FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn

Jeremy Corbyn, the grand hope of the Labour Party in Britain, is being politically assassinated. The process has been a gradual one, coming in the form of poison administered over a series of months and thinly veiled promises. But now, the issue has become even more violent. The anti-Corbyn clique is now brandishing its weapons in the open.

The Brexit vote has resulted in much blood letting. A Prime Minister fell on his sword, promising to depart to ready the uncertain ship for his successor. The poor Labour campaign, always marred by different ideologies between the Blairites and Corbynistas, was also bound to attract internal scrutiny.

The daggers, dripping with unreconstructed Thatcherism and sour Blairite aftertaste, are being readied against a man who came to power without traditionally seeking it, the rank outsider who capitalised, as have so many in this climate of estrangement with central authority.

He made the most unpardonable of errors to many in his party when nominated: He won the leadership contest. He won a vote for a party he was not meant to. Even his backers were stunned. He came to a show in free fall, a lot in moral decay. And he sought to go about reconstructing what he could, going about cleaning the stables.

Then came the vote on Europe. Europe, as ever, part nightmare and hope. His position on Europe was similarly shaped by an anti-corporate scepticism and fears about a loss of sovereign control. Through the 1970s, and even under Neil Kinnock’s stewardship of Labour in the 1980s, scepticism persisted.

In the remain campaign, Corbyn was never going to unequivocally back a project that was, in itself, refusing to consider a reformist agenda. The EU had certainly done good, but it had not given a good account of itself in the areas of accountability and governance. Conditional endorsement was what he gave in a range of speeches, notably in April. For those who wanted more, this was never going to be enough.

As he tried explaining, focusing the debate upon the ill-intentions of the Tories backing the Brexiteers, the social and labour benefits obtained by European Union membership would be sabotaged by any exit.

In the question and answer segment following his April speech, he articulated his dark vision: “Just imagine what the Tories would do to workers’ rights here in Britain if we voted to leave the EU in June. They’d dump rights on equal pay, working time, annual leave for agency workers, and on maternity pay, as fast as they could get away with it.”[1]

Not having a Labour government negotiating “a better settlement for working people with the EU” would be disastrous. A Tory government, led in all likelihood by Boris Johnson, with Nigel Farage whooping in the wings, “would negotiate the worst of all worlds: a free market free-for-all shorn of rights and protections.”

Absent from Corbyn’s delivery were the concerns that have reached near hysterical proportions. Immigration, a point that evidently sold well in the Brexit campaign, was not emphasised enough.

With the stench of revolt in the air, something made that much more potent by the results, Corbyn moved to sack Hilary Benn, who served in the Labour cabinet from 2003 to 2010. For Benn, whose tin morality was all too clear over such matters as the Syrian conflict, Corbyn might well be “a good and decent man but he is not a leader.” The tipoff on the rebellion came from the Observer on Saturday, which outed Benn as the chief plotter in the effort to undermine the party leader.

This precipitated a massive departure. Eleven shadow cabinet members quit, not all having been previously designated anti-Corbynistas. The shadow health secretary, Heidi Alexander, expressed her view on Twitter on Sunday morning that she did not believe Corbyn would be an electable leader.

There was never any intention that this party would make a return pilgrimage to its sacred roots. It was the party that had made a Faustian pact in the 1990s, moulded with market values and pro-corporation sensibilities. Talk about traditional labour rights and welfare began to sound marginal and extreme, notably in times of austerity.

Now, it seems that Corbyn will join Cameron as sacrifices of this vote, even though the former remains determined to hold a fort that is being rapidly abandoned. Even the Deputy leader, Tom Watson, is making murmurings of taking a knife against his leader.

The irony is that both the PM and Corbyn fought for a remain campaign they had doubts over, approaching it from different sides of the divide with varying degrees of integrity. History is now playing a terrible joke on its participants, and no one is laughing.

Notes.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/14/corbyns-eu-referendum-speech-verdict-rambling-but-rather-special

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
Julia Stein
California Needs a 10-Year Green New Deal
Dean Baker
Declining Birth Rates: Is the US in Danger of Running Out of People?
Robert Fisk
The US Media has Lost One of Its Sanest Voices on Military Matters
Vijay Prashad
5.5 Million Women Build Their Wall
Nicky Reid
Lessons From Rojava
Ted Rall
Here is the Progressive Agenda
Robert Koehler
A Green Future is One Without War
Gary Leupp
The Chickens Come Home to Roost….in Northern Syria
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: “The Country Is Watching”
Sam Gordon
Who Are Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionists?
Weekend Edition
January 11, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Richard Moser
Neoliberalism: Free Market Fundamentalism or Corporate Power?
Paul Street
Bordering on Fascism: Scholars Reflect on Dangerous Times
Joseph Majerle III – Matthew Stevenson
Who or What Brought Down Dag Hammarskjöld?
Jeffrey St. Clair - Joshua Frank
How Tre Arrow Became America’s Most Wanted Environmental “Terrorist”
Andrew Levine
Dealbreakers: The Democrats, Trump and His Wall
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Que Syria, Syria
Dave Lindorff
A Potentially Tectonic Event Shakes up the Mumia Abu-Jamal Case
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail