Corbynism

One of Britain’s biggest unions has said Jeremy Corbyn must win the Labour leadership to cure the party of the “virus” of Tony Blair as it threw its support behind the leftwinger.

Comrades, we must purge ourselves of the influence of the only leader we’ve had, for 39 years, who led us to electoral victory!

52 thoughts on “Corbynism”

  1. The Meissen Bison

    I think it wasn’t ‘us’ but a ghastly simulacrum of ‘us’ – that’s how that works.

  2. I think they just aren’t happy with what Blair did with that victory. Which is fair enough, really. I don’t see why a socialist party shouldn’t be led by a socialist.

    Let’s face it, the “Centre” as it is doesn’t seem to be making anyone very happy. Well, unless you’re standing in front of the QE machine scooping up cash then lending it out, perhaps.

  3. Chukka is looking a very smart cookie. Kendall gets the all the abuse. He can walk in unopposed when the Blairites proved right sometime before the election on bad polls or after a bad result.

  4. I want Corbyn to win it. Fuck it, who knows all our received wisdoms might be wrong. Let’s find out.

    (really want I want is Labour to split into two, so we can learn via experimentation which wing is more popular at ballot box. Then maybe two wings can form a coalition government!)

  5. If it wasn’t for that nasty Mr Blair then the comrades could have had 40 years of glorious opposition.

    I want Corbyn to win as well, just to see the general publics reaction to his views on immigration controls (there should be none) and Hamas/Hezbollah (lovely fellows). His brain-dribble economics could well prove to be popular tho.

  6. So far the BBC is heroically suppressing his loonier views. In every article on him I have seen, there has been no mention of immigration or these other issues.

    Will be a bit harder when he is leader though.

    It would be a bit rich for Blairites to attack his stance on immigration though, as it was effectively their own stance too when they removed border controls.

  7. The only way Labour is going to get back in is to have another Blairite leader who tells the rest of the world that he/she isn’t a Blairite. Corbyn is simply John the Baptist.

  8. Socialism/communism is a secular religion with the state as it’s church, party functionaries as it’s priests and revolution as it’s populist movement.

    The Catholic Church had the crusades. The point is that once the Catholic Church got over the crusades it started to settle down and become something that people could live with, with the exception of alter boys.

    It does make one wonder when will the left wing secular revolutionary religion will get out of it petulant adolescence and grow up and become respectable.

  9. The Meissen Bison

    Salamander: alter boys
    I don’t think you can blame the Catholic Church for that. Maybe the NHS?

  10. The Great Redacto

    Watched Phil Collins and Diane Abbott on Newsnight last night. Depressing. She just wants “the debate” within the party to go on ad infinitum, which means droning on about unfairness until people stop listening and surrender.

    In fact, the Labour left has given up on the idea of winning the centre and just wants to smash it up with re-runs of industrial conflict from the 1970s and 1980s, webcast “people’s courts” for hedgies etc etc etc. Good luck with that.

    It is arguable that Labour only wins when people are utterly sick of the Tories (Harold Wilson and Tony Blair) or when the country has had some sort of near-death experience (Clem and whatever is coming next).

  11. And by contrast with Cameron being condemned for the use of the term ‘swarm’ to describe the illegals marauding around Calais, ‘Progressive opinion’ raised nary a quibble over the use of the term virus to describe a former Prime Minister. Truly we are living in an insane world.

    No great fan of Blair, who I estimated indictable on about 60 counts of treason at the last count ( I will see if I can dig out my draft blog post) but this is desperate stuff from a Union most of whose senior leadership are on the record as having close links with a variety of unsavoury Left Wing regimes and terrorist organisations, and whose idol is the most anti semitic politician (well maybe equalled by Galloway and Livingstone) in the UK since World War 2….

  12. I know how they feel.

    I, too, find Corbyn much less odious than Blair.

    A loony deluded nutcase, to be sure, but much nicer than Blair…

  13. John Miller, possibly because Corbyn is sincere whereas Blair has all the sincerity of an American TV evangelist.

  14. Blair is the only Labour Prime Minister to have won an election in the last 40 years (Wilson won a majority of 3 in October 1974).

