Jeremy Corbyn, england, and the continuing absence of a popular protest movement, and how that absence just feeds the right/far right in england: We have had floods in both west england in what is usually the stunningly beautiful Lake District that has seen flooding that has ruined the homes of some 60,000 people. These are people who have been directly let down by the government, people who were promised in the last massive flooding in 2009 that infrastructure changes would be made and such flooding would not cause such damage for another 2 centuries. Infrastructure change did not happen as the government made the excuse of 'austerity', and basically they have dumped here tens of thousands of people, these people are livid and angry at the government, and rightly so.
This is just one of many examples of mass outrage against the government in recent years that has seen no take up in terms of developing it into a mass protest movement.
Some of the other examples of late is the bedroom tax, threatened cuts to family tax credits, organised and institutional sex abuse involving senior politicians, police, bbc, nhs etc, airstrikes on Syria, general spending cuts and austerity and british state collusion with death squads in the Muslim world.
On all of these issues Corbyn and his camp have failed and refused to develop mass campaigns like we have had witnessed before such as in the resistance against the poll tax in the early 1990s, the Miners Strike support groups, and a few tiny peaks of protest such as the student and youth protests in circa 2010. I have no idea why he and his camp refuse to do this as Corbyn has mass support amongst the Labour Party and the left attached to it; Corbyn has tens of thousands of people, perhaps more, and hundreds of activists ready to take to the streets in organising campaigns against this tory government.
Why is Corbyn failing to mobilise people? I have been asking around and I am still a little bemused by this. Its perhaps a combination of things: 1, Corbyn's politics are actually very parliamentary despite supporting protests and campaigns here and there, his own strategy is solidly parliamentary; 2, there must be people close to Corbyn giving him counsel not to be too confrontational, who this is I am not sure, but the people closest to him have not themselves ever blazed a trail of mass protests etc; 3, the british state and related media has been in a hyper negative campaign against Corbyn which seems to have had the desired impact of intimidating him and his camp into inaction.
There was a very important british state conference at the very start of 2011, the event was entitled: 'The Rise of Street Extremism' (see here) Leading law enforcement and intel agency personalities all agreed that the greatest thing that they fear is if something like UK Uncut (campaign that targeted high street shop companies for failing to pay tax etc) became a mass movement, they fear and work hard to ensure anything like that does not happen. And indeed UK Uncut failed to take on a mass character and remained like most lefty/radical politics solely in the a minority circles of the liberal middle classes, albeit alternative in their cultural lives. And this is why the media and state has conducted and continues to conduct a strategy to tame Corbyn and Co through intense negative media and lies and exaggerations, ie., they do not want an unintended consequence of Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party to result in sparking a mass movement against the tory government.
As long as the pro poor left, even liberal left, fault to develop a mass movement, the more the right and far right (UKIP, EDL, Britain First etc, as well as the tories of course) will continue to take more ground amongst the population in england. And this is a phenomenon across the west, whereby the anti-imperialist left has not recovered from the defeat in the 1980s going into the early 1990s, and the liberal left social democrats in general either are still stagnant, or in the case of the new social democrats such as Syriza totally fail even in their own aims, and in so doing hand over politics to the right.
In Scotland the opposite is happening, the people-centred left nationalist independence campaign and the SNP continue to grow in capacity and assertiveness and unity against the tory government. The SNP are also social democrats, albeit very impressive in their political organising and campaigning thus far, and sometime in the future they might also wobble and fail in some regards in their independence campaign, but thus far they are an example of how if you have the right united approach and leadership that even left social democrats can achieve some impressive results for the people of Scotland, but also for the entire anti british imperialist struggle in helping to develop crisis against the UK state.
I think its clear that even the quite useless left of labour that supports Corbyn are not going to move, and that Corbyn and Co are not going to call on the grassroots to develop a serious, mass, united and assertive campaign on any issue, rather the whole thing is going to be oriented in a electoral strategy that risks being even worse than the Ed Miliband-led Labour Party. I might be proved wrong on this, and hope I will be proved wrong and that Corbyn and Co do spark a mass movement that has some 'umph'. But all indicators are from his camp that things are going to get quieter not louder, more tame not assertive. The people of this island deserve better, not to mention the resistant-victims of british and wider imperialism across the non-'western' world.
PS: I saw this article after I wrote the above, the article quotes Momentum stating that it is against desolation of MPs and that they do not want anyone but Labour Party members to make decisions in their organisation. It is clear taking everything into account that Corbyn and his camp are running fast towards a very narrow imperialist parliamentary strategy, a strategy which has brought the people of Britain nothing but growing problems.
- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm