The following (edited version of my last blog entry) was published in the Independent on Tuesday. It's still trending & provoking lots of (mostly) constructive debate.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/dont-think-jeremy-corbyn-is-a-worthy-leader-maybe-its-time-to-leave-the-labour-party-a6773741.html
Elsewhere in the news this week. Police forces admit they're "overwhelmed" by the surge in domestic violence cases in recent years. One woman in England and Wales is killed from domestic violence every three days and despite it being one of the biggest killers in this country, resources to tackle it have been cut to the point where the system is at breaking point.
It should come as no surprise that brutal austerity measures that are hitting the poorest the hardest lead to a surge in alcoholism, mental health incidence and domestic violence. There is a known correlation between economic hardship and domestic violence, yet services that previously existed, albeit basic, have been cut into oblivion by the same government whose policies have created an even greater need for their existence.
Thursday, 17 December 2015
Tuesday, 8 December 2015
It Isn't Just David Cameron Who Thinks Those of Us Who Oppose Air Strikes On Syria Are "Terrorist Sympathisers"
It seems Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour has taken over from
Islam as the root of all evil. Not since 7/7 have I witnessed such naked hysteria
and loathing in the British media. The same reductionist, lazy language is now also
being invoked in response to the awakening beast of left wing politics.
The obvious way of describing the divisions in Labour
is along ideological lines. Jeremy Corbyn represents the overwhelming majority
of labour supporters who gave him a landslide victory, and with it, a mandate
to lead the party to the left, in line with its founding principles. There are
those, more aligned to the Blair/Thatcher ideology on the right, who, despite
being in the minority, are resisting change at all costs. Even if it means
letting the Tories off the hook. These people are pro austerity, pro war and
have more in common with the other right wing parties than that of Labour.
If the media was seeking to be impartial, it would
refer to both factions in line with their ideological leanings, one being left
wing, the other, right wing. Whilst the term “left winger”, “trots”, and “terrorist
sympathisers” is regularly used to depict the Corbyn majority, the right
wingers (who support bombing and austerity, which has seen child poverty and
poverty related suicides rise exponentially) are described as “moderates” and
“modernisers”. The media think that, if
they don’t refer to the right wingers as being, right wing, we might not notice
the fact that there are already plenty of right wing parties and they’re not
Labour.
The rhetoric is heavily loaded
against the left, in a way that is far too commonplace in reporting the plight
of Muslims around the world. Take Gaza for example. Last year, 600 Palestinian and 3 Israeli civilians, were
killed during an escalation of hostilities. At the time, I came across this in a left leaning newspaper, “…For more than
five years the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas nor Israel appeared ready to
stop fighting…”
Why is religion only referenced
when it’s Islam and why is it used as code for “terrorist”? If religion is
deemed relevant, why not cite both? Why do we never hear the phrase, “Jewish fundamentalist” when reporting on a state that has breached numerous
international laws and stands accused of “possible” war crimes and crimes
against humanity?
But
it is not Palestinians that David Cameron and Hilary Benn want to rescue from
a life of occupation, persecution and starvation. Nor is it the beleaguered victims of the
ongoing Darfur genocide (which Hilary Benn was criticised for downplaying
during his time as Labour’s Secretary of State for International Development) Why are there no plans to bomb the fascist despot in Khartoum? These are all
Muslims suffering at the hands of brutal regimes, so why is it not OK to walk by
on the other side of the road when some Muslims are being persecuted but OK
when it’s others? Are some Muslims more worthy than others?
The media would have us believe that Hilary Benn is
a leader in waiting. He may well have a future in the Tory party but not as a
Labour leader. If you find yourself unable to oppose your political opponent on
the grounds that you have more in common with them than not, that’s a pretty
good indicator that you’re in the wrong party. The government of the day needs
to be held to account by a robust opposition (the clue is in the name),
that constantly challenges, questions and
opposes its ideology and actions.
Corbyn’s leadership style is inclusive and is loathed
by those who seek to maintain the fear and control of the past. Ironically,
those Corbyn traits that are depicted in the media as “weakness” (listening to
ordinary people, engaging with Labour’s grass roots, being driven by principle
and integrity, as opposed to the whim of focus groups) are the very traits that
endear him to the public. But the party
faithful who gave him his mandate will not tolerate him floundering over his
response to the saboteurs in his midst. They had their chance and in return for
being given a seat at the top table of the shadow cabinet, they plotted to
undermine the new direction of labour. The dignified response would be for them
to do the decent thing and go, but if they don’t, they should be shown the door.
A degree of dissent and disagreement is healthy within
organisations. The challenging and questioning leads to better decisions and prevents “group think”. If the level of dissent however, becomes dysfunctionally divisive, to the extent that it impedes the organisation's ability to be effective, decisive remedial action is called for. Taking on the Tories and their toxic
austerity agenda, requires every shred of Labour’s energy and focus. Either
respect the democratically elected leader and his left wing mandate, or join
one of the many right wing options out there (Tory, Lib Dem, UKIP, take your
pick).