In the early 1960s a satirical combo called the Chad Mitchell Trio sang of the anti-communist paranoia of the John Birch Society (a forerunner of today’s Tea Party, as those among you who study the history of demagogic delusion will know). The reds were so ubiquitous that:
There’s no one left
but thee and we,
(and we’re not sure of thee).
You cannot trust your neighbour
Or even next of kin
If mommy is a commie,
then you have to turn her in.
Move from the far right to far left – a trip so short it’s like nipping to the shops – and you find that critical coverage of Corbyn in the Guardian produces threats to cancel subscriptions; that the ludicrously named Left Unity site accuses Liz Kendall of being an infiltrator; and that the Communication Workers Union says Blairites are a virus, which only Jeremy Corbyn can exterminate.
Labour MPs, who have fought the Tories all their lives, are Tories. Labour members voting for anyone but Corbyn are Tories. Believers in universal human rights, revolted by Corbyn’s support for the Iranian and Venezuelan regimes, are Tories. Everyone’s a Tory (except for ‘thee and we’).
I will not dwell on the easy point that, if Labour chooses Corbyn, many voters will indeed become Tories, but look at the one place where harsh words should be heard, indeed must be heard, but are never heard.
The Labour hustings are so soporific I am surprised the audience does not bring camp beds. Candidates treat each other with exaggerated courtesy. They do not bring up painful subjects or expose their opponents to rigorous questioning. The gentility is such that when Labour’s shadow chancellor Chris Leslie made a modest critique of Corbyn’s economic policy this morning, it was a major story.
If you think I am merely lamenting the failure to challenge Corbyn’s cold-blooded and long-standing indulgence of fetid regimes, consider the behaviour of the Blairite right. It is not just that one struggles to find a corrupt government on the planet that has not paid for the services of ‘the master’. Tessa Jowell, the favourite for Labour’s London mayoral nomination, is not so different from Corbyn. Her family fortune was built on her husband’s dealings with that sleek sleaze ball Silvio Berlusconi. I promise you that just as journalists will hammer away at Corbyn’s record if he becomes Labour’s candidate for prime minister so we will lay into Jowell if she wins the London mayoral nomination.
You got a taste of what will come when the Mail on Sunday revealed that her husband ‘has still not paid a €250,000 penalty’ from an Italian court for ‘bringing the office of prime minister into disrepute’. It went on to report that Jowell’s partner has been linked to a Swiss aristocrat called Baron Filippo Dollfus von Volkesberg – a name which would embarrass a Bond villain – in connection with the dumping of toxic waste.
If Jowell gets the Labour nomination, the questions shouted at Hillary Clinton will be shouted at her: Where’s your money come from?
In the London Labour hustings, none of her rivals asked it. True, during a debate at the Guardian building, a member of the audience had the sheer bloody nerve to raise the tricky question of tax-dodging Italian media moguls, but none of Jowell’s rivals noticed the cue.
The excessive politeness is in part the result of the age of the frontrunners. Jowell is 67 and Corbyn is 66. Attacking them feels like attacking your gran. One Labour adviser told me that the image of strong, fit candidates jabbing their fingers at the elderly rivals was perhaps not the best election propaganda.
But there is more at play than nervousness at highlighting the frailty of the elderly. Labour pretends to be a happy family filled with brothers and sisters who love each other. They may disagree from time to time, as all families do, but they keep their disputes civil and, above all, private. The truth that, if Labour were a family, the parents would be at the divorce court and the kids would be in care, is never allowed to intrude.
The failure to admit it, and the unwillingness to have robust arguments, defeats the point of a primary contest. In the US, rivals for the Democratic and Republican nominations tear into each others’ records. It may look ugly. But at least the process allows supporters to see if candidates can answer hard questions before they decide whether to present them to the wider electorate. By contrast, Labour doesn’t test candidates, it cossets them.
It is as if the party believes no one else will have points to raise once the selection processes are over. For this reason, as for so many other reasons, Labour’s continuing membership of the reality based community looks ever-more precarious.
Comments