For the big majority of the capitalist class, a Labour government would now be a huge relief.
There are several reasons why.
They include Starmer’s intention to increase alignment with the EU, for example by adopting the same standards for food and agricultural products as the EU, which would have the potential to at least partially ease the problems of the Northern Ireland protocol.
However, the overwhelming reason that they are looking to a Labour government is that it would be able to oversee attacks on the working class more effectively than this broken Tory government.
Historically, when Labour was a capitalist-workers’ party, the capitalist class repeatedly relied on the pro-capitalist leadership of the Labour Party to use its authority as the party of the working class to implement unpopular policies in government.
The character of the Labour Party was fundamentally transformed into an out-and-out capitalist party in the period after the collapse of Stalinism.
Corbyn’s leadership was a brief opportunity to begin its retransformation which was not realised.
Nonetheless it still has a residual place in mass consciousness as the party ‘for workers’, not least because of the propaganda of the capitalist media to paint it as such.
Starmer has ruthlessly re-established an iron grip over the party apparatus for capitalist interests, while making every imaginable statement to demonstrate unequivocally that his government would act loyally in the interests of the capitalist class.
This includes his declaration that he, like the Tories, would attempt to block a new referendum on independence for Scotland.
Over time this will further fuel support for independence in Scotland among the working class.
In Wales too, support for independence has risen in recent years under the Tories, albeit from a much lower level than in Scotland, and could grow further as discontent with Starmer’s New Labour grows.
Nonetheless, in the short term a Starmer-led government would undoubtedly have more ability to ‘sell’ cuts to workers’ living standards, etc. more effectively than Sunak does.
Firstly because, at least in the initial phase, there would be widespread hopes that Starmer was going to be a least some improvement on the last twelve years.
Crucially, sections – in fact probably a big majority – of trade union leaders would attempt to hold back struggle by arguing to give Labour ‘a chance’ and point towards any reforms they promise, however, limited – such as the repeal of some elements of the anti-union laws.
This is the significance of Paul Nowak’s statement on becoming TUC general secretary that he understood Labour “can’t turn on the taps from day one”.
Nonetheless, there would be no prospect of any prolonged honeymoon for a Starmer New Labour government, and its ability to hold back struggle would be shallow and limited.
Labour today is not seen by workers as the party that represents their interests in the way that it was historically.
At the same time it would preside over a much more difficult economic situation than New Labour inherited in 1997.
Even if, as is far from guaranteed, Starmer is lucky, and the worst of the developing recession is passed by the time they take office, the economic situation will be dramatically worse than 1997 when the economy actually grew by 4.9%.
Undoubtedly the capitalist class will still be demanding austerity in its varying forms given the accumulated weaknesses, including the level of government debt, facing British capitalism.
Most importantly, the workers’ movement is in a very different state from 1997.
At that stage, under the impact of the collapse of Stalinism, capitalism was widely accepted as the only viable alternative and the workers’ movement was in retreat.
Today, while the consequences of the collapse of Stalinism have still not been entirely overcome, we have entered a new era of heightened struggle.
Strikes have reached a level not seen since then.
And Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party represented a first attempt in this era to build a mass political alternative to the pro-capitalist parties.
Due to the weaknesses of its leadership it has been defeated inside Labour.
Today, left candidates for Labour’s NEC get votes at the puny levels they got under Blair.
Nonetheless, in society the popularity of Corbyn’s programme showed a search for left, ‘socialistic’ ideas among broad sections of the working class and especially youth.
Regardless of the role we play, this will prepare the ground for massive opposition developing to a Starmer Labour government, which in turn will intensify the capitalists’ crisis of political representation.
