I am in no sense an expert, but there have already been many comparisons drawn between the new British election and our American candidates for 2016… most of them undoubtedly premature and/or wrongheaded. In hope of somewhat illuminating our ignorance, here’s British expat Anthony Lane, in the New Yorker, on the election of Jeremy Corbyn as the head of the Labour Party:
… How you regard this singular occurrence depends on your point of view. If you cleave to the idealistic left, and believe that Labour has strayed for too long from the path of righteousness, you will treat the ascent of Corbyn to the top job—he is now the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition, in Parliament—as the advent of a Messiah. (That was certainly the tone of the adulation that Corbyn received on Saturday afternoon, in Parliament Square, when, in his first deed as leader, he addressed a large rally that was urging the Government to welcome refugees who are fleeing war in Syria, and elsewhere, and arriving in ever greater numbers at the borders of Europe.) If you are someone who worked for Tony Blair, when he was the party leader, you will lie down in a dark room, press your fingers to your temples, and wonder if your life’s work just got thrown out with the trash. And, if you are a member of the Conservative Party, currently governing with a healthy majority, you will solemnly pour a glass of champagne and then, midway through your first sip, start laughing so hard that bubbles come out of your nose.
Our story begins on May 8th, when the Tories, contrary to all predictions and polls, awoke to discover that they had won an outright majority at the general election. The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, resigned forthwith. An interim boss took his place, while the contest to find his successor got underway. Three candidates emerged: Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, and Liz Kendall. All of them were personable, well-drilled, and hovering ideologically around the center of Labour politics, with Burnham tilting slightly to the left and Kendall to the right. All three had been Shadow Ministers. (This means that, while your party is out of power, you “shadow” your opposite number in government, challenging his or her policies in the House of Commons and constructing better ones of your own. In so doing, you prepare for the day when, after your party wins an election, you step into the full glare of ministerial office.)
And then, unexpectedly, a fourth contender arose. His name was Jeremy Corbyn, and he was a last-minute candidate. That is no exaggeration. Anybody wishing to enter the contest for the leadership had to be nominated, with the support of thirty-five Labour Members of Parliament, by noon on June 15th; with hours to go before the deadline, Corbyn was still short of that figure, and it was not until 11:59 A.M., apparently, that the final nomination for him was registered. What movie director, making “The Corbyn Supremacy,” years from now, will be able to resist a closeup of that second hand, and its deafening tick?
One wonders how funny that film will turn out to be. The scenes set in 2015, for sure, will be tinged with irresistible comedy. We will see the faces of the actors playing Burnham, Cooper, and Kendall as word begins to filter through, from the campaign trail, that they are no longer in a three-horse race; that the hobbling outsider, far from being an also-ran, is right on their hooves. Even more aghast will be the expressions of the Corbyn nominators. It is now clear that some of them—sane, experienced politicians—encouraged him to enter the fray not because they shared his beliefs, or even because they were backing him in the leadership contest, but because they felt, in their wisdom, that the race would benefit from a broader range of candidates. The other three were on the bland side; why not, you know, toss a maverick into the mix? Who on Earth could object to a more vigorous debate? To which the only response is: be very, very careful what you wish for.
Jeremy Corbyn is sixty-six. He has been married three times. “He’s a genuinely nice guy,” according to his first wife. “The problem is that his politics are to the exclusion of other kinds of human activities.” There is a cruel caricature, hard to erase from the popular imagination, that depicts the archetypical resident of the British far left: a bearded, bicycle-riding, teetotal vegetarian from Islington, in north London. The image is lazy and unjust; in Corbyn’s case, unfortunately, it also happens to be true. Since 1983, he has been the Member of Parliament for Islington North. He owns no car. He was a member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the Stop the War coalition against the invasion of Iraq. His natural weapons are the banner, the bullhorn, and the protest march. He has never been a Minister, or a Shadow Minister. What he has been, persistently, is a pain in the neck, or, at any rate, a thorn in the side. More than five hundred times, in his parliamentary career, he has defied the Whip; in other words, he has ignored the advice of the party Whips—a thrillingly British term for the enforcers who, in a House of Commons debate, cajole and command M.P.s to vote in line with the leadership. Corbyn’s reputation as a rebel has been honestly earned, over the long haul, but it now presents him with a problem; how exactly, in his new capacity, can he expect those who serve beneath him to obey the touch of the Whip? How do you square the example of your own conscience with the need for party order, without which, in opposition, you cannot hope to hold the government to account?