    The last time Labour won a working majority before Blair was Wilson in 1966. So I suppose a raft of policies not seen since 1966 might well do the trick.

  15. Van_Patten.

    My wife can’t understand why I walk out of the room when the TV news comes on.

    Last night, unfortunately, I caught the opening of the 10 o’clock news. The UK is being invaded, and our (and the French) security seemingly unable to stop it or aid our citizens in peril.

    And what was the Headline/theme of the story:
    CAMERON CRITICISED FOR CALLING IMMIGRANTS A ‘SWARM’.

    That’s where we’re at as a country. That’s why I don’t watch MSM news.

  16. Ian B,

    No-one’s denying they can’t choose to be a socialist party, but they’ve got little chance of success, because socialism isn’t very popular, especially in the sort of “swing seats” that Labour has to win.

    The problem with many Labour supporters is that they do not understand the effect of technology. They think Thatcher destroyed jobs, rather than robots. They think that unions have shrunk because of politicians rather than the motor car. They think politicians are pro-outsourcing maniacs, rather than the fall in transaction costs and improved communications making outsourcing preferable. And so they think it can be reversed, and they’ll get back to their rose-tinted vision of the 1970s.

  17. The Stigler

    I often say that the likes of Murphy and Howard Reed seem to believe ‘progress’ is a synonym for returning to 1978. For me I don’t think they understand Technology per se let alone its effects and third order analysis is way beyond the capability of someone like Murphy. Who can forget his immortal line on Bitcoin from March 2014 – search on TRUK for ‘Bitcoin’:

    ‘Someone has created a lot of wealth here, and it looks untaxed’

  18. Trolls seem to have been given another holiday on his latest post – production must be being impacted now!

  19. Dave Ward, the general secretary of the union, said: “There is a virus within the Labour party and Jeremy Corbyn is the antidote.

    Chief Wiggum: Fat Tony is a cancer on this fair city. And I am the… uh… what cures cancer?

  20. Stuck-Record says:

    Last night, unfortunately, I caught the opening of the 10 o’clock news …… That’s why I don’t watch MSM news.

    I always wanted to throw heavy objects at the TV, back in the days when Hugh Edwards was incapable of saying the word Tory without the corner of his mouth turning up into some sort of sneer.

    I no longer have a television. And the nice Mr Cameron now leads the tories.

    Now I can’t say the word Tory without the corner of my mouth turning up…

  21. Unite is busily signing up some of the lowest paid to back a candidate who wants to lower their wages through mass immigration.

    I wonder what (or if) the members think. Some of them might be playing their cards close to their chests.

  22. they don’t like winning elections. Coming face to face with reality is something they find most offensive!!!

  23. I think the interesting thing is the “Blair the winner” narrative. But bear in mind that John Smith would have almost certainly won against the chaotically collapsing Major administration had he not died suddenly.

    I’m not in any way by the way suggesting that he was poisoned by Peter Mandelson. Not in the least. Not slightly.

    Anyway, in which case, things would have been very different. We really can’t say what would have happened. Possibly one term of tepid Labour, then another tepid Tory government.

    But certiainly, no Blair, and no “Blair The Great Winner” narrative. It’s interesting to consider.

  24. Ian B – It’s a tragedy John Smith died when he did. He would have been a far less destructive PM than the grinning sociopath who replaced him.

  25. Is Corbyn the best Labour can do? Why don’t they just hand the leadership to Arthur Scargill and get it over with? I’m pretty he doesn’t have any pressing engagements at the moment.

