Corbyn’s Calling us Home

Corbyn’s Calling us Home 

From Chelley Ryan

Contact Chelley here on Twitter: @chelleryn99

This was the tweet that broke the camel’s back. After reading it I was faced with two options – either write an article on why it wound me up, or scream long and hard into a cushion – I opted for the former. So here goes.

‘Jeremy Corbyn might represent our views, but if we want Labour to return to power he isn’t the right man.’    

CORBYN’S CALLING US HOME

The argument against the selection of Jeremy Corbyn as labour leader can often be summed up in three words, ‘Remember Michael Foot.’ So let us remember Foot.

After Michael Foot’s election as leader in November 1980, Labour enjoyed significant poll leads of between 9 and 15%. Understandably, the departure of Roy Jenkins et. al. in March 1981, knocked public confidence in the party, and poll leads dropped to a four or five point average – but labour kept a steady lead, under Foots leadership, until the Falklands war in the spring of 1982.

The patriotic fervour unleashed by the Falkands’ conflict gave a huge boost to both Thatcher and her party. Riding on the crest of a nationalist wave, Thatcher won a landslide in June 1983.

So what does all this mean for the comparison between Corbyn and Foot? It means there were factors afoot – pardon the pun – in 1983, unique to that time, that meant whether on the right, left or centre of the party, 1983 was not Foot’s year.

FOOTjeremy house of commons BLAIR

 What the establishment have cleverly done, is blame Foot’s defeat on his left wing manifesto, in the same way they have falsely but cleverly blamed the financial crash on Labour’s profligacy. With the help of their friends in the media, Tory lies quickly embed themselves in the public consciousness, rather like a splinter that is never removed, and as a result, the public have brought into the myth that left wing equals electoral defeat. What an ingenious Tory strategy this is. What better way to keep socialists out of power than to convince the socialists to ditch socialism. That way whether Labour or Tories are at the helm, the good ship Brittania always roughly heads in the same direction. Any minor detours along the way can be quickly corrected when the ship is safely returned to Tory hands. No wonder Thatcher claimed new labour was her greatest achievement, an unusual moment of candidacy.

The Tories are well aware what might happen if a real socialist, like Corbyn, wins power. They only have to look back at ’45 and their blood must run cold. And no doubt they’ve had a long hard look at Foot’s 1983 manifesto and breathed a sigh of relief they’d had such a lucky escape. They know full well, had Foot won in 1983, progressive tax policies would have reversed, and staunched, the growth in inequality. Homelessness, and housing bubbles, would have been avoided. Utilities and railways would have stayed in state hands, and North Sea oil revenues wouldn’t have been squandered on tax cuts for the rich. The so called ‘longest suicide note in History’ was in fact a prescription that would have spared ‘the many’ a lot of pain.

Should I ever meet the tweeter behind the tweet, he or she would likely warn me against voting Corbyn, not just because Foot lost, but because Blair won. Like many other Corbyn supporters, I’ve heard this argument time and time again. Blair won three elections, is the general gist of this argument, so that’s the model we need to adopt to win. Well I don’t agree, and here’s why.

Blair was of his time – just as Foot was of his – a unique time when Britain was bouncing along happily inside a credit and housing bubble, a bubble none of us could imagine would burst in the spectacular way that it did a decade later, a bubble that made people feel falsely well off. As a result aspiration was the buzz word of the time. Then there was the relatively recent demise of the Soviet Union, which had damaged the confidence of the left, and the fact Labour was opposing a stale tory government, 18 years long. And there you have it, the perfect recipe for Blair’s stunning electoral success in 97. What Blairites/centrists are less keen to explore is the aftermath of that victory.

Between 1997 and 2010 Labour lost five million core voters, and general election turn-outs fell off a cliff. People didn’t just stop voting Labour, they stopped voting full stop – a collapse in support that ultimately lost us Scotland, and put a rocket booster under UKIP, the new political home for so many ex labour voters.

one for allUnder Blair the flame of socialism was all but snuffed out, but with Jeremy Corbyn in the race, the flame is burning brightly again, and like moths to a flame, it is calling us home.