This conundrum may be all the more acute for Corbyn, because few of his M.P.s want him as their commander-in-chief. They did not choose him. He was chosen under a new set of Labour Party rules, which, like many things devised in the interests of fairness, have concluded in a splendid fiasco. You might think that, since M.P.s are elected by the populace, they could—or logically should—be trusted to appoint their own overlord. Not so. There was a time when the trades unions, fettered by history and loyalty to Labour, wielded great influence in the matter of its leader; but that age has faded. Instead, with a bracing simplicity, every paid-up member of the Party now has a vote. The payment is three pounds (about four dollars and sixty cents). For that trifling sum, you get to sway the direction of Labour’s future, and, if enough of you sign up—many minds with but a single thought—the outcome will be anything but a trifle. That is what transpired in 2015: the Corbynistas ran amok. They swarmed to their man. Corbynmania was born.
In the end, he won the leadership with embarrassing ease. The rubric demands that only by gaining fifty per cent of the votes can a contestant win on the first round; otherwise, further rounds will ensue, with the weaker candidates dropping gradually away. Corbyn took almost sixty per cent, more than his three rivals put together…
schrodinger's cat
The pendulum has swung from the neoliberalism of Thatcher and Reagan.
justawriter
Yes sadly, even if he leads Labour to victory in the 2020 elections, I can easily see the British versions of Manchin, Lieberman, Heitkamp (mine own Senator, again – sadly) and Wasserman-Schulz working diligently to embarrass, disarm and remove him before he separate the party from its corporate sugar daddies.
sharl
British political twitter has been in some kinda melt-down mode over this whenever I’ve looked at it.
Things are gonna be interesting…
Culture of Truth
Corbyn is Sanders! Or Trump! Look I’m a pundit, and I’m lazy. or drunk. Or possibly both.
redshirt
Fuck Thatcher.
Cpl. Cam
Why, oh why didn’t labor elect another milquetoast Tory-lite to be their leader again? That’s been working out soooo well for them? Anthony Lane sounds like a tool…
Mike J
@Culture of Truth: Did Sanders ever join a “peace” group that called for the death of American soldiers?
redshirt
@efgoldman: Metaphorically of course!
Amir Khalid
Corbyn has a well-wisher — Keef from the Stones.
Omnes Omnibus
@sharl: Yes. I’ve seen the same. One of the complaints it that Corbyn’s new shadow cabinet is devoid of women. Also, to me, the inclusion of Charlie Falconer as shadow justice minister is bizarre given his Blairite background.
Marc
This looks to be closer to McGovern or Goldwater than it does to something that is going to go well.
Rex Everything
Yeah, I just can’t help but think we had this fucking jerkoff in the White House 10 years ago, with a neocon Prime Minister of the Uk, a Nazi pope, a Wall St billionaire NY mayor, etc. Nowadays: Bernie threatening Hillary, a commie Pope, Corbyn, and de Blasio. Things are looking up, for real.
BBA
Bah. We already knew Labour was going to lose in 2020, this just determined how they’re going to lose.
Omnes Omnibus
@Rex Everything: Let’s be fair to Tony Blair. He wasn’t a neocon. He was a squish.
Amir Khalid
Corbyn will have up to five years in opposition in which to lead Labour. Let’s see how he goes. It’s not a great sign for party unity that some of the previous shadow cabinet won’t stay on under him, but if he can find decent alternative shadow ministers Labour might have the generational change it needs.
Mike G
Comparison pics of what Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn and PM David Cameron were up to in the 80s —
https://twitter.com/KushlasBySanaer/status/642657660110827520/photo/1
Omnes Omnibus
@Mike G: Does that really matter? Aren’t who they are more important?
Rex Everything
@Omnes Omnibus: Fuck that asswipe! “Squish” this, Tony Blair (offers soiled toilet paper)!
Linnaeus
@Amir Khalid:
That’s pretty much my view right now. I think it’s a little premature to say, as Corbyn’s detractors are, that Corbyn will be nothing but a disaster as Labour leader. That may end up being the case, but let’s see what he does in the next few years first.
benw
@Culture of Truth: I like your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
@Mike J: Maybe! Look it sort of sounds true, so let’s just say it happened, okay?
Omnes Omnibus
@Rex Everything: Thank you for missing my point. It is so appreciated.
redshirt
I would love to see a Pan-American-Canadian-English-Australian-Indian-All the rest-ian statement on this subject.
Rex Everything
@Omnes Omnibus: Hey, no prob! Thanks for taking me so seriously! It is SO what i intend!
BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: I believe the term, at the time, was Bush’s Poodle.
Omnes Omnibus
@Rex Everything: Don’t worry, I haven’t taken you seriously for years. It’s all good.
amk
@Omnes Omnibus:
Wrong. Many women in his ‘cabinet’. Almost 50/50. Better than previous govts.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34240869
Omnes Omnibus
@BillinGlendaleCA: Yep. But he was Clinton’s poodle too.