  26. Dear Andrew,
    Thank you for your recent application to become an Affiliated/a Registered Supporter of the Labour Party.
    As part of the process to sign up as an Affiliated/a Registered Supporter all applicants are asked to confirm the following statement; I support the aims and values of the Labour Party, and I am not a supporter of any organisation opposed to it.
    We have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party and therefore we are rejecting your application.
    Should you wish to dispute rejection by the Labour Party you would have to submit and pursue an application to join Labour as a full member.
    Kind Regards
    Lee-Ann

    My reply: (original in large green Comic Sans)

    Dear Lee-Ann,
    Thank you for your recent email.
    You state that “We have reason to believe that you do not support the aims and values of the Labour Party or you are a supporter of an organisation opposed to the Labour Party”.
    Given that this was clearly stated on the application, I am surprised it took you so long to reject me.
    Gratifyingly it appears that your Party is capable of self-immolation without my assistance,
    Good luck with Messrs. Corbyn and Watson in charge. ¡Que vivan los juanqueristos! ★
    Warm regards,
    Andrew K

  27. Ian B,

    “I think the interesting thing is the “Blair the winner” narrative. But bear in mind that John Smith would have almost certainly won against the chaotically collapsing Major administration had he not died suddenly.”

    I don’t know if it’s almost certain. For most of his term, Smith had a few percent on the Conservatives, which was boosted after the ERM for 5 months. A couple of years of getting the economy back on track might have led to a Conservative return to power. New Labour’s success was about sounding like the Tories in terms of tax, but a bit socialist in terms of spending.

    But even if he did, a strategy of winning because the other party falls apart, is hardly a good one. And Corbyn still wouldn’t have won then.

  28. I’m not so sure that the belief on the right that most people are really on the right bears much scrutiny. We all tend to get the delusion that the people we mix with are the mainstream, and everyone who disagrees are fringe loons. But really, the economic left is still quite popular- while of course the “social left” is now the mainstream (and thus those few of us who think the police shouldn’t be pursuing teenagers for dressing as golliwogs are the actual fringe loons in that regard. As I’m sure Arnald would agree).

    The Tories only scraped a win against a Labour Party led by the most unsuitable leader possible. I think Corbyn Labour might have more appeal than people think, especially compared to “Labour who daren’t have any policies Labour” which did so badly at the last election.

    This looks to me like time for another break of the consensus, of the kind that brought Thatcher in. If I were Saatchi and Saatchi this time, my slogan would be “Neoliberalism isn’t working” and a picture of bankers rolling around in cash, that kind of thing.

  29. ” If I were Saatchi and Saatchi this time, my slogan would be “Neoliberalism isn’t working” and a picture of bankers rolling around in cash, that kind of thing.”

    Oof. I don’t wish to blow smoke up your arse, Ian, so soon after publicly stating my adherence to your description of our ruling female case as ‘society matrons’, and I’m no banker basher because most of them are just people doing jobs, but the last description of British politics I read which made as much acute sense was our gracious host’s declaration that you can understand British politics only when you understand that Labour is the most truly conservative party we have. And that declaration must have been at least a year ago.

    FWIW, I am presently drinking cheap blended whisky. In my view, no strong liquor is worth the name unless it is at least 40% by volume.

  30. SE, what’s your problem? Whisky obviously comes before wine.

    Where did you go to school, for God’s sake, a ditch?!

  31. I apologise, I cannot think what came over me.

    Or, at least, he and I have agreed not to mention it.

  32. Ian B,

    “This looks to me like time for another break of the consensus, of the kind that brought Thatcher in. If I were Saatchi and Saatchi this time, my slogan would be “Neoliberalism isn’t working” and a picture of bankers rolling around in cash, that kind of thing.”

    But is that where the nation is? I can’t tell because of who I fraternise, but I’ve not met anyone expressing a view about TTIP that I know, except for the Guardian readers next door that are against anything the Guardian tells them to be against.

    I just think it’s easy to see protest marches on TV with 20,000 people, with the same people again and again, protesting against globalisation, austerity, “the 1%” and that it means anything more than 20,000, 200,000 or 2m people.

  33. Surreptitious Evil

    Sighs.

    G&T comes first (or Pimms if summer is pretending to be here. Or sherry if you are a maiden aunt or an RAF non-flight officer.) Or other vaguely obscene things if you are young (or Guinness for the SDs / LEs.)

    Then champagne. Then wine. Then port or madeira. Then whisky, whiskey or brandy on personal preference.

