Reader TTS

The British voter can be a difficult character to please, but is ultimately fair-minded. One consequence of this is when a major political party chooses a new leader there will be an initial

willingness to “give them a chance”. Whoever emerges will tend to have, for a brief period, the attention of those with only a mild interest in the nation’s political machinations. The

cameras will snap, the victory speech will lead the bulletins. For the Labour Party, this could have meant an opportunity for a clean break, not only with Jeremy Corbyn, but also with

Corbynism — a “fresh start”. It would at least win the attention of former Labour voters who angrily abandoned the party in last month’s general election. The snag is that none of the Labour

leadership contenders show any inclination to do any such thing. If they did, they wouldn’t have a hope of winning, for the simple reason that most Labour members are still, in their

hearts, Corbynistas. Jeremy Corbyn was elected Labour leader in 2015 with a large majority. He got 59.5 per cent of the vote. When he was challenged the following year he won by an even

wider margin — Corbyn secured 61.8 per cent, easily seeing off Owen Smith who only secured 38.2 per cent. During the Corbyn era thousands of those dismayed by him allowed their Labour

membership subs to lapse, while thousands of those who were enthused by him have joined. There is a caveat, which concerns the 60,000 new members in the past month — those specifically

joining to vote in the leadership contest. Many of those may be returning to the fold due to Corbyn’s forthcoming departure. But with around 550,000 members, any shift away from the Marxists

and towards the social democrats must be rather modest. In any case, no candidate is offering a strong change in direction. Criticisms of Labour’s election manifesto are very muted. There

is some soothing talk about how the policies were all very good. Perhaps there were too many for us all to take in. The document was a bit on the long side. But the fundamental pitch from

Corbyn — and the Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell — was that our capitalist system should be overthrown. The inspiration around the world came from countries that have done so. All the

policies — nationalisation, closing down independent schools, getting rid of billionaires, empowering mass picketing, state control of newspapers — were in that context. There was discussion

about the schedule, the figures, the practicalities. The comrades would have their traditional meetings where they argued for hours about the wording. Yet the direction of travel was clear.

Part of the left’s world view is that as Britain is a capitalist nation, therefore Britain is an enemy country, one that is allied to the United States and Israel (also enemies). It follows

that Labour rather struggled to come across as terribly patriotic. None of the five leadership candidates — Rebecca Long-Bailey, Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Sir Keir Starmer and Emily

Thornberry — are prepared to defend the capitalist system. Yet that is what Tony Blair and Gordon Brown would do, of course, while also favouring all sorts of tinkering around the edges.

There is no greater insult for many in the Labour Party than the word “Blairite”. All the leadership candidates stress their left-wing credentials. This week, Lisa Nandy has been denouncing

free schools. Starmer’s campaign video stresses his backing as a young lawyer for the miners’ strike and the print unions during the Wapping dispute. Jess Phillips, points out that her

grandfather was the cartoonist for Tony Benn and the Socialist Campaign Group and that in her childhood she made signs for the nuclear disarmament protests at Greenham Common. Efforts to

undermine Rebecca Long-Bailey, regarded as being the authentic Corbynista choice, have focused this week on her (very tentative) support for a modest further restriction on abortion. So the

contest is all about the rival candidates seeking to prove that they are the most left wing, which is a pretty astonishing shift. Yvette Cooper, the Labour MP for Normanton, Pontefract and

Castleford, stood for the leadership in 2015. Apparently, she considered trying again this time, but gave up as her prospects were so hopeless. None of this is to suggest that Labour members

are indifferent to their general election defeat. But the instinct on the far left will be to look for betrayal as the explanation. In George Orwell’s _Animal Farm_ the character of

Snowball represents Trotsky, Napoleon is Stalin and Squealer is Stalin’s deputy Molotov. At one point Squealer tells the other animals: “We had thought that Snowball’s rebellion was caused

simply by his vanity and ambition. But we were wrong, comrades. Do you know what the real reason was? Snowball was in league with Jones from the very start! He was Jones’s secret agent all

the time….” With a similar tone, some Labour activists are furious with those in the party who criticised Corbyn. They feel it was this sabotage that fatally undermined the party’s election

prospects. Those holding this view will cross Nandy and Phillips off their lists. Long-Bailey, Starmer and Thornberry, who served in the Shadow Cabinet, are treated more sympathetically. One

poll of Labour’s members put Starmer well ahead. Another one gave a narrow lead for Long-Bailey. Neither shows much natural charisma, but neither did Corbyn. The whole saga will roll on

until April. Whoever wins, Corbyn has cast a long shadow over the party. Labour will continue to embrace an extreme agenda that is at odds with traditional British values. That will mean it

will be hard for them to gain power — but not impossible in this volatile age. An alarming prospect.