Rex Everything
@Omnes Omnibus: Please rank ’em. Best to worst: Dionne Warwick, Stevie Wonder, Gladys Knight, & Elton John??
Uncle Cosmo
Um, Laurie Penny over at the New Statesman would like a word with yinz re Corbin:
Go read the whole thing whydoncha.
Rex Everything
Corbyn: RULZ
Sanders: RULZ
De Blasio: GOOD
Pope Francis: NOT BAD
Blair: HORRIBLE
Bush: HORRIBLE
Bloomberg: FUCK YOU
Pope Benedict: IN THE NECKHOLE
divF
The comparison to Sanders, while superficially tempting, is wrong in (at least) two directions. The first is that Bernie has a voting record and personal history that is much closer to the center of mass of the Democratic party, while Corbyn is farther to the left relative to the Labor party. The second issue is that the consequences for making the wrong Democratic presidential nominee are much more severe than choosing Corbyn to lead Labor, at least at the present time. Cameron is not likely to dismantle NHS, unilaterally go to war with Iran, or start rounding up millions of undocumented immigrants in boxcars, whereas any Republican President might try to do all three. National elections are 4+ years away in the UK, while they are much sooner here. Finally, there is nothing at stake in the UK corresponding to the possible appointment of 2-3 unprincipled ideologues to the USSC.
Omnes Omnibus
@amk: Sorry, I meant front benchers. My bad.
@Rex Everything: Why?
Rex Everything
@Omnes Omnibus: Just as a favor.
Omnes Omnibus
@divF: No, pointing out political differences between countries is wrong. Corbyn’s success augers Bernie’s success. It’s not like there are different countries involved. Golly.
Omnes Omnibus
@Rex Everything: Fine. Wonder, Knight, John, Warwick.
smintheus
How is the New Yorker’s film reviewer a credible expert on politics? He writes as if opposition to the Iraq invasion was and is ridiculous.
Yes, Tories may be laughing over their champagne; yes, they view Corbyn as a joke. And nearly everyone who wasn’t a Tory thought Cameron was a joke. In fact, while Cameron was poncing around in Oxford in the ’80s like a fool, Corbyn was serving as an MP and looking after his constituents’ interests.
Amir Khalid
@Omnes Omnibus:
Corbyn’s success drills holes in Bernie’s success?
Rex Everything
@Omnes Omnibus: I’m sorry but you’re incorrect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTpu6BmE88
benw
@Omnes Omnibus:
Look guys, can we leave out the reasonable analysis and fight about whether Bernie is a racist Socialist or ultra-plus-super-racist unelectable-Socialist the way we are supposed to? Thx.
Amir Khalid
@smintheus:
Beats me.. But Salon also have their movie critic Andrew O’Hehir, who isn’t all that great at critiquing movies to begin with, writing about politics.
p.a.
@Linnaeus: any successes could bring the deserters in line; their aim is, after all, to stay in office. And since shadow Labour has been such a success (me-too-ism totally works, right?), replace the existing shadow ministers. It will be messy, but talent hunts usually are.
amk
@Omnes Omnibus:
well, the front benchers suddenly developing phobia over corbyn cooties is not his fault.
BillinGlendaleCA
@benw: That’s the AMERICAN way!
redshirt
Jesus this is not the way!
Omnes Omnibus
@Amir Khalid: No. Was using augury as a root. Misspelled it. Sorry.
smintheus
@Amir Khalid: Besides, Anthony Lane is Cambridge so he doesn’t really know what Cameron was about at Oxford. Cameron was so obnoxious I still remember him from my grad school days there, even though at the time he was way beneath my radar.
Amir Khalid
@efgoldman:
I think Omnes meant augurs.
divF
@benw:
Balloon Juice: come for the argument, stay for the abuse.
smintheus
@Amir Khalid: Yeah, if you drill down into his words’ hidden meaning.
Omnes Omnibus
@amk: Did I say it was? I simply made a factual observation.
Omnes Omnibus
@smintheus: #humble brag.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Omnes Omnibus: Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here, this is the War Room.
sharl
It will be interesting listening to BBC (World) tap-dancing on this one. IMO they’re already rather conservative on domestic politics (and U.S. politics as well). With continued threats of further cuts to their government support – also loudly championed by some (many? most?) competitors for online business among newspapers/tabloids – network management must be severely stressed, and I suspect unwilling to risk riling up Tory leadership by saying nice things about Corbyn beyond the minimum required to appear impartial.
amk
@Omnes Omnibus:
So did I.
NotMax
Catharsis: The Corbyn Project
/strained obscure movie title reference
benw
@divF: I warned you!
Omnes Omnibus
@amk: Well then, different interpretations of a set of facts. It happens.
