Ritchie then political analyst

There really is no beginning to these talents here:

The threat that this might happen would force the hand of the 170 or so Labour MPs who very clearly will not be supporting their party leader, but who have now, by default, already selected their own group leader in Owen Smith. I believe they will be forced to act and have little to lose from doing so. There are three obvious reasons for that.

First, every one of them faces the risk of deselection by their constituency parties. Even if they hung on as the candidate the chance of Labour winning more than 100 seats in 2020 after four more years of shambolic opposition looks optimistic to me.

Second, facing four years of frustration and impotence they will be forced into action.

Third, their duty will overcome all other considerations: there isn’t an option available in UK politics for the largest group of opposition MPs to sit on their hands and say they will not oppose anyone but their own front bench: it is their duty to the electorate to oppose and that they will have to do.

With their backs against the wall I expect this group to form an opposition first, and a party second. On this basis Labour will fracture this Autumn, because it would have to: democracy would demand it of these MPs if they think they cannot serve under Corbyn.

OK, Labour Party shorn of the lefty nutters and keeping the Blairites.

What in that case does radical mean? It can only be an embrace of a radical approach to Brexit and the opportunities it provides or the whole thing will be a waste of time. My discussant agreed. As they put it, the left has to overcome its paradoxical position. There are free economic freedoms. They are of capital, goods and labour.

The left is happy about restricting the movement of capital whether through measures to beat tax abuse, by the adoption of financial transaction taxes, and much else.

It is also happy to prevent the free movement of goods, to protect Port Talbot for example.

And in reality we have always restricted the free movement of labour: we do not have an open border policy except with the EU, and yet suggesting changing this offends the left considerably, although not the population at large. On this most apparent of the ‘freedoms’ the left has to now make up its mind because this will dictate the future of Brexit.

Demand free movement and there is no chance of restricting capital and trade, and we will be left like Norway working in a fundamentally neoliberal system where we have no say and so chance of changing things. Accept limitations on movement and leave the single market and controls can be imposed on capital and trade as well when required, as the left would reasonably expect.

It’s a pretty fundamental choice to make, and an essential one. Forming a new party of the left that does not accept the reality of Brexit and give it a left wing stance (which happens to be consistent with current policy with the world excepting the EU) would be a waste of time. Do so and there is an electoral offering which can be the foundation for a radical economic policy.

Which should immediately adopt the policies of the lefty nutters and not the Blairites.

Sigh.

11 thoughts on “Ritchie then political analyst”

  1. ‘What in that case does radical mean?’

    Tim – might be worth opening up ‘The Curajus State’ and finding out just how ‘Radical’ some of Murphy’s nonsense is. I would say from memory almost everything contained in it is a rehash of an idea from the 1980s Labour manifestos or from the 1970s and earlier – it’s only considered ‘radical’ in his tiny mind because he is so poorly read…..

  2. The Meissen Bison

    There are free economic freedoms. They are of capital, goods and labour.

    As easy as 1,2,free.

    Except, of course in the EU context there are four freedoms – he’s forgotten the one which would enable him to establish himself as an economic consultant in an EU country.

    Yup, probably understandable that he should skip that one.

  3. It’s Corbyn who would keep the Labour Party, its organisation, members and buildings and donors. The MPs would have to build their new party from scratch. I wonder how many parachuted in SpAds could achieve that in their constituencies?

    The constituencies will split Real Labour and UKIP, and the Blairites will only have a hope in the Proggie heartlands. Basically Middle Class London and Glasgow Kelvin.

  4. Murphy went sniffing around Corbyn, wanting a pat on the head.

    Didn’t get one, so puts the boot in.

  5. If Labour MPs leave the life-support machine that is the Labour Party they will simply disappear. There will be no new party, it’s suicide for whoever leaves.

    They’ll stick around and fight a guerrilla war against Corbyn and get bricks through windows in return, maybe worse.

  6. Leaving Labour would be very difficult – no machinery no money etc. I suppose they could do a deal with Farron and hope that a new Labour/LDP alliance would work. In reality, it might just let in UKIP.

    The only group interested in doing what the Murph says is actually Corbyn’s mob.

  7. They will have a considerable financial incentive to stand for their seats next time, deselected or not. Or, at least, that has been the case up till now. Would it survive if the constituency boundaries were redrawn?

  8. What keeps the majority of Labour MPs elected is the legally protected word “Labour” next to their name on the ballot paper. That is the single most valuable asset the Labour Party has. Any split in the party will trigger an almighty fight over who gets to keep that asset. Do the Blairites want to be automatically re-elected by voters putting their mark next to the word “Labour”, or do they want to find the resources to put the effort into persuading people to look for “New Party” or whatever on the ballot paper.
    I think it’s more likely the Trotty end would be more likely to be happier having to adopt their own new brand name. But then you will end up with swathes of Labour voters voting Labour even harder and harder until they adopt some decent socialist policies.

  9. There’s no way the Corbyn Momentalists are going to give up on Labour, the name, the organisation or anything else. The Blairites will be seceding from Labour. If they hope to take the name with them, they’re as deluded as Sturgeon wanting to take the EU with her when Scotland secedes.

  10. Bloke in Costa Rica

    There’s all this pious nonsense about “needing” an opposition to keep the ruling party in check. That’s all very well, but if the policies you are propounding in opposition are disgusting (in the case of the Blairites) or evil (in the case of the Corbynites) then the sooner you slink off into oblivion the better.

Leave a Reply

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