British perspectives 2022 (continued)
For Britain’s capitalist class, looking on at the car crash of the Tory Party, there is one ray of light. Their fear that a Corbyn-led government might have taken serious measures in defence of the working class has been replaced with confidence that the opposition can now be relied on to act in their interests. As a result of their experience of capitalism the majority of the population, above all of young people, are looking for a left alternative, but their radical outlook has no mass expression.
Already Johnson has had to rely on Labour votes to pass the latest Covid prevention measures, yet Labour did not take the opportunity to demand, to give just one example, full pay for all those who have to self-isolate. In the coming months there are likely to be further examples of, in reality, an element of a ‘national government’, as Starmer’s Labour loyally does the bidding of the capitalist class on different issues.
The honouring of Tony Blair with a top-level knighthood, enthusiastically supported by Starmer, was one little indication of the capitalist state’s enthusiasm for a return to New Labour. That more than a million people have so far demanded he be stripped of it is an indication of how millions of people remember the imperialist warmongering of Blairism. Nonetheless, that does not mean that Starmer’s ‘New Blairism’ cannot make electoral gains. Contrary to the Blairite mythology, New Labour won the 1997 election not as a result of its pro-capitalist policies, but despite them. It was the accumulated hatred of the Tories, and the effects of the 1992 economic recession, which thrust Blair into power. The same could happen to Starmer’s Labour. Inevitably, if a pro-capitalist Labour leadership manages to win the next general election, whether Starmer or his successor, it would create some hopes that the new government would act in the interests of the working class. Such hopes would be even more ephemeral and shattered more quickly than last time round, however, due to the intractable crisis of British capitalism and, additionally, the hopes raised by Corbynism, particularly among young people and in the trade unions. Any government acting in the interests of the capitalist class would very quickly have to carry out anti-working class measures. As we have said previously, coming to power under pro-capitalist leadership would tend to speed up the destruction of Labour, raising the prospect of it becoming – like PASOK in Greece or the PS in France – an ‘ex’-party.
The consolidation of Starmer’s pro-capitalist leadership of Labour poses the need for a new mass workers’ party extremely sharply. In the absence of such a party, as anger with both major capitalist parties deepens, there is also the danger of right-populist and even far-right forces making electoral gains. In the period straight after Corbyn’s defeat many other forces on the left were demoralised and disorientated. We have been virtually alone in raising the need to fight for independent working-class political representation. However, the first indications of that changing have begun to emerge, albeit as yet in an extremely limited way. Unfortunately, there is as yet no other force fighting for a mass workers’ party. Nonetheless, the pressure of events is having an effect. In the North West, in addition to the founding of the local Beacon grouping, a number of councillors have resigned from Labour over its rightward shift, and are putting a partial anti-cuts position. There are handfuls of others moving in the same direction in other parts of the country.
In London it is possible that Jeremy Corbyn will contest his Islington North constituency as an independent, although he has up until now not said so publicly, never mind begun to use his position to build support for a broader stand. If he does so it is possible it could still have a significant effect, despite his invisibility through much of the pandemic. The Daily Telegraph has reported discussions on his Peace and Justice Project being launched as a party, but also that many of the few remaining left Labour MPs, including Diane Abbott and John McDonnell, are urging him not to do so because it could dent “Sir Keir Starmer’s prospects of winning the next general election”. If accurate, this would be no surprise. We have to vociferously argue the case that a new mass workers’ party, even if it only initially had a relatively small number of MPs, could significantly strengthen the struggles of the working class, including by giving them a voice in parliament and council chambers. The alternative is to accept ‘Tweedledum and Tweedledee’ politics, with an endless choice between different brands of capitalist politicians.
Although they are at an early stage, by far the most significant developments on working-class political representation are taking place in the trade unions, including Labour’s largest affiliate, Unite. Looking on the surface, Sharon Graham’s approach to political representation might not seem to represent a step forward. Unite remains affiliated to the Labour Party, and Steve Turner who, as a general secretary candidate, argued for a cosy relationship with Starmer, is the union’s political officer. However, that is very far from the whole story. Sharon Graham has linked her militant industrial stand to the need for ‘workers’ politics’, and as general secretary has publicly attacked Labour councils that attack Unite members’ pay and conditions, and stated that Unite will only back candidates that stand in the interests of their members. In addition, the decision of last year’s Unite conference, resulting from a motion instigated by our party, to call on Labour councils to set “no cuts, needs-based budgets”, poses sharply what Unite members should do in this May’s local elections when faced with the prospect of voting for pro-cuts Labour candidates. The idea that trade unionists should stand in elections on a pro-working class anti-cuts programme is lodged in the situation. This applies not only in Unite but across the trade union movement. Obviously, the relatively small Bakers’ union (BFAWU) has gone furthest, disaffiliating from Labour but making clear that they were not turning away from politics. As they take further steps they can act as an important catalyst for other trade unionists.
In the absence, as yet, of decisive steps towards a new party being taken by any section of the workers’ movement, the immediate period is likely to include all kinds of different half-steps in the right direction, missteps, and retreats, as the remnants of Corbynism search for a way forward. However, our party, and the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition could be, more than at any time in its existence, a very effective lever to fight for steps towards a new mass workers’ party. Nothing is guaranteed. The 2020 decision by the RMT NEC – the trade union currently affiliated to TUSC – to support our party’s proposal that TUSC should again contest elections, was not unanimous. Undoubtedly there are forces in the union who would rather disaffiliate from TUSC. However, those that previously argued for the RMT to look to Labour are increasingly unable to put that forward given Starmer and Sadiq Khan’s record. History is pushing in the direction of the workers’ movement standing its own candidates in elections and TUSC is an important lever to push that process forward.
TUSC’s federal ‘umbrella’ approach would enable the different disparate forces starting to move into the electoral field to come together under a clear anti-cuts programme, while maintaining their own banners and programme. We have to have a skilful approach, making clear that the TUSC banner does not belong to the Socialist Party or any of its other components, but is available as a tool for any group of workers who want to fight on the electoral field. The fact that the BFAWU executive has already agreed to officially support any of its members that stand under the TUSC banner is a small indication of the potential that exists. At the same time, our candidates standing under the TUSC banner have to ensure we make full use of the freedoms TUSC offers to others: putting the Socialist Party programme, raising our name and banner high, and patiently attempting to convince those we are working alongside of our ideas and approach.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the pandemic has been an important test for our party. To have come through this challenging situation intact is in itself an achievement, and puts us in a very good situation for the much greater opportunities ahead. Other organisations who claim to be Marxist, have, virtually without exception, moved in an opportunist direction, are weakened and disorientated by the whole era, which has been intensified as a result of the defeat of Corbynism and the travails of the pandemic. By contrast, our theoretical and political clarity and orientation to the working class has enabled us to navigate skilfully a complex situation, at each stage raising a programme to point a way forward.
We are now going into a period of growing objective opportunities. The Covid crisis and its aftermath have shaken up and disordered every part of society, including the outlook of the working class and young people. The growing anti-capitalist consciousness which had already been developing in the wake of the Great Recession has been accelerated by experience of the pandemic. All of this will be enormously intensified by capitalist instability, impoverishment of the working class and, above all, the mass struggles ahead.
Continue to The consequences of the Ukraine conflict for Britain