Ziggurat
@amk: The complaints are specifically that all the senior posts so far – Deputy, Exchequer, Foreign, Home, Justice – all went to men. You have to go down to Business and Innovation – the place where Brown buried Chuka Umunna – to find a woman. But Defence has not been filled yet, so…
Ziggurat
@efgoldman: Even if he did have a ground game, Super Tuesday is dominated by states with lots of white moderates and voters of color. It’s not fertile territory.
amk
@Ziggurat:
How many women held those posts in previous labor govts?
Omnes Omnibus
@amk: Two. Held shadow posts under Ed.
Ziggurat
@amk: Under Milliband, Harriet Harman was Deputy Leader (and became interim Leader after he stepped down). Yvette Cooper bounced between Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary.
I’d be remiss in not pointing out that he has a female Chief Whip, a powerful position which is going to be more important than usual, given the differences between the leader and his caucus. But her power will be procedural, not substantive.
EDIT: Defence will be interesting, and I imagine it’s hard to fill because Corbyn’s stance on Trident has been controversial in England and Wales (though mainstream in Scotland). He’s probably debating how much he wants to trim there.
NobodySpecial
You know, I hear a lot about how the ballot box was essentially stuffed by people who threw five bucks at the party, and that’s why Corbyn is now a horrifying monster. Are these fainting lilies gonna refund the cash? Nope.
I’m not particularly worried. We won’t know what the election will look like until we see what Britain looks like in 2019.
Omnes Omnibus
@NobodySpecial: That actually makes no sense at all.
Jewish Steel
Like my thrillingly Illinoisan senator, Dick Durbin? Christ, Lane. How long have you lived here?
redshirt
Well, Governor, looks like a lift on the loo.
amk
@Ziggurat:
Fair enough. The dood just got elected which he himself admitted was a bit of a shock. From being a decades long back bench heckler to being thrust into the position of leadership overnight is overwhelming for anyone. I would give him time and pass on this.
Tim J
@divF: best US equivalent I can think of for Corbyn is Dennis Kucinich. Always there voting against bills from the left because they aren’t perfect and never there when the hard work of getting something done was going on.
To put it another way, he’d have voted against Obamacare because it wasn’t single-payer and even if that meant nothing had been passed at all, he would still be proud of having prevented a non-perfect bill from passing.
I agree with almost all of his positions announced so far but I’m really worried about where this is going.
Mandalay
@BBA:
That is ignorant nonsense. In this year’s election Labour announced in advance that they would not form a coalition with the SNP under any circumstances, in part because of the SNP’s position on national defense, and Labour’s position on austerity policies. With Corbyn assuming the leadership that situation has changed; Labour’s policies will now be much more closely aligned with those of the SNP, and the two parties have already become BFF.
As things stand now a Labour-SNP coalition government after the next election is not improbable at all. Labour’s chances under any of Corbyn’s rivals – all milquetoast candidates who stood for little beyond wanting to gain power – would be far worse.
Brachiator
@smintheus:
I guess they figure that he is British, has an opinion and can write an elegantly worded column on the topic.
I don’t quite get this. It’s not the 80s. Why should I care what people thought of Cameron decades ago?
Today, Cameron is Prime Minister. Corbyn is not. And the question is whether Corbyn and his shadow cabinet can have any influence on national policy right now.
A BBC news story claims that these are some of Corbyn’s principles. Do you think this is accurate?
I get the impression that he is respected for at least being a man of principle.
And I guess this connects to Sanders, and even Trump, here in that Corbyn is viewed as an outsider, and a person who is honest about what he thinks.
Ziggurat
@Mandalay: There will be no Labour-SNP coalition if the SNP pushes for another referendum, as both Sturgeon and Salmond have said they will. If they’re smart – and they are – they’ll make that the sine qua non of an alliance, and no Labour leader could acquiesce to that and ever show his face south of Solway Firth ever again. Even last year, when he had nothing to lose, Corbyn stayed neutral.
Brachiator
Wasn’t there an episode of Star Trek called “The Corbyn Maneuver?”
Ziggurat
@Brachiator: Corbomite! Featuring two of the scariest aliens ever:
http://www.startrek.com/legacy_media/images/200306/tos-003-balok-threatens-the-en/320×240.jpg
http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/wallpapers/tos-003-balok-1600.jpg
Amir Khalid
@Brachiator:
I think so. The Corbyn Supremacy is more of a Robert Ludlum title.
Viva BrisVegas
While we are talking of parliamentary democracies, our one here in Oz is undergoing some turmoil.
The Liberal Party (Conservative) is currently in power with Prime Minister Tony Abbott (absolute rightwing arsehole) in charge.
