British politicians, a view of Galloway. Three nails in the coffin of Corbin's leadership: anti-Semitism, a policy of appeasement, and attitudes toward Brexit.
I’ll make a reservation right away: with Jeremy Corbin, whose five-year term of party leadership came to an end last weekend, I’ve known for forty years, of which thirty we worked side by side in parliament.
On almost all the videos of my parliamentary speeches that can be found on YouTube, Corbin sits next to me.
I, more than anyone else, supported him in the British media. My statements in defense of Corbin attracted a millionth audience, and my former Talk Radio employer, the Ofcom state media regulator, wrote a substantial fine for the “imbalance” of my energetic objections to his critics. But it was in days past, we are talking about the present.
In the decades that Corbin was next to me, I never considered him an outstanding thinker (I literally never saw him read a book), or a writer (I don’t know if he wrote anything at all), or a speaker, or even a companion (in it, for my taste, there were too many student squats).
It was inconceivable to imagine that he would ever become a leader. The fact that he became one is a historical accident.
The lot fell on him: he, as an ordinary candidate among the left, was entrusted with carrying the banner of the Socialist Campaign parliamentary group (of the Trotskyite laborers), because it was his turn to fail. In the summer of 2015, when there was still no certainty that he was a candidate, we talked at the headquarters of the British Congress of Trade Unions on Great Russell Street. Corbin asked me: "Am I doing the right thing?" I replied: “If your name is on the ballot, you will win.” He laughed, and with him the witnesses of that conversation.
The irony of fate is that for the same reasons that he then appeared on the ballot, he was eventually expected to be a real defeat.
He was put forward because they did not see him as a threat to the existing order. Thanks to the qualities of his character (and he was on friendly terms with everyone) of personal enemies - I’m not talking about political opponents - he had almost no parliament. Say, his right hand, the Trotskyist John McDonnell, who later became the shadow chancellor of the Treasury, would not have been on the ballot - they hated him so much. And Korbin had no haters. Then.
Why was I sure that he would win, and publicly gave such a forecast in the British media?
Because, as Shakespeare said, "in the affairs of people there is a moment of high tide, he rushes them fortunately, if not missed." The tidal wave in the Labor movement went against austerity measures and centrism. I knew for sure: if Corbin manages to act as an off-system politician such as Bernie Sanders and goes ahead in full swing, he will be able to ride the wave.
Blairists were hated. The point is not only in wars, and not even in what role they played in the financial crisis and how calmly they forced people to pay for the crimes of bankers. They hated them due to the fact that the Labor Party did not have a drop of Labor under them, it was replaced by a kind of alloy of Blairism with Clintonism, and from the movement it turned into a emasculated counting machine - a heartless, heartless and stranded story.
The 2015 campaign, when Corbin fought for the post of Labor leader, seemed like a miracle. He was on the crest of a wave, he himself lifted a wave, because of which it became higher and higher. And his victory over the centrist opponents was deafening.
Here he would take into service the recommendations of one of his worst enemies, former Blair political secretary John McTiernan, who today gives advice to whoever took the place of Corbin - Sir Cyrus Starmer, the former prosecutor and leading opponent of Britain’s exit from the European Union. So, the first three “Rules of Government" of Maktirnan read:
1) act without delay;
2) act without pity;
3) punish the losers.
Although Corbin and I and others gave similar advice, he acted exactly the opposite. He could not act without delay or pity, and he did not punish the losers, he defended and even promoted. Then he darted in their direction, then he tried to move away from them, and after a while he capitulated. And after that they devoured both him and his entire project.
Corbin avoided his friends and extolled the enemies, even when those behind him carried knives to strike, like a whole gang of brutes. Starmer is a prime example, but there are many. In 2016, Sir Cyrus, along with dozens of others, defiantly resigned from the shadow government, protesting against the leadership of Corbin, and supported a vote of no confidence, which was supposed to destroy him. When the conspiracy failed and the king did not die (an even larger percentage of the party, which then had 500 thousand members and was the largest in Europe, supported him in the re-election), Corbin, instead of using Maktirnan’s training manual, INCREASED Starmer by giving him the most important post of shadow minister for brexitis. Promotion was received by many other fans to stick a knife in the back.
