Since Jeremy Corbyn rushed to a massive 22 point lead in the
polls (according to a Labour Party internal poll reviewed by the Mirror) the
right wing media and Blairite contingent within Labour have come out in force
to explain how Corbyn would ‘destroy Labour’s electoral chances.’ His policy
portfolio, bringing back the social democratic ideology which Labour was
founded upon and reversing the party’s slide to the right since 1997 is seen as
unrealistic by his critics and fatal to the political discourse which the
Tories and his leadership opponents have adhered to.
Criticism of Corbyn has focussed upon two arguments. The
first is that his policies will not work; the second that he will not be
electable as leader in 2020. Concerns about his electability raised by his
opponents centre around his refusal to follow the Conservative agenda on policy
and accept the transition to the right which political discourse has taken
since Blair.
The first argument, suggesting that his policies will not
work, is an argument which must be tested relative to the functionality of the alternatives
which his opponents propose. The suggestion for example that removing benefit
caps and ensuring minimum provision for the poor, unemployed or ill will damage
the economy too greatly to be seen as a valuable option presupposes that the 60
confirmed deaths due to Iain Duncan Smith’s reform of the welfare state are an
acceptable cost against the benefit of economic growth. It supposes that the rapid
growth of food bank dependence (41,000 people in 2010 to upwards of 1 million
in 2015) is acceptable wastage from the pseudo capitalist system which both
Corbyn’s Labour opponents and the Tories propose.
Furthermore, the supposition that rail renationalisation
would fail asserts that a system with rising prices and poor service quality;
due to the oligopoly of private providers which has developed since the 1980s
is a functional model – and that Britain could not provide a service which
Germany and Japan do perfectly well, and in the interests of the taxpayer.
Abandonment of Trident is also a sticking point for many,
who believe that a nuclear deterrent is necessary in the modern world
regardless of the moral arguments involved. One must question however, the
logic of an independent missile system which cannot be discharged without USconsent. Particularly when it exists in a country which is so economically and
tactically significant to the US that were they to abandon the system they
would still enjoy the benefits of perpetual nuclear protection from a threat
which continues to exist only in fiction, even were it to become fact.
Evidently, the argument that Corbyn’s policies could or
would not work better than the current system is incredibly flawed. However
this reality does not necessarily win elections and Labour supporters believe
that having their party in power is necessary in order to provide a successful
alternative to the Tories. As such the question of whether Corbyn is electable
in the current climate is a significant one.
This argument can be dissected by understanding how his
policies correlate with public opinion; and by understanding the main
motivators behind which box the public cross on Election Day.
A YouGov study prior to the election found that the public
overwhelmingly support renationalisation, or the continued nationalisation of
hospitals; schools; rail; roads; prisons and the postal service. Crucially the
survey offered the option for respondents to choose the option ‘whichever
(national or private) maintains standards.’ Regardless of this option, the
majority of the British public still want nationalisation for nationalisations
sake. Therefore, far from being unelectable, Corbyn stands as the only Labour
leadership contender with a populist policy on public services and utilities.
In addition to the objective popularity of the policy, Corbyn
is the only candidate who directly opposes Cameron’s programme of NHS
privatisation; increased use of academies and the sell off of Royal Mail. This
is crucial when Labour placed fourth of the six main parties in an Ashcroft poll after the election on conveying genuine values and believable promises in
what they would seek to do if elected. Corbyn offers a chance to put clear
daylight between the two main parties and rediscover an identity which was
clearly absent in the last election and saw rapid growth of other opposition
parties who fared better in the poll.
Nationalisation and a removal of welfare state sanctions
under Corbyn also offer solutions to the three main voter concerns in the last
election – the NHS, job provision and the cost of living. By taking services
under public control, utilities and infrastructure can be returned to the
public good, both providing employment and controlling the cost of living.
Reluctance to act drastically in this way has previously led Labour down the
path of the Tory agenda despite the CLEAR POPULARITY of alternatives which the
party traditionally identified with, to the detriment of the party. With 54% of
the British public taking an anti-austerity stance after the election, this
popularity is likely to grow.
Clearly Corbyn is a positive candidate, but the evidence
shows he is also a functional and electable proposition. A break from the
Westminster consensus would create clear, much needed daylight between Labour
and Conservative and would break the steady slide to the right since Blair. The
degree to which this is realistic can be seen in the furore created by a single
poll, the right are running scared. Ultimately, regardless of the feasibility of
Corbyn, voting against austerity and for equality is simply morally valuable,
but there is no doubt that as well as being morally laudable, he is electorally
significant.