Former Liberal Party Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull (rich mongrel, but socially liberal) has just resigned from Cabinet to formally challenge Abbott for the party leadership. Should he win the party ballot, Turnbull would become PM.
The next election is around 12 months away, and the Liberals have been trailing in the polls since December 2013.
Things are not looking good for Abbott. Which is a pity since he was Labor’s best hope for a win next year.
Expect a huge rush for popcorn anytime now.
Viva BrisVegas
@Ziggurat:
There is no need for a formal coalition, all that Labour would need is a promise from the SNP to vote down any no-confidence motion. Which they would probably do just to keep the Tories away from power.
Brachiator
@Viva BrisVegas:
Wait. This change would happen without an election?
mdblanche
I’d say there’s one important way at least where Corbyn is more like Trump than Sanders: he’s the choice of the grassroots of a party that is in open rebellion against its establishment and want to see said establishment nuked from orbit.
Viva BrisVegas
@Brachiator:
The Prime Minister is voted in by the parliamentary representatives of the ruling party. So it’s a party room ballot.
joel hanes
@Uncle Cosmo:
[ quotes Laurie Penny at The New Statesman]
In my dreams I can write like that.
Viva BrisVegas
@mdblanche:
The establishment is the Tory Party, and it has co-opted the right-wing of the Labour Party. Blair being the prime example.
I think that is the nexus that the Left would like to nuke.
TS
@Viva BrisVegas:
I would reword that as the Liberal Party leader is voted in by party room ballot and said leader then becomes PM (I think through some ritual by the Governor General).
Either way – it’s popcorn time & although no friend of the liberal party or Turnbull, Abbott would be the worst PM of the country during my lifetime & I was born before Menzies became PM. It will be a joy to see him go.
I was even a monarchist until Abbott decided to make a ridiculous award to the husband of QEII and now I want both a republic and a new flag – preferably before I have left the planet.
Atrios
Lane’s not an expat, he lives in cambridge. oddly I know this because I had dinner with him the other night. Seems like a good guy, but has a Very Serious Person view of politics.
sharl
BBC World just had a bit on Corbyn that was more analysis – I guess that’s what one would call it – than bare-bones news. Unlike Corbyn-friendly pieces, which contrast Corbyn with the discredited (by Labour leftists) Blair and his fellow conserva-Labourites, this BBC piece contrasted Corbyn with where they perceive the British public in general to be politically. [To paraphrase one observation in that piece – legitimate or not – ‘Brits these days seem to be more interested in shopping than in politics’.]
Elsewhere in that analysis there was a curiosity about why Labour members would go even more left when the last election was such a disaster for ‘the leftist Labour Party’. I’m guessing Laurie Penny would wish to have a word with them on that.* But having heard plenty of such BBC pieces on politics over the past several years, the stance they took was totally unsurprising.
*Laurie Penny’s New Statesman post was linked upthread by Uncle Cosmo at #30, where he also posted an excerpt, if you don’t have time to read the entire worthwhile article.
lf
To a Brit, that article sounds about as trustworthy as a Mark Halperin piece. Same lazy acceptance of conventional wisdom, same trotting out of ‘Very Serious People’ canards.
For example, he implies that Corbyn only won because of the members who only paid £3 to vote but this is simply not true. The voter breakdown shows he won fair and square with everyone except the MPs (who are as cowed and pathetic as most American democrats).
In my humble opinion, Corbyn won because people saw him as the one person in the race who says what he really believes, not what he thinks people want to hear. He could well win a general election for the same reasons – but every politician and pundit and media organization in Britain will do their best to stop that happening … including this guy from the New Yorker apparently.
Applejinx
@lf: There’s a lot of that about, even in Balloon Juice.
As part of Bernie’s ground game, I’m sitting on my hands this month because near as I can tell this isn’t the time to crank up a huge effort. I’ve already given him hundreds of dollars and I’m poor as dirt, but I learned here on Balloon Juice that it’s not down to just that: get up and go out and work. Did that for Obama, twice.
Once more, with feeling.
We got this: and good for you, Brits. We’re watching.
Skippy-san
@Culture of Truth: And at that you are still smarter than Jonah Goldberg.
Zinsky
Things are changing in Brazil too. Dilma Rouseff may end up getting impeached after all. Dylan comes to mind – “The times they are a’changin'”…
Robert Sneddon
Corbyn is 66 now and he would be 71 when the next election comes around in 2020. It’s unlikely he’ll still be the Labour leader then even assuming he lives that long. Our tendency over the past fifty years or so is to elect Prime Ministers who aren’t eligible for a pension and a bus pass unlike some nations I could mention.
What he can do while he lasts is push the Overton window in British politics a little to the left by giving a voice to the folks who have been steamrollered by the Conservatives and the conservative-with-a-small-c leadership of the Labour Party over the past couple of decades.