The renewed and strengthened mandate allowed Corbin to do anything with the Labor Party. But he hung out like a shell in the ocean, and swam where he would carry the current. Now he and his project are sunk, and soon there will be no trace of them.
This is still inexplicable because under Corbin, in June 2017, the Labor Party received the largest influx of voters in modern history. Theresa May had no particular reason to hold those elections, but she thought she would be able to beat Corbin to smithereens. Corbin did brilliantly. The rising whirlwind of left populism lacked some plus or minus two thousand votes (in the right constituencies), so that for the first time in history a socialist would appear in the premier residence on Downing Street 10.
And even at this finest hour, Corbin did not use the mandate received this time from the electorate to suppress the rebellion, which was ripening behind him, and more and more around him. Instead of mobilizing his supporters in the party and falling upon the hating members of parliament, Corbin continued to act against the party and in the interests of those same parliamentarians. When he did not lift a finger to help his closest ally, Chris Williamson, who at that time was in parliament and was expelled on trumped-up charges of anti-Semitism, this was the last straw. For Corbin, it was all over.
Any review of Jeremy Corbin's brief and completely inglorious leadership will reduce his failures to three key topics: anti-Semitism, a policy of appeasement, and attitudes toward Brexit.
Calling Corbin an anti-Semite is a monstrous lie. The reason is a false identity, when Israeli rejection is equated with hatred of Jews. Yes, if you come up with some kind of false religion and turn to Jeremy Corbin for protection, he would certainly appear in the proper vestment and with complete reverence would mumble ritual phrases. There is NOT A SINGLE minority whose cause Corbin would not support. And all his life he defended the interests of the Jews, their customs, their religious buildings, their rights. Corbin defended Jewish radio, Jewish cemeteries, ritual practices of slaughtering livestock, orthodox Hasidim rights in his own constituency. In 1936, his mother fought against British fascists on Cable Street.
But Corbin was not able to initially expose the aforementioned false identity, and he was floated with cynicism and real hatred, which the authors of books and dissertations would last for several decades. It must be emphasized that he did not take decisive measures against a handful of real anti-Semites identified in the ranks of the Labor Party. The fact that he did not immediately expel them from the party is inexplicable - given how heartlessly he said goodbye to people like Williamson and his longtime friend, the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone.
The problem of anti-Semitism EXISTS. And not in the old manifestation that poisoned the right-wing political forces in the 20th century (and continues to poison). There is also a new anti-Semitism, which under each bush seems to be the Rothschilds, who believes that the root of all our problems is bankers and that all bankers are Jews. For some reason, Corbin never understood this. And, given that he had supported the Palestinians all his life, he became an easy target for an international campaign to destroy him.
Attempts to pacify the Blairists, an internal enemy, were mentioned above.
But Corbin could have overcome all the misfortunes mentioned if he had only adhered to his position on Brexit. If he continued the previous line - that the Laborites without reservations and objections accept the result of the referendum on leaving the EU - the Red Wall of Labor strongholds in the central and northern regions of England could survive. And the fact that he did not do this demonstrates the main reason for the failure of his revolution. The Labor Party has become a party of the urban middle class, liberals with university degrees who, having heard the name of the Swarfega hand cleaner known to every British hard worker, will think that they are talking about some island of the Balearic archipelago and are absorbed in policies built around gender or racial affiliation. This party no longer speaks the same language as the working class living behind the Red Wall, and now it can hardly even pretend to understand it. Anyone who opposes liberalism is without a doubt either "-ist" or "-phob."
The masses who supported the exit from the EU — decent people, patriots, conservative in social issues and, possibly, radical in economic ones — are completely alien to the Labor Party, both its left and right wing. Corbin always chose the left side of such liberalism. He had to read books all the same.
Now the leader is Sir Cyrus Starmer, the Blairists are again at the helm. And - be quiet - the new regime will not be slow to take advantage of the recommendations of John Maktirnan.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.