece so tragically
demonstrate?
Corbyn’s dilemma is revealed first and foremost in
the choices he has made for his
Shadow
Cabinet. Its composition reflects the compromises of all kinds
Corbyn must make in order to accommodate a Parliamentary Party
pretty much opposed to his views on just about everything.
According to
Labour List, an ‘inside the Labour Party’ source, JC commands
only 7% support within the Parliamentary Labour Party, that’s the
one the Labour MPs belong to. Don’t forget, there are two Labour
Parties, the Constituency Labour Party that in theory anyway,
anybody can join, and the Parliamentary Labour Party, though
obviously the two are connected at the hip (as the song and dance
about ‘infiltrators’ during the election process, shows). It’s worth
noting that the Labour Party has long practiced what my folks called
a policy of ‘Bans and Proscriptions’, whereby not only were lefties
left of the Labour Party banned from joining said Labour Party, but
there was to be no connection at all to anything left of the Labour
Party, like we had a communicable disease. I well remember what
seemed to be a yearly event; the Labour Party disbanding the Labour
Party Young Socialists because it got too socialist! It had been
infected with the disease of socialism, well at least Trotskyism.
The Labour Party is, in every sense a creature
born of the Establishment. In that sense, the Labour Party is as
imperialist as the Tory Party with its history of promoting
imperialism-colonialism abroad (to the marginal benefit of its
organised working class support, ie the trade unions) attests. This
is an embarrassing history for the left of today, and the left of
the past, my past. To my mind, this issue is central to the paradox
that is the Western left generally, but those of the imperialist
states in particular. But it does go some way to explaining the
following bizarre behaviour by someone who calls himself a
socialist:
Tariq Ali, doyen of the intellectual left here, at
the very beginning of the (current) imperialist assault on Assad’s
Syria in 2011,
called
for “Assad to go”, he revealed exactly how the Western left is
trapped in an imperialist worldview. We, along with everyone else
here are forever telling the rest of the world what to do and how to
it – or else, including Tariq Ali.
Yet JC has clearly touched a nerve, especially it
would seem, amongst the young who have better sense than to have
anything to do with our corrupt and moribund political class and its
equally moribund so-called democratic system. But this is not even
the first step on the long road to socialism. Whilst the existing
left is quick to exploit every opportunity that comes its way, it
either never knows what to do with it or, it behaves
opportunistically. But this is not to say that if JC reached out to
the formerly voiceless that something significant couldn’t be built
and in quite a short time.
But not if it develops within the Labour Party.
Again, I aver to William Morris on this score. If Jeremy Corbyn is
to have any chance at all in mobilising the voiceless, who after
all, are almost 30% of the population, and build an alliance with
progressive sections of the ‘middle class’ who are already active
through such issues as climate change, consumerism, tax evasion or
whatever, as well as the few remaining progressive trade unions,
gathers these ‘issues’ together and links them all to their common
cause – capitalism.
Can Jeremy Corbyn do this? Is this what he wants
to do (or something like it)? But on the one hand he bypasses the
established institutions in favour of ‘alternative’ media, social
networks and so forth. He reaches out to his constituency and speaks
their language but on the other he heads a party whose institutions
he has to work with. Can he change the party he now heads that much?
But assuming JC makes all the right calls, could
it, a reborn Labour Party lead to a new call for an end to the
madness of capitalism and exactly 130 years after Morris made his
plea?
William Bowles, Writer, Editor and Publisher -
http://williambowles.info