Another Holocene Human
@divF:
shipping container libel! (as they say on Wonkette). Seriously, do they even manufacture boxcars any more? And being Republicans they’ll send that on truck ground freight to burn more fossil fuels.
Another Holocene Human
This thread is confusing me. Don’t we have a shitmuffin Senator from Texas called Corbyn?
Oh, it’s Cornyn.
Whew.
Another Holocene Human
@Jewish Steel:
I’d buy the notion they invented the term, but, yeah, I found that rather jarring. Maybe English speakers in other countries* find it servicey? His definition sounds precisely like American party whips.
*-and not Commonwealth countries who presumably copied their governance system very closely
And in our country the term “whip” is somewhat less charming. Madison Avenue likes it for “lite” food products marketed to women, though.
Where there’s a whip there’s a way.
Keith G
Maybe it is because of the way the internet magnifies older media narratives, but it sure seems that we’ve gotten to a place where all political events have become a do-or-die, elimination forever, contest.
Corbyn represents important political ideas that have been stifled for far too long. He may not ever have a chance to lead his country as prime minister, but what he does have the chance to do is to allow the public to further explore the important ideas he represents and to inspire other similar advocates to step forward and add their voices forcefully to the conversation.
Sometimes the payoffs to events such as this are a bit further down the road.
Another Holocene Human
@Viva BrisVegas: Oh, y’all got rid of the superfluous “u” in labor as well?
Looking at you, Canadians.
Another Holocene Human
@mdblanche:
Very astute. Blairite Labour has a long history of unabashed failure that the base is thoroughly sick of. Meanwhile, the crazies that make up the Republican base couldn’t be angrier at their leadership for “failure”. (They don’t know what they want, and they keep moving the goalposts, or, well, Rush and Hannity move them, they just parrot what they’re told.) Ultimately, their pols failed to defeat That One so the crazy is dialed to 11 now.
EconWatcher
Far left in Britain means actually far left, as in, this guy is pretty much a Trotskyist. You can’t compare him to anyone in US politics, because no one that far left could ever be elected to the national legislature. Bernie Sanders may use the “s” word, but he’s milquetoast in comparison.
Another Holocene Human
@Atrios: The Cambridge near Boston or the other Cambridge?
msdc
@justawriter:
Just out of curiosity, were you rooting for Rick Berg to pull that race out?
msdc
@NotMax: Well played, sir.
Cervantes
By asserting that Corbyn’s election is a fiasco, the writer thereby proves that it is a fiasco.
Cervantes
@Omnes Omnibus:
Bizarre complaint. Where did you see it?
bjacques
If Corbyn effects a change in how the party selects candidates and generally behaves as a party, he will have accomplished a lot. Currently it goes like this:
Go to the right schools
Study politics
Make the right friends
Become Special Advisor to a rising star
Get parachuted into a safe district
Get elected, maybe become a front-bencher
Regulate with a light touch
Lose an election to a Conservative
Sit as a nonexecutive director on the board of the industry he/she regulated
Collect an honor
And in Oz, the Mad Monk is OUT! Antonius Abbas fugit. Deus vult.
Atrios
@Another Holocene Human: UK cambridge. he writes for the new yorker but he mostly lives in england
Barry
@sharl: It was pointed out by Krugman that the Labour elites back austerity, and so gave massive political cover to the Tories (IMHO, this also reassured the elites that they’d win no matter who won). Now, the Tories are standing alone on this issue, and the elites are no longer playing ‘heads we win, tails we win’.
Bobby Thomson
@schrodinger’s cat: no, the current PM makes them look like pikers.
Bobby Thomson
@Rex Everything: I think you just proved his point.
Brachiator
@Cervantes: RE: One of the complaints it that Corbyn’s new shadow cabinet is devoid of women.
Lack of women in the leadership positions, all over the UK news.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-blanks-reporter-in-excruciating-noninterview-when-quizzed-about-lack-of-women-in-top-shadow-cabinet-roles-10499447.html
@Viva BrisVegas:
And so, it has happened! Is it upside down, down under?
Rupert Murdoch is disappointed to lose his man. Oh, well.
Could Canada be next for a little election topsy turvy?
Cervantes
@Another Holocene Human:
The other Cambridge is not all that far from the other Boston!
Uncle Cosmo
@Another Holocene Human:
I see these “food products” in shoppers’ carts & I want to scream at them, Do you know what the secret calorie-reducing ingredient is that they’re charging you a premium price for? It’s air, goddamnit! AIR!!!
Amir Khalid
@Another Holocene Human:
The English university town of Cambridge was granted a town charter in the 12th century. So it’s the much newer university town in Massachusetts, renamed in 1638 after the University of Cambridge in the English town, that is the other Cambridge.