27 thoughts on “Corbyn’s Calling us Home

  1. Yes, I suspect that the real fear of the informed right is that they know that many socialist causes are very popular, as is shown by independent polls of public opinion on specific policies, as opposed to Murdochracy scare tactics and reds under beds propoganda. And to be candid about another reason for the spuriousness of the ‘two left Foot’ claim is that although Michael Foot was manificent in his day, by the time of his leadership he had lost much of his vigour- unlike Jeremy who puts many a younger person to shame. Also, unlike more recent vanity politicians, if Jeremy felt he were a liability to a left-wing victory he would step aside. It is also a myth that Blair appealed to electors because he was more right-wing, as Ken Clarke admitted, the Tories had become deeply unpopular and Blair happened to be the Labour leader- who then eroded an enormous electoral lead and long term decline of the Tory vote losing core votes and the soul of the party along the way.
    If Jeremy wins there will be a hell of a fight though, the press and the right here and abroad will unleash an onslaugh of vilification and ridicule. A politican who is more interested in their personal success would capitulate and become a Blairite, but Corbyn would face it head-on, and with the young more tuned into social media than the products of the press barons, he may be able to work around the ageing Daily Hate Mail brigade and take the fight to heart of the establishment.Terrifying isn’t it!

  2. Strong stuff.
    It’s far too easy for real events to get wrapped in in retrospective framing, and we need these kind of reminders all too often.
    Especially the bloody Blair one.
    The underlying assumption for all this “unelectable” shorthand is that the world hasn’t changed.
    But the plunge to the Right has been in play since the mid-70s and the Cameron govt is WAYYYY to the right of Thatcher et al.
    And the policies of Blair & Brown are still reaping their costs – politics and economics is a much longer game than folk realise – Osbornomics impact will be felt by some now, but by many more in the next 20 yrs, and I think (to their credit) folk are beginning to realise this.
    The neo-liberal settlement is being rejected by more folk every day, we understand there’s more to it all than pure financialisation, we feel the debt burdens.
    Corbyn’s solutions are to todays problems, and are probably imperfect, but at least they’re solutions to REAL, CURRENT problems, rather than the orthodox neo-liberal “solutions” for problems that aren’t a problem (unless you’re a 1%-er).

    • Thanks for a great write up Chelley Ryan, everything you have said is spot on. I have said for a long time, this Tory govt is THE most right wing govt this country has ever had. Yet they have managed to hide it, cloaked their extreme policies in spin and pushed the message austerity is necessary. Their biggest target of those extreme right wing policies have by far and away, been the benefits claimants. It’s been nauseating seeing how many people they have literally hounded to death, starved to death, worried to death, and of those who have still managed to breathe life, far too many are now without a roof over their heads, others reduced to using food banks just to feed their children. The govt got around these figures by changing the way those things were measured, so, whilst the actual numbers of children who now live in real poverty have soared, the govt denies this by quoting the ‘correct’ figures which show poverty to have reduced. Well they can fiddle the figures every which way they want, the fact is tens of thousands of benefits claimants have died under the tyranny of the DWP; many more are living a life of fear, fear of that envelope from the DWP dropping on their doormats, their mental and physical health being greatly adversely affected; thousands of children are living in insecure, inadequate housing, being fed by the local food banks; thousands of sick and disabled people are having to live below the poverty line, many without the support they once had, whether this was financial or otherwise. I hate what this govt has done to this country and its own citizens. We can thank/blame the media for helping them to get away with all of this, they are complicit in the Tory crimes, and I do believe they are crimes. It’s the media who have either not reported things that they should have, or they have reported them but with plenty of spin.

