Corbyn and the politics of betrayal
To The Guardian
It’s remarkable that opponents of Jeremy Corbyn still do not seem to understand the sources of his appeal. Let me suggest two reasons. The first is that many voting for him have experienced, through employment in the public sector, the gradual creep of privatisation, and the imposition of forms of management illiterate in the understanding of contexts such as education or healthcare. Second, considerable sections of the workforce (the “left behind”) have seen their jobs stripped of benefits and security, and – through an overemphasis on academic credentialism – stripped of any respect. The fantasy of social mobility through competition and selective forms of education consistently marginalises this group.
All these changes have been legitimated as modernisation, while challenges to them are written off as Old Labour. There is nothing – as many people voting for Corbyn have said loudly – modern about greater inequality, or old-fashioned about principles of fairness and equality. Many people take the view that neo-liberal economics can never deliver anything except to the rich and powerful, and that a politics of minor adjustments is not a sufficient challenge. Mary Evans, Patrixbourne, Kent
To The Times
As a historian of the Labour Party, I was dismayed but not surprised to hear so many calls for “unity” in the aftermath of Jeremy Corbyn’s re-election – even, most strikingly, from his opponents among Labour MPS, commentators and academics. “Unity” is not a good in itself, and to call for it is little more than blockheaded tribalism of the most unthinking sort. Moderates should not “unite” with people who back Britain’s enemies abroad and who pursue a style of politics at home that is little more than malice in the guise of virtue. To fixate on “unity” is a reflection of the same cultural problems that has landed Labour in its current mess: a historical, pathological, and increasingly pathetic fixation with “betrayal”. Country should come before party; but, for some, being “Labour” is such a central part of their identity that they are willing to go along with almost anything to sustain it. In pondering what to do next, they might reflect on the great figures from Labour history who put their country first: Attlee, Bevin, Callaghan and, yes, Ramsay Macdonald. Dr Robert Crowcroft, lecturer in contemporary history, University of Edinburgh