Matthew B.
@smintheus:
Oh, he’s never been a credible expert on film either. But he’s got a nice, glib prose style, which seems to be all The New Yorker cares about.
Uncle Cosmo
@Barry: A WSJ article that appeared about the time of Blair’s first government (ca. 1997) reported that someone with far too much time on his hands had noticed that
is an anagram for
Barry
@Mike J: “Did Sanders ever join a “peace” group that called for the death of American soldiers?”
Are you a supporter of any group which diligently works for the needless death of American soldiers?
Note, that would include the GOP and Tea Party.
Sherparick
So Corbyn was right about the Iraq War and austerity and that makes in completely unfit to govern the country according to the Village media in both the U.K. and U.S. Interesting. By the way if, like New Labor, you decide to no longer make the class divide, and how the income and wealth of society are split up along class lines the issue, well, you allow others come up with other explanations along racial, religious, and ethnic lines for the hardships, frustrations, and resentments of life. Hence why lots of former Labor voters voted for SNP, Green, and UK Independence (anti-immigrant) party. The Conservatives won their “healthy majority” with a plurality of under 38% under the British First Past the Pole System. Also, there does not seem to be much acknowledgment of what happen to the Center-Left Liberal Democrats who basically were extinguished as Parliamentary Party in the last election through their insane coalition with the Tories.
The Village loves hippie punching, and New Yorker is a fine example of the art.
Chris
@Linnaeus:
Yeah. I can’t say I’m an expert in British politics either, but that kind of talk reminds me a little too much of how the entire Beltway media had decided by mid-2009 that we were all living in the death throes of Obama’s Failed Presidency.
Cervantes
@Brachiator:
Well, I don’t necessarily believe everything that’s all over the news, but I suppose the following puts the complaint in perspective:
schrodinger's cat
@Bobby Thomson: The status quo is being questioned, you can say that perhaps it is changing too slowly.
The elections of Barack Obama as the President, Bill De Blasio as the mayor of New York and Corbyn’s election as the new head of the Labor Party, point to this. Austerity politics and neoliberal economic theories are being questioned everywhere. It was not too long (pre 2008 crisis) that they were accepted as the Gospel Truth by almost everyone.
boatboy_srq
@Uncle Cosmo: This part is priceless:
It says a good deal that most of the criticism is coming from the folks who lost.
I remember what a PITA for both sides Corbyn was in the 80s (he sometimes made Kinnock look conservative, which took some doing), and can imagine what he’ll be like as Labour lead, but it’s far too early to tell what kind of chance Labour would have with him at the helm.
Momentary
I live in rural Wales. My neighbours variously supported the Greens, Plaid Cymru, and UKIP in the last election. They would never vote Tory and they hate the Blairites. All of them enthusiastically support Jeremy Corbyn. Even the UKIP voter, who says Corbyn talks like a real person about things real people care about.
Brachiator
@Cervantes:
My point was that it was easy to find stories about the issue, and that it was one of the issues noted among the first stories about Corbyn’s rise to power.
I picked one at random that was a top google search result, so that you and others who were curious could do follow up if interested.
And the key issue was not the total number of women in the shadow cabinet, but the perceived lack of women in top spots. Another story noted that Corbyn’s selection of a woman for shadow first secretary of state has additional significance.
And Corbyn now notes that more than half of the shadow cabinet positions have gone to women, a first in history.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-more-women-appointed-to-shadow-cabinet-than-men-for-first-time-10500032.html
And of course, all this has to be adjusted to account for the biases of the various UK media outlets.
Cervantes
@Mike J:
Once again you voice this criticism of Corbyn. Once again I point out the obvious. First, what his organization called for was the following:
And second:
Who do you think put those British soldiers in harm’s way? Was it Corbyn? And whoever it was, should they have done it? Why not excoriate them? Furthermore, do you suppose the Iraqis were planning to meekly accept the invasion — except that Corbyn convinced them not to?
Cervantes
@Brachiator:
Yes, and as you say:
Which was my point — and why I found the original complaint a little bizarre.
Omnes Omnibus
@Cervantes: Why is a bizarre complaint? I’ll note that your question has already been addressed.
Cervantes
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well, when someone’s natural inclination and first act is to begin to rectify a historical wrong, complaining that he isn’t doing it fast enough strikes me as disingenuous at best.
Particularly when the complaints come from those who were part of the problem in the first place.
burnspbesq
@Culture of Truth:
Doubtful, unfortunately. When i look at Corbyn through the lens of 45 years involvement with the Democrats, I don’t see Bernie. I see George McGovern, a genuinely good man who was right on nearly every issue and still managed to lead his party to a crushing defeat. Hopefully i will be proven wrong, but I don’t think i will.
sharl
An interview aired this morning featuring “the father of Corbynomics”, UK accountant Richard Murphy. He sounded like a pretty level-headed guy (though being a radio interview, he could have been throwing firebombs out the window during the taping…dunno).