      Labour won that landslide in 1997 because a) the country was sick to death of the Tory years, and b) Blair promised a full programme of real Labour policies, including renationalisation of the railways. What he did in fact, was what the Tories are notorious for (why does anyone ever trust them??); make election promises only to go back on them once in power. The promised railways renationalisation not only didn’t take place, Blair actually accelerated the privatisation of any remaining lines, and also of other State owned utilities and services. By the time he left power, the country hardly had anything left to pillage, save for the Roayal Mail and the NHS, though some privatisation of the latter had already taken place under Blair. What that Labour govt was in fact, was Tory-lite, not Labour at all. Sure they introduced some good things, but ultimately they were still Tory-lite; a sort of Conservative govt but with a heart, if there could ever be such a thing.

      Now, with Jeremy Corbyn there is reason to feel optimistic again, hopeful that we might yet achieve that fairer society, that works for the many, not the few. Did anyone actually believe all that guff from Theresa May outside No.10 Downing Street? I fear some probably did.

      There are more of us than there are of them; more who feel the pain of Tory rule EVERYTIME it happens, and I think it’s fair to say that this lot have even surpassed Thatcher for nastiness. This country, this lovely, wonderful country of ours needs a Corbyn led government, not another Blair type Tory-lite Labour in name only govt. I feel like weeping when I think of how Labour were going ahead of the Tories in the polls, despite all the hostile press and disloyal briefings of some of his own MPs, and now, they have wrecked it. Just who is being selfish, egotistical, and making themselves unelectable here? I know it isn’t Jeremy Corbyn. For Labour MPs to actually WISH election wipeout on their own Party just to get rid of the leader chosen by the membership, says everything we need to know about those MPs. They are only interested in themselves, their own egos, their own careers. For if they were remotely concerned about their constituents who suffer daily under this cruel regime,they would just accept the leader they have, and get on with attacking the Tories. The truly laughable thing is, Tory-lite Labour LOST, TWICE! I truly hope they soon see sense, however, I fear not, as they have a completely different agenda than the rest of us and Jeremy Corbyn. I am so thankful for those wonderful MPs who have stood by him, and serve in his Shadow Cabinet; long may they continue to do so, and one day in the not too distant future, serve in his Cabinet of govt!
      Sorry for the tome, and please have patience if there are typos etc; it’s very late, I’m very tired, I didn’t set out to write such a lengthy comment!

  3. Thank you for this brilliant post. I have a feeling part of the reason (and only part) for Corbyn’s popularity is that people know the narrative, that the left cannot ever win, in the media is wrong -,even if they don’t know yet in such detail why. And suddenly the emperor with the “there is no alternative” message is shown to have no clothes. There is another way. It must be possible to have both principles and power. A better society.

  4. Pingback: Corbyn’s Calling us Home | Think Left | sdbast

  5. The loss of millions of Labour voters after 1997 is a vital element in returning the party to its former standing. A political party that was established to protect the rights of workers against the ruling elite..The argument that Labour can’t be seen as anti-business does not stand up when we consider that zero hours contracts, unaffordable housing, debt laden university graduates and mass unemployment have resulted from policies that were introduced to lure the business elite into backing (new labour)..

    The current (new labour) obsession with fighting the ideological battle in the middle of a pitch that has all ready been lost makes absolutely no sense.

    Michael Foot was an intellectual politician at a time when ‘dumbing down’ took hold of the country. His reasoned, thoughtful argument was viewed as weak in comparison to Margaret Thatcher’s ‘blood and bluster’ rhetoric..

    The conservative party’s desperation to restore the UK’s reputation as a world power led it to cling, culturally and politically to North America, the country it had colonised.
    The Falklands war, it could be argued, was engineered to do this.
    The image of Margaret Thatcher sat in a tank with a union jack scarf tied around her head is prescient..

    Norman Tebbits ‘I got on my bike and got a job’ was claimed by the masses as a statement of intent in opposition to the ‘disgruntled migrants’ who were accused of ‘living off the dole, paid for by our taxes’ and going out rioting when they should be at work !

