The prospect of a Jeremy Corbyn-led government grows closer as Theresa May’s divided government staggers from pillar to post in the wake of the abysmal failure of her pathetic “strong and stable” election campaign. That’s why we’re planning ahead by getting together on October 28.
Any number of issues, most notably Brexit, could hasten the collapse of the minority Tory government, result in a fresh election and an outright defeat for May’s party. Victory at the polls for Corbyn would be an important first step towards the transformation of Britain into a country for the many not the few that he and the dynamic social movement behind him desire.
But it would be a terrible mistake to think that an election victory by itself would simply clear the way for a Corbyn government to implement a radical manifesto that directly challenges the neo-liberal policies of successive governments for the last 30 years.
Whereas the Tories see austerity continuing indefinitely, Corbyn and shadow chancellor John McDonnell want to bring it to an early end and increase state spending on infrastructure, the NHS and education.
All this is anathema to a UK establishment and a state that’s fully in the embrace of corporate, military power and a market economy. Corbyn would also be resisted by global financial institutions which can make or break governments.
Demonstrations and protests will no doubt be organised in the event of a concerted backlash against a Corbyn government. But we will need to do much more to defeat the forces of reaction.
A whole array of behind-the-scenes power structures serve and promote capitalism.These include the powerful departments of state, like the Treasury, and includes the Bank of England and other bodies not directly within Whitehall.
Added to them are defenders of the status quo like the spy agencies MI5 and MI6, Special Branch the armed forces and other deep state bodies such as GCHQ.
All these bodies are dedicated to upholding private property in the shape of capitalist forms of ownership and control – by force when and where necessary. They form a matrix of working relationships with corporations, hedge funds and investment banks, which drive policy making at state level.
The growing desire and aspiration for substantial change is obvious. It made itself felt in the Scottish independence campaign, the shock vote for Brexit, the mass campaign to get Corbyn elected as Labour leader and the 2017 general election result itself.
However, this yearning cannot be fulfilled through Parliamentary procedures and occasional general elections alone. Real democracy and self-determination will be achieved when active citizens transform and remake our present forms of political rule and economic power, not just in the UK but internationally.
Staying where we are is not an option – in any country. The global crisis of the system has already led to runaway climate change and a planetary emergency. A rogue, authoritarian president in the US adds to the dangers of war, which could involve nuclear weapons.
A new financial crash is a real possibility because any “recovery” since the last one is based on mountains of unsustainable corporate, state and consumer debt. A democratic solution would embrace a co-operative style economy, where workers and producers have decisive control.
For that to happen, we have to overcome the overwhelming sense of powerlessness that was shown by the stories of the Grenfell Tower survivors. According to local campaigner Eve Wedderburn: “It will not take a generation to heal divides in the borough, it will take regime change.”
Building the Real Democracy Movement into a significant force for change is essential if a Corbyn government is to have a chance of success. Our role, as RDM supporters, is threefold:
- work on a strategy to defend a Corbyn government and build support in the shape of assemblies, civil disobedience, strikes and protests that will challenge the establishment as well as corporate/financial power
- deconstruct the present state and put forwards proposals for a democratic alternative, based on a new constitution, self-determination and a transfer of power from the political and corporate elites to the majority
- develop plans to turn the RDM into a organisation that works with others to carry through the transition from a corporatocracy to a real democracy.
RDM supporters will hold a planning day in London on Saturday, October 28 where we will work collaboratively in small-group sessions to address these challenges. You are warmly invited to become a supporter at realdemocracy.org and take part.
For more information and to register, send your name with “October 28” in the subject line to info@realdemocracymovement.org
Broadly agree with the argument set out. When I talk to fellow Labour members, the sense of anticipation and excitement at the prospect of a Corbyn led Labour government is very strong – but it tips over into a dreamy ‘…and all will be well’; one last push and we are there! But what if Corbyn achieves only a thin majority, struggles to implement a modest Labour agenda and then is chucked out? Whatever good a Labour government may do will be rolled back by a returning Conservative government. The blog rightly identifies the deep state forces embedded within government machinery which will act as a break on a radical agenda. In the end we have to work over the long term; influence and support a Labour agenda where possible and keep talking to Momentum as well as other groups who may not at first seem to embrace our values. We have to do this while we work to bring about a constitutional revolution. The three points listed are as good a starting point as any.