Here’s a Guardian story that came out on him a few days ago:
If you want to peruse a list of Google search results for [(“Richard Murphy”) AND Corbynomics], click here.
Cervantes
@sharl:
Joe Stiglitz has endorsed Corbyn’s economic plan (such as it is at the moment).
Cervantes
@burnspbesq:
Re Corbyn you may well be right. I wouldn’t bet against it right now.
What interests me, though, is your contrasting him with Sanders. Care to elaborate?
Lurking Canadian
My shorter for the article:
The guy was selected by upwards of 60% of the ballots cast by members of his party. And that proves he shouldn’t be the leader. ‘Cause whose idea was it to let all these proles vote, anyway?
mudslide567
@Culture of Truth: Much more Ralph Nader
WaterGirl
@Lurking Canadian: Clearly not elected by the ‘right’ people who surely know best!
Jewish Steel
@Another Holocene Human: Oh, man. Ralph Bashki, right?That’s an oldie.
Foxhunting, whence comes the term whipper-in, evolved concurrently in the UK and the US in the 18th and 19th century. We have as much claim to it as they do.
NobodySpecial
@Omnes Omnibus: Sure it does. They took the money, but bemoan what the money brought them. Sorry if it wasn’t clear.
Ron Thompson
@justawriter: But in Britain, there are no primaries–the central party office slates candidates for each of the constituencies, so Corbyn and his deputy, Tom Watson, can clean out the Augean stables at party headquarters and get rid of the Liebermans and Manchins in the next election.
Cervantes
@Jewish Steel:
He’s not too observant.
Cervantes
@Omnes Omnibus:
No. I wanted to know specifically where you had seen it.
In any event it’s not that important; I was just curious which sources you personally follow on this topic.
Omnes Omnibus
@Cervantes: I first saw it on Twitter along with links to British news sources.
Bloix
Krugman is good on this:
“[T}he striking thing about the leadership contest was that every candidate other than Mr. Corbyn essentially supported the Conservative government’s austerity policies.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/opinion/paul-krugman-labours-dead-center.html
Also:
“I’ve seen plenty of people call Corbyn names or claim that all of his supporters are lunatics, but I’m not sure that I’ve heard any MPs say: “This humiliating rejection tells us that our own members think we are terrible at our own jobs. Here’s how we plan to be less terrible”.”
http://flyingrodent.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/just-any-kind-of-sign.html
jefft452
@burnspbesq: “George McGovern, a genuinely good man who was right on nearly every issue”
McGovern torpedoed the repeal of Taft-Hartley in committee, so No!
Cervantes
@jefft452:
Good heavens! You know how to hold a grudge!
Sort of.
What committee are you talking about?
Cervantes
@EconWatcher:
You have some basis for this, I suppose.
Davis X. Machina
@CervantesNot exactly a Trot.
Corbyn has an equivocal record on Clause IV — right now, he’s against it — as per Guardian</em> — or not willing to support its reappearance in the Labour Party platform.
So you could tar, or not tar, him with that brush, depending on taste, and the day of the week.
Davis X. Machina
@Jewish Steel: In Lane’s defense, most American voters don’t know what a party whip is — and they’re very important in Westminster.
The explanation is only insulting to people like us who are paying attention, and watched the UK version of House of Cards.
Davis X. Machina
@Ron Thompson: There’s the risk of pushback from constituency committees, not in every constituency. to be sure, but in a non-trivial number of them. Not all Labour seats are held by Millbank-tendency drones.
Davis X. Machina
@Cervantes:
Careful, Joe Stiglitz has been consulting with Hillary’s people on economics platform issues, so he has either sold out, or conversely Corbyn Doesn’t. Really. Mean. It.
Cervantes
@Davis X. Machina:
Regardless, Stiglitz has endorsed Corbyn’s plan.
Cervantes
@Davis X. Machina:
Not even close, you’re right.
If we’re talking about the fracas resulting from his recent interview with the Independent, then I’d say his position there is more carefully qualified than many of his paraphrasers see or are willing to admit.
A spokesman recently tried to clarify:
The Nameless One
@Viva BrisVegas: @TS: I think I was the only one doing the Snoopy dance at work today.
And received another lesson about not getting into a discussion about politics with the boss when we’re on opposite sides of the political spectrum. (I like my boss.)
Cervantes
@Uncle Cosmo:
Capital idea.
Paul in KY
Power to the people!! Wish the best for Mr. Corbyn.