    Soundbites such as this would later be scrutinised by speech writers, policy makers, advisers and the like that have so repelled pre -1997 labour voters.
    The reason that Jeremy Corbyn is attracting so many pre-1997 labour voters is that he does not employ such soundbitten statement.

    He is a politician that speaks to people with reasoned argument. He encourages debate so that people may indeed speak to him.
    His philosophy of agree to disagree if accord cannot be found is that of a committed pacifist. He voted against the Iraq war.

    Blairs legacy, a financial services industry that launders dirty money, provides jobs for telephonists and a salespersons mentality for an entire generation is not a legacy to be proud of nor is it one that would encourage life long labour supporters to return.

  6. You already elected Ed and all that basically did was ensure Labour never has a majority again…your too late the Jocks have gone and with it your prospective power base! Does anyone thin Corbyn might wear a donkey jacket at the Cenotaph too ….

    • And what if he did wear a donkey jacket at the cenotaph – a worker paying respect to those other workers who gave their lives – typical comment from someone who relies on soundbites and what people look like rather than what they believe in or what they say.

  7. Don’t Believe The Blairite Hype – Vote For Corbyn – He Represents Labour’s Last Chance!

    I’m so tired of hearing this ‘don’t vote for Corbyn’ type commentary from self elected experts like ‘Chelly’ and Co who like to tell us all that because the media are controlled by right wing neo-cons like Murdoch, it’s impossible for any socialist like Corbyn to become an effective leader of their blue-labour party. The Blairite indoctrination message is that a socialist can never be elected or become a future Prime Minister because if they ever got close, (like Benn did in the 1970s) their credibility would be somehow destroyed by some pre-planned strategy launched by the media and Corp-interests within the city of London, Wall street, and the Koch’s and Co, of this world.

    And that’s true, but they can’t be defeated by doing – as they do, and just be happy with the occasional crumb from the oligarch’s table like a bit of Tax Credit, offered to keep you quiet while they privatise and corrupt the rest of your world, forever!

    So what is New-Blue-Lablair’s strategy for defending what’s left of the People’s hard-won political and human rights – which Unions and other generations of agitators from the past (like T. Paine) fought so long and hard to wrench from the wallets of the bloated aristocrats and bent politicians of Britains corrupt past and current future?

    New-Blue Lablair ‘advisors’ tell us to act like the opposition – because the masses of Britainia have become conditioned into believing all the many media bombardments upon their grey matter. Nearly forty years worth of Right-Wing-corrupt and twisted Ideology espoused by the media Barons since some years before Raygun & Snatcher’s cabals came to power in the West. Blue Lablairites advise that common people are incapable of recognising a political leader policies if they are designed to serve the people’s best interests because the people are conditioned to believe all the bullshit broadcast by the British Brainwashing Corp and other privatised media Organs. In other words, if the people are told the truth in a manner that they can’t fail but understand, they won’t be capable of discerning what is really in their best intersts.

    I hear ‘Lablair’ people saying that ‘they’ need a leader who is willing to massage middle management types desires to ‘Aspire.’ Tony Bliar captured the imagination of the ‘Aspiring’ blue Labourites (tories really) and that’s why he’s alleged to have won two elections (Nothing to do with Murdoch and his mates, etc).

    He was a (tory) ‘moderniser’ (who loved Snatcher) happy to bin Clause 4 and feed the right wing greed-machine by selling British taxpayers down the river by introducing corrupt policies like – P.F.I. Private Finance Initiative. Deals designed to further enrich the filthy rich. The Blairite ideology is a useful friend of the Private sector, the ‘aspiring’ sector, which must be fed mountains of public cash or they will turn the public against Lablairites. Their message must be obeyed, Watch my lips sucker ‘Their Is No Alternative.’ It’s the friken ECONOMY – STUPID’

    NO – It’s the psychopaths running the economy, and we’re not ALL stupid.

    I would say, there is a powerful alternative. If the Blairites fear the media.
    Then work to create your OWN media in order to get the message out to the Public.
    You should be working to persuede the Public, instead of only being concerned with talking to those who already agree with you, etc.