    You must have done Inns dinners?

  34. Stig- I think there’s a lot of disgruntlement and feeling that what we have now isn’t very good, and thus a desire for Something Else. And at such times, what matters isn’t the truth, but peoples’ perceptions of what the problems are, which are often not much aligned with actual reality.

    I think every consensus has its season, and we might be due another change of consensus, is what I’m saying. Interesting times and all that.

  35. The scran is surprisingly good at Inns dinners, SE. And lunches, come to that. The booze? Appalling. I wouldn’t give the port to my valet for him to give to his dog.

    That said, when I had to dine ‘in hall’, the trick was always to sit on the same table as three or four Mohammedans so you could scoop up their booze and thereby tolerate the Presbyterian/ blue-stocking/Lord Justice of Appeal* who inevitably ended up next to you.

    Where you make your bloomer in re. whisky is to assume that drinking starts when the sun is over the yard-arm. But frankly even if it did, neither wine nor fortified wine will sharpen your appetite like strong liquor. Nevertheless I’d agree with you on G&T as a substitute for whisky.

    Now, if you’ll excuse me, there’s a bike shed just over there in which I propose to meet a) Dodgy Dave, who’ll give me 200 Capstan and a grot mag in return for a bag of Mintoes, then b) Juicy Jess to whom I’ll give 100 of the Captan in return for a bit of ah’s yer fahver.

    * who may have been both.

  36. Do I hear the tumbrils rolling? Tempus fugit, et cet. …*

    * that last is especially for dearieme

  37. IanB

    Consensus:
    Like interminable middle management meetings in Total?
    Japanese boardrooms?
    Climate science jamborees?

    Consensus is having a bad time.
    Why not: Think & Decide. Either direct or vote.

  38. “Where you make your bloomer in re. whisky is to assume that drinking starts when the sun is over the yard-arm.”

    Clearly!

  39. Bloke not in Cymru

    Maybe after Blair and his end justifies the means approach some people just feel that having principles you will stand by is something they want (or expect) from politicians even if they aren’t principles you personally agree with. I think Corbyn might making an interesting leader of the opposition and if he stood aside for a more electable candidate a year before the next election could actually have a positive impact for labour

  40. BniC,

    “Maybe after Blair and his end justifies the means approach some people just feel that having principles you will stand by is something they want (or expect) from politicians even if they aren’t principles you personally agree with.”

    They don’t. Almost no-one wants principles. They might make some noises along the lines of how refreshing it is to see a man of principles in politics, but people vote for a better hospital for their mum or a better school for their kids.

    Even the people voting for him in this leadership election aren’t voting for Corbyn for his principles. They just want more union jobs for their union, or their student loan to be written off.

  41. Mr Stigler, one of the problems with principles is that they demand internal consistency. This can be intellectually difficult – which is one reason I’m a libertarian: being fundamentally lazy and not uncommonly bright I find it easier to extrapolate forwards from the single non-aggression principle than to work backwards from endless impositions on others to the point where, two or more such impositions conflicting, I somehow have to prefer one over another. I mean, that’s just whack-a-mole. So yes, people talk a good game when it comes to principles – like, say, Diane Abbott and non-state schooling – and, as you point out, they fold at the first sign of a conflict of interest. But I also think it’s a question of intellectual rigour: consistency may or may not be the hobgoblin of small minds, but it is a talisman of a stout heart.

  42. Wot Ian B and Bloke not in Cymru said. Seems a bit odd to support someone just to become PM, rather than what you think he will do!

    Perhaps worth pointing out that half the Labour members left while Blair was leader. Some Labour supporters don’t want their party to win at the cost of what the supporters want.

  43. Interestingly I’ve just received my candidate information email from Harriett Harman. It starts,

    “Dear David,”

    And ends.
    “Thanks for being a part of this, Katharine.

    Harriet Harman
    Interim Leader of the Labour Party

    Best,

    Harriet Harman

    Interim Leader of the Labour Party”

    Not sure why Harriet needed to sign off twice, or who Katharine is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *