"Left Out" - Jeremy Corbyn Assessed or Assassinated?

 

"Left Out - The Inside Story of Labour Under Corbyn" by Gabriel Pogrund and Patrick Maguire, is a sincere attempt, in my judgement, to give an objective account of what happened in the Labour Party between the Labour surge in the 2017 election to its caning in the election of 2019. Predictably, the book has divided opinion on partisan grounds.

Jeremy Corbyn, understandably, is dismissive of the book:

“… those people that are now being paid a great deal to write books analysing the past five years – what do they concentrate on? ... Tittle tattle, tittle tattle, tittle tattle gossip passing off as political comment, passing off as if it is a serious analysis.”

The right-wing press, as expected, are delighted by the revelations. The Daily Mail gloated maliciously:

"Journalists Pogrund and Maguire had front row seats to Labour's calamitous attempt to gain power.Former aides have revealed non-stop infighting between top strategists, Jeremy Corbyn's anger at losing control of his diary, and his own wife's on-screen snipes."

Trust the Mail to get personal. 

Anyway, I have the book myself, but, initially, found it hard to review. Corbyn has a point when he speaks of "tittle-tattle". Heavy use is made of anonymous sources, and there are some anecdotes, presumably intended to amuse, which do not advance the narrative. There is the anonymous allegation that Ian McNicol, the Labour general secretary and Karate expert, who:

“regularly used his training to turn light switches on and off with his feet”.

The authors also found it relevant to mention David Prescott, son of John. Prescott Junior is alleged to have made a number of inappropriate advances towards women, even on one occasion:

"Prescott was said to have relieved himself on the kitchen floor of a woman who refused to have sex with him". 

As might be expected, Mr Prescott denies all such allegations - but this could give grounds for Corbyn's accusation that the book is about nothing more than gossip. It might be productive for JC to explain why Prescott was not suspended from the Labour Party. The authors say that Prescott was saved by intervention from senior officials in the Labour Party hierarchy.

These anecdotes might provide light relief, but do not enlighten us much about Labour's fall from almost-victory in 2017 to defeat in 2019. To their credit, the authors report exhaustively on the reasons for the catastrophe. 

To me, the rot set in with Corbyn's inept response to the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury. When everyone else pointed the finger of blame at Putin's Russia, including most Labour MPs, Corby bumbled his way to a slow acceptance of that view. One revelation in the book describes how two of his aides examined one of Corbyn's speeches and expunged condemnation of Russian aggression in the Ukraine and an affirmation of support for NATO. As James Dowsett says:

“The Salisbury attack is something we got wrong”, admits a senior Corbyn advisor."

Then there was the vexed issue of anti-Semitism, which was another example of Corbynist bungling. His declarations of support for the Palestinians - even making Palestinian self-determination part of Labour's programme - alienated many Jewish voters, even though Labour was already struggling to cope with accusations of anti-Semitism. He refused all suggestions from aides to make conciliatory gestures to Jewish voters. Margaret Hodge MP, who challenged Corbyn publicly, was called before the Labour disciplinary committee - a contrast to the treatment of David Prescott. This led to a split between Corbyn and his old colleague, John McDonnell. As "The Week" says:

"Corbyn backed the investigation. But McDonnell did not, fearing the optics of “jeopardising Labour’s standing for the sake of winning an argument with an elderly Jewish MP on a point of principle that was to most voters beyond arcane”.

Then there is the dismal spectacle of Corbyn's dithering over Brexit, which annoyed many in his party and the country as a whole. A firm stand by him on this issue may have saved us from Brexit.

This hardback book is now being described as a "first draft". Pogrund and Maguire are working on revisions for their paperback edition to come out next year. Indeed they should. As Sienna Rogers says in "Labourlist": 
"There was the ‘oatcake’ saga, which portrayed Corbyn’s wife Laura Alvarez negatively and had Labour Twitter scrutinising footage from the campaign day. A tweet from ITV – denying that they edited out the scene described in the book from their footage, as claimed – led to the Times online extract being amended."

This, and other mistakes, will be corrected. 

The authors do not  blame Corbyn alone for Labour's defeat in 2019. While he himself blames the Press, the capitalist system, etc, he does not, unsurprisingly, blame himself or, at least not yet, his internal opponents (although the book points to some involvement in a 2019 move to dismiss Tom Watson). The book makes clear - even if Corbyn didn't see it - that there were officials in Labour HQ who were less than happy at his becoming party leader and sought to curtail his tenure.

The authors, I think fairly, make an accurate assessment of Jeremy Corbyn: 

"At points in the narrative, Corbyn is a felt absence".

He was not a unifying figure, being used to years of being a maverick. He did not cope well with confrontation, despite being an able debater in the House of Commons. He appeared to be gripped by indecision at times of crisis and this did not play well with voters. 

As for the book, it is not without flaws for the general reader. It is almost claustrophobic at times in its focus upon office politics and backroom dealings. The voice of the Labour Party members out in the constituencies is not heard, nor that of Labour voters. However, this does not prevent it from being an important book for Labour supporters and anyone interested in modern politics. I realise that some people might find the reactions in the media (including this blog) off-putting. To them I say: don't condemn this book before you've read it.