    The right wing fascist ideology of the neo-con led Corporate-tory party is so twisted and impractible that a Media of the Left – Financed by the Left, would have a much more powerful impact than the opposition – just by telling the actual TRUTH.

    It is the media that conditions the general public view of reality and forces them to think ‘There Is No Alternative’ to austerity and the Privatisation of EVERYTHING!

    The media is the neo-cons greatest weapon.The media is also the neo-cons achillies heel which is why the snoopers are monitoring all of the general public because we have in place corrupt governments and they fear their own General Public. They fear them finding out how corrupt they Really Are.

    If Corbyn has people around him who understand how to deal with the media, he can gradually push the Socialist agenda forward, merely by exposing the corruptions of the current system, and it’s corrupted institutions.

    Corbyn can connect directly with those of the general public who could be persueded if the bare facts were laid out before them. And don’t forget that Corbyn is a rare character in the world of Politics because he is a Teflon politician, they have nothing on him.

    He can work to assist the people to recognise that their ‘Aspirations’ are actually not being served by the Privatisation agenda, for expample; they ARE Privatising the NHS, and education, and eventually ALL of our Public Services will be gone, and you, Mr general pubic – will be paying through the nose for everything.

    Privatiastion means Profit Motive, and that means that your child’s education, your gas bill, your Health Service will cost so much more when privatised, shouldn’t that be OBVIOUS to YOU Mr/Mrs ‘aspirational?

    Ask yourself why so many Americans lose their home when they get old, and ill, because of the cost of their Privatised Healthcare system in the USA, it is, like ours soon will be, very, very, very expensive. So that’s were Mr/Mrs ‘aspirational’ Blairite is happy to lead us.

    A fully Privatised Britain will turn our world into an Orwellian disaster. The only successful ‘aspirers’ will be those rotton bastards who are happy to overcharge you for their shoddy products. Snake oil salesmen & saleswomen, running amok among us.
    Little or no regulation to protect the people’s rights and best interests

    Collectively, the people of the Britain have been fooled into allowing bankers and their collaboraters to seize what little wealth the public had in the bank, after the assetts from the sales of nationalised Public companies were sold off by the tories to their rich mates. Bankers interests have been placed above the people. This is the core issue.

    If Britain had taken the same action against the corrupt banking sector as the government of Iceland took to defend their people from the bankers fraudulent claims – then the British economy would have weathered the storm because those who caused the problem would have been held to account, instead of the taxpayers.

    It is not an economic crisis we face, an Ideological Crisis is being imposed upon the people because the Neo-Cons don’t want their Corporate friends to have to foot the cost of a Welfare State because it impacts their Bottom Line. It’s not People who matter to the Psychopaths running Multinational organisations, IT’S PROFITS STUPID.

    They want to max their profits and reduce human existance to a state of wage-slavery.
    Not just in the West but globally. Ask yourself what TTIP etc, is Really all about?

    Anyone who believes the Lablairite/Camoron austerity bullshit has no place commenting on modern Real ‘Politics’ because they don’t understand in whose interests the game is being played.
    X

    • ‘I’m so tired of hearing this ‘don’t vote for Corbyn’ type commentary from self elected experts like ‘Chelly’ and Co who like to tell us all that because the media are controlled by right wing neo-cons like Murdoch, it’s impossible for any socialist like Corbyn to become an effective leader of their blue-labour party.’

      I take it you did not read my blog post

      • Or any other post here it seems, or the information about this blog, and our rejection of neoliberalism. Most Labour supporters, and members back democratic socialism, and need to get behind Jeremy Corbyn, and trsut and believe that we can do again what Attlee did. Solidarity and teamwork is the answer, not division, Go for it Jeremy Corbyn!

  8. It always amuses me that the comparison is with Foot and not Attlee.

    Let us never forget that Attlee – an oddly spoken chap – defeated the great war leader Winston Churchill. And that’s because what Attlee was good at was building a good *team* around him. Possibly the best government the UK has ever had.