Tim is right when he says that a Corbyn-led government wouldn’t necessarily be a catalyst for change or that it would support occupations and strikes. However, the blog suggests that, despite itself, a Corbyn-led Labour government could come into conflict with the state and the financial markets. There is no political or economic space within a crisis-ridden globalised economy for its modest reformist policies that look back to the 1970s. Of course, it would also be under attack from the PLP right wing, whose loyalty is to capitalism and the state.
Yet, should Corbyn become PM, he would have been put there by a social movement that rejects the status quo, is demanding substantial change and which is not identical with Momentum which, as you rightly say, is now little more than an appendage of the electoral/parliamentary machine. In my view, the RDM has to find a road to this movement while avoiding a pure position in relation to Corbyn if we are to build something independent. That means explaining why socialist change can’t be achieved through the bourgeois state and presenting alternatives. I agree that this requires collective discussion and elaboration. Our gathering in October should have this aim in mind.
I feel that reference to a ‘Corbyn Government’ is inappropriate, whether such a government materialises or not. Jeremy Corbyn is the leader of the Labour Party. Any prospective government, with him at the head, should be called a Labour Government. A refreshing aspect of the Tories loss of support in the last general election was the miserable failure of the presidential style election of Theresa May. This kind of celebrity idolatry is contrary to real democracy. It is also very dangerous, as we have seen from the results of the ‘cults of leadership’ which have been calamitous at various times in history. The Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn should be cognisant of these dangers. Jeremy Corbyn should make strenuous efforts to play down the tendencies of such a personality cult, rather than wallow in adulation and whip people up into a frenzy; the pinnacle of which was the aberration of the ‘Corbyn chant’ which would have been more at home at a rally of Trump supporters, or at a Nazi rally. Additionally, it is important not to conflate Corbyn with a Labour Government; not just for the reasons highlighted in the piece – in that elected governments are invariably undermined by corporate and other vested interests – but also because a Labour Government, under Corbyn, is unlikely to be radical due to the reactionary nature of the majority of Labour MPs and the conservative nature of the Labour Party itself. Anyone who attempts to pursue a radical agenda is likely to have their agenda quickly snuffed out from within, aided and abetted by the taunts and jeers of other political parties and the reporting of a mainstream media intent on maintaining the corporate hegemony that masquerades as representative democracy. I can’t see Momentum, subsequent to its enforced assimilation into the Labour Party apparatus, being able to successfully oppose such conservatism. One only has to look at the last Labour Party manifesto and compare this with Corbyn’s views to appreciate that Labour in power is more likely to maintain the status quo, with a little tinkering here and there, rather than provide a catalyst for substantial change. Jeremy Corbyn himself is likely to go along with such realpolitick, as he has already demonstrated.
I agree with much of the analysis and comment in this piece and I note the caveats that are attached to the assertion that a ‘Corbyn Government’ will provide a ‘solution.’ But I feel it is premature to state, as settled aims of RDM – presented in the three bullet points –prior to the inaugural meeting in October. I think it is at least arguable that to advocate support for a ‘Corbyn Government,’ without any idea of what the policies of such a government might be is reckless. To couple this with proposals for civil disobedience, strikes and protests – implying that a ‘Corbyn Government’ would support such actions – is, at the least, doubtful. But regardless of one’s views about these aims, they are more appropriately matters for debate and agreement in October, rather than presented as a fait accompli. Whilst the reasons for failure of the political left to successfully implement and/or sustain a socialist society may be many and complex, it seems that at least one important reason has been that, frustrated with the lack of progress, the fanatics have concentrated power for themselves within small cabals. They have then abused this concentrated power by imposing a blueprint of their Utopian society by authoritarian means; creating perverse and pernicious distortions of socialism in the process. The means by which socialism is achieved are at least as important as the ends. Distributed power within robust and transparent democratic mechanisms is the only way to avoid the creation of yet another version of totalitarianism. Such democratic means should practiced at every level of decision-making and every effort made to constantly diffuse power to avoid it corrupting and pernicious effects.