Poachers, Gamekeepers and the Brexit Party

 

When it comes to radical politics in Britain, there is a long tradition of poachers turning into gamekeepers. That is to say, of political activists, radical in their youth, who move towards the centre ground and join "The Establishment" as they grow older. Examples include the late Dennis Healey, who left the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) when the USSR attacked Finland in 1939; Bessie Braddock , who was an active communist in Liverpool before becoming a rabidly anti-communist Labour MP; Jack Jones, who fought as a communist in the International Brigade in the 1930s, before becoming a Trade Union leader and Labour Peer.

More recent examples include John Reid (now Lord Reid), who became Defence Secretary for a while and is an ex-CPGB member, as was Lord Peter Mandelson. Steven Byers, who became a cabinet minister under Tony Blair, was a member of the Militant Tendency in the 1980s. Peter Hitchens, himself a former member of the International Socialists (IS), says:

"The veteran Left-winger George Galloway remembers former Chancellor Alistair Darling as an active sympathiser of the IMG (International Marxist Group) in Edinburgh in the 1970s."

The most recent, and most remarkable example of such political apostasy, however, is that which has happened to members of the organisation to which the young people in the photo above belonged - the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP). which existed from 1981 to 1997. Its founder was a sociologist at Kent University, Frank Furedi, who led a breakaway group from the Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) in the late 1970s, becoming the RCP in 1981. After 1997, some key members drifted (or swam) to the political Right. They were certainly effective. Guy Rundle says here:

"The post-RCP message began to spread through the UK right-wing press, The Times and Telegraph. Boris perhaps first encountered it through Bruno Waterfield, an RCPer and Brussels correspondent for The Telegraph, when Boris arrived. Something, in those years, made a failing wastrel like Boris into a man with a plan. The combo of bootstrap optimism and techno-society — the public/private split irrelevant — has the RCP brio all over it."

Other ex-RCPers to flourish on the Right include Munira Mirza, who now heads the Downing Street Policy Unit. (Dominic Cummings is said to be in awe of her). Gerry Gable, editor of "Searchlight" magazine , refers to the way that the RCP had erratic policies, but:

"...regardless of its twists and turns, its members always landed on their feet. Furedi, Mick Hume and Brendan O' Neill appear regularly in the Spectator, which formerly employed Johnson and now seems to be Downing Street's house magazine." (Editorial, Autumn Edition, 2020).

The most astounding example of post RCP success, however, must be that of the ex-Brexit Party MEP and new peer to be raised to the House of Lords, Claire Fox.

Fox was a leading member of the RCP , which strongly supported the IRA during the Troubles, even creating a group called the Irish Freedom Movement. In 1993, as is now well known, the RCP issued a statement following the Warrington bombing, which took the lives of two young boys: Tim Parry (no relation) and Jonathan Ball. It said that they supported :
"the right of the Irish people to take whatever measures necessary in their struggle for freedom".

These words have come back to haunt Ms Fox. When she stood as MEP candidate for the Brexit Party in the North West last year, she was widely criticised. One Brexit Paty MEP candidate, Sally Bate, resigned in disgust. Tim Parry's father, Colin, now a renowned peace campaigner, said, in April of last year:

"For somebody to come out with comments I believe she made, and being an apologist for the IRA, is absolutely disgraceful. If this woman would care to explain her comments back at that time to me and my wife, I would like her to do so."

Fox phoned Colin Parry to placate him and his wife, although he later told the press that she "repeatedly refused to disavow her comments supporting the IRA bombing..."

Colin Parry now opposes Ms Fox's elevation to the House of Lords. Both Warrington MPs, one Labour and one Tory, have also spoken out against it. Andy Carter, Tory MP for Warrington South has said:

“I will be very clear, I do not support her appointment to the House of Lords and I understand fully why so many people in Warrington feel the same".

Now, you might have expected a bold British patriot such as Nigel Farage, seen above with Ms Fox, to take a vigorous stand against the presence of an ex-Bolshie and IRA supporter in his electoral menagerie. After all, this is the man who opposes the early release of convicted terrorists from our jails. Er, well, not quite. He has been quoted as saying that he thought the criticism levelled against her as being irrelevant. Ms Fox has not responded with gratitude for his support, and that of the Brexit Party. In January, she accused Nigel of "whipping up fear" during the EU Referendum campaign. What a shame she didn't notice that before she joined the Brexit Party!

In conclusion, I'd like to provide another perspective on the RCP's take on the Irish "Troubles". It comes from a writer I remember from my SWP days - Eamonn McCann. He remembers the RCP in Ireland before and after the signing of the Good Friday Agreement:

"Naturally enough, local supporters of the ‘Ra (IRA) reckoned this crowd sound enough. But the amity only lasted until the IRA’s declaration of a ceasefire in July 1997. Claire and the Comrades went bat-shit crazy. The Irish people had been sold out again!...
Claire was so distressed by this misfortunate turn of events that she stormed along to the Blutcher Street home of one of Derry’s top Sinn Feiners, banged on the door and demanded an explanation. His response that she should – to use a technical term – fuck off, appeared to dampen Claire’s fervour. Shortly thereafter, she left town, possibly grinding her teeth at the crass ingratitude of those who’d abandoned the armed struggle which she had travelled so far to solidarise with."

In his article, McCann observes that Ms Fox has not been back. I wonder - why? Besides this, if McCann's article is accurate, Fox's outrage at the end of hostilities is difficult to reconcile with her more recent statement, quoted here in the Liverpool Echo:

"My political views have never made me insensitive to the pain and suffering caused to the innocent victims of events such as the Warrington bomb".

It seems that Ms Fox has more questions to answer on this issue. We can only hope that there are many members of the House of Lords willing to ask them.