  9. Pingback: Is Westminster now ready for the Jeremy Corbyn Effect? | Think Left

  10. There are some very good, well informed comments on here. ( rather bemused by Olive, though, who seems to think Chelley does NOT want us to vote for Jeremy Corbyn! I wonder what blog she was reading!)
    Edmund Kelly says “The Falklands War it could be said, was engineered” It certainly was. Labour was on course to win in 1983, but Thatcher had very clever strategists, including Sir Keith Joseph.
    In 1981 the Thatcher Gvt announced that HMS Endurance, a patrol ship watching over the Falklands, was to be withdrawn, despite various knowledgable people protesting that it would be unsafe to do so. It wasn’t long before the Falklands was invaded by the Argentinians. Warnings had been given to the Gvt,prior to the invasion by the captain of the Endurance, but no action was taken until the invasion was taking place. We then had the spectacle of our troops being sent by troopship, with flags flying, bands playing, crowds cheering. Thatcher, the great war leader ( or so she wanted us to think!) was in charge. I think this above all, set the tone for the General Election the following year. Most people didn’t realise that this was a totally unnecessary war, and instead of blaming her for the deaths and dreadful injuries sustained by our troops, thought she had done the right thing and admired her for it! Election won!
    ( The captain of The Endurance Nick Barker, wrote a book about it,called “Beyond Endurance” which is still in publication and on Kindle)
    When Blairites talk about taking us back to the 80s, they need to remember that Rightwing Kinnock lost not one, but TWO elections. So much for Blairism.
    Jeremy Corbyn will give us back the real Labour values and principles of fairness for all, not just the privileged few.As Andy so rightly said on here, it won’t be without an almighty fight. I believe he is strong enough to cope, especially as he must know there are now millions of people on his side! For myself, I am longing for the day when Jeremy Corbyn faces Cameron across the Despatch Box! You bet it will be Cameron’s worst nightmare!

  11. The reference to the Falklands factor as being key to Foot’s defeat is I think a little simplistic. It rather ignores the fact that Foot actually supported Thatcher’s use of military force against Argentina, in contrast to the approach of the Americans who despite the closeness of relationship between thatcher and Reagan were disappointingly unsupportive. That the Falklands were used as an excuse for defeat in 83 is because many on the far left, like Corbyn himself (albeit he was not yet an MP) were against it and in his case and probably others, still consider that we should give the Falklands “back” to Argentina.

    Foot fought, from his time in the Callaghan government to try and temper and restrain the impulses of the bennites. He was a unity leader who wanted to keep the forces in labour which had brought it down and thatcher in- the people like Corbyn- in the same party as the Callaghan government. It was their recalcitrance that led to the founding of the SDP whose policies were very much continuity Callaghan.

    That said, if you don’t mind withdrawal from the EU and NATO, siding with anyone against the U.S. And Israel however unappealing some of their practices I think Corbyn could well become PM. I’m not sure many would like what that ultimately meant. https://botzarelli.wordpress.com/2015/06/15/beware-of-what-you-wish-for/

    • Thanks for your reply. The fact Foots supported military intervention ( though he felt Thatcher had made grave errors that made that intervention necessary), demonstrates yet another reason the Foot Corbyn comparison is disingenuous. Corbyn would not have supported the intervention. And regardless, it was Thatcher who gained political capital from it, not Foot. My original point stands. To echo your words, it’s a little simplistic, if not downright crafty, to blame the 83 defeat on Labours manifesto. P.S Corbyn will campaign to stay in the EU.

      • I agree that the comparison between Foot and Corbyn is wrong on the Falklands but from a different perspective. Had Foot taken Corbyn’s approach, given the huge popularity of the action and victory in the Falklands, the electoral fallout would have been even greater. As it was, the fact that Foot was not supported in his stance meant that there was little chance of even mitigating any boost to Thatcher which came from the Falklands War.

        I think oppositions’ stance on such things will generally be of limited consequence (hence little damage to the Conservatives arising from supporting Blair in voting for the Iraq War) unless they oppose the government’s actions and are proved “right” (hence the improvement in LibDem fortunes post Iraq) or they oppose them and are proved “wrong” (as with the Falklands where the support from Foot was neutralised by the loud voices from his party condemning it).

        On the EU, it is hard to tell what Corbyn will do because the EU he seems to support isn’t the actually existing one underpinned by the provisions of the Treaty of Rome (which get forgotten these days in the excitement over currency and political union made more explicit in the Lisbon Treaty and the social chapter provisions). Miliband’s much more moderate left policies would have been very difficult to enact while in the EU as is set out in a very good blog by a somewhat left leaning former government lawyer who went in detail through the complexity of the apparently simple energy price freeze policy http://www.headoflegal.com/2013/09/25/is-eds-energy-freeze-lawful/ (I also somewhat jokingly predicted he was moving towards Lexit himself a couple of years ago – https://botzarelli.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/is-miliband-quietly-leading-the-uk-out-of-the-eu/ ).

        As Labour realised in its 1983 manifesto, the things it wanted to do economically were really not compatible with membership of the then EEC. While Corbyn might not want to go quite as far as the 1983 manifesto, he clearly does want to go a lot further than Miliband. If this is a serious practical proposal from someone who would really want to do these things in government, I struggle to see how that could fit with supporting remaining in anything which looks at all like either the EU as it is now or how it might look following any realistic form of renegotiation. If the EU is likely to resist the relatively minor tinkering that Cameron will propose it is hardly likely to embrace much more significant changes like (as proposed by some on the left) removing the free movement of goods, capital, workers and freedom of establishment (the last of these would be the minimum needed to prevent things like Amazon doing business out of Luxembourg). Just as the EU stops Tories from removing worker protections which are mandatory under EU law or blocking intra-EU economic migrants, it also stops the Left from removing the neo-liberal underpinnings of free trans-European markets. That needs to be confronted rather than ignored by anyone who would want to change in either direction.

      • I agree with you, as would the Bennite eurosceptics. As I understand it, Jeremy Corbyn’s position is that there must be a thorough debate in the LP about membership of the EU. He has made various internationalist-type remarks but has not actually come down firmly as pro or con.

        I am intrigued by your position as a Conservative EU lawyer, and gratified that you validate my understanding that EU law indeed prevents the Left from removing ‘the neo-liberal underpinnings of free trans-European markets’. I assume that you are of the libertarian tradition because it is so often the case, that the Left shares an analysis with the libertarian right but markedly differs in remedy.

  12. But if Foot was on course to win before the Falklands then it suggests that the Falklands was significant, pictures of Maggie in a tank etc. that and the SDP split of course. Even Ken Clarke thinks Corbyn could be PM. Youth seem to be turning leftward when they vote, they seem less susceptable to media lies. Indeed, the more he is vilified the more they seem to support Corbyn.

  13. Pingback: The strange case of the reluctant leader and the reluctant campaigner | Think Left

  14. Maybe, just maybe, it’s time to stop these Corbyn comparisons with previous Labour leaders, as they serve no useful purpose, except to those who have a hidden agenda. That was then, this is now.

    Also, the attacks on him by members of his own party, seem to be scripted by people who want the destruction of their own party. Strange behaviour, from a political party, who have not long lost a general election to a party who on paper, should have been unelectable.

  15. Pingback: Corbyn’s Calling us Home | Turning the Tide

  16. I think the big thing that certainly the establishment are now forgetting, is that back then newspaper readership was high and on the whole people believed the printed word. Subsequently the press has thrown itself into the gutter and the rise of social media is finally starting to break that stranglehold on people’s minds, hence the awakening of the masses!

    The Establishment only have themselves to blame, not content with keeping the masses in a cocooned state, they just had to push it too far with ridiculous reporting and idiotic money theft scams.

    Well Establishment it’s time to reap what you sow!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s