Make Brexit Work???

Keir Starmer appeared on Andrew Marr, and again put forward the ludicrous position of wanting to "Make Brexit Work".  No wonder that despite the catastrophes of lockdowns, Brexit shortages, rising inflation, and a Tory government again mired in a slurry of sleaze, and despite Johnson's poll rating having tanked, Labour is still trailing way behind them in the polls.  Starmer is useless, and the rest of the PLP is no better.

Starmer argued that the slogan "Get Brexit Done" was all very well, but the task was to "Make Brexit Work".  That is nonsense.  It is the same kind of "have cake and eat it nonsense" that was propounded by Johnson and Corbyn in 2019, and that Johnson continues to purvey.  It is what Johnson's attempt to scrap the Northern Ireland Protocol, and other elements of his own Withdrawal Agreement is about, continuing the myth that the EU needs Britain more than Britain needs the EU.  It perpetuates the myth that Britain can somehow have all the benefits of EU membership, but with none of the costs or obligations.  In short, it is a lie.

The reality is, of course, the opposite of what Johnson and Starmer are claiming.  There was no better deal available for Britain outside the EU, and so there is no potential now to negotiate something better.  Johnson had to agree to the Northern Ireland Protocol, indeed it was his proposal, because he had already rejected the less onerous solution, agreed by Theresa May, of remaining within the constraints of the EU Single Market and Customs Union.  That solution, avoided both a border down the Irish Sea, and on the island of Ireland.

Of course, the Brexiters rejected it, because, for them it was not Brexit.  And, they had a point.  If you are going to remain inside the Single Market and Customs Union, then why would you not also want to be able to have a set at the table of the political institutions that set the rules and regulations for them?  It would be crazy not to do so.  But, then that means staying both inside the single market and customs union, and in the EU's political institutions, including the ECJ.  In other words, it means rejecting Brexit, and remaining in the EU!

But, for all of the bluster about Getting Brexit Done, they have ended up in an even worse position.  Firstly, they had to propose the solution of the Northern Ireland Protocol that effectively separates Northern Ireland from Britain.  Despite Johnson and Frost's claims, that they originally claimed was their marvellous deal, it inevitably meant that goods going to and from Britain to Northern Ireland would be subject to checks, to ensure that they complied with EU regulations.  That also then inevitably meant that a dynamic would be created in which trade between Northern Ireland and Britain became problematic, and in which Northern Ireland would turn increasingly to the Republic and the EU as its trading partner.  Politically, that was always going to cause anger amongst Unionists, politicians, even if the protestant community in Northern Ireland have themselves been shown to be rather sanguine about the affair, as they turn increasingly away from the Unionist parties.

And, trade between Britain and the EU as a whole has also inevitably suffered.  large swathes of EU business has decided its just too much hassle to trade with Britain, and vice versa.  UK businesses have responded by shifting operations to the EU, to avoid those problems.  The UK fishing industry has been close to wiped out, because in search of excluding EU fishing fleets from UK waters, they failed to take into account that most of their own markets for fish was in the EU, and the new trade restrictions caused by Brexit, made accessing those markets much, much harder and expensive.

Rather than gaining control over its borders, Britain is forced to now let goods into the country largely unchecked, because to do the necessary checks would not only require employing vast new armies of border control and customs staff, but would also cause an even greater backlog at the ports, and even greater shortages and delays than those already being suffered.  Even in terms of the Holy Grail of the Brexiters, control of immigration, they have failed, because as a massive shortage of workers in one industry after another has caused shortages threatening to grind the country to a halt, the government has been led to panic measures to try to get foreign workers to flood in to save its bacon, by filling all of these various jobs.  Not surprisingly, having been told to piss off, by the government, and by half the British population, its no wonder that few foreign workers are, in fact, lining up to get the country out of the shit, imposed by its hostile Brexit environment.

Are there things that could be done to improve the situation?  Undoubtedly.  As far as the Northern Ireland Protocol is concerned, for example, a Phyto-sanitary  agreement with the EU, could reduce some of the required checks.  Indeed, on a whole range of issues, such side deals are being negotiated, so that, in reality, the façade of Brexit hides the fact that its like ground under which there is a series of caverns and voids, into which the whole edifice is constantly in danger of collapsing.  That will inevitably be the fate of Brexit in the end, the whole edifice will collapse under the weight of its own contradictions.

All of these side deals simply reflect a slow motion acceptance of the fact that Britain is tied inextricably to the EU, and that the most sensible arrangement is that provided by a single market and customs union, a single set of rules and regulations, providing a level playing field for all capital operating inside it, and indeed, logically, a single currency, fiscal regime and so on, i.e. all of the normal characteristics of a state.  The piecemeal achievement of that, by side deals, only delays the inevitable, and increases the costs incurred in the meantime.  At a certain point, the number of such side deals will be seen as effectively just replicating membership of the single market and customs union, but again without any seat in the political institutions.  America fought its revolution against Britain, and to overthrow the monarchy of George III, on the basis of the slogan "No taxation without representation".  Having learned that in today global economy, no solution can be found in the fallacy of Brexit, Britons will quickly learn that there is none of the advantages they were promised of being outside the EU, especially when they realise that they continue to be bound by its rules, but without political representation within it.

So, if Starmer's mantra means anything, it can only mean negotiating for Britain to re-join the Single Market and Customs Union.  But, why then not say that openly, and argue to convince people of that requirement?  Starmer does not do so, because he is a populist, captured by the populists of Blue Labour, who want to cling to the past, in search of the votes of reactionary, a quest that will inevitably lead to labour losing the support of the young, progressive working class that now provides its core support, but which could easily desert it, either to other parties, to single issue campaigns, or simply to apathy.  If you want to know why despite having a once in a lifetime opportunity, Labour is languishing way behind the Tories, that is it.  It is not winning the support of reactionaries, but it is bleeding the support of its core young, progressive, working-class voters.

The truth is that those core working-class voters look at Starmer, and see nothing that attracts them.  He has ditched the modestly progressive social-democratic elements of Corbyn's agenda, and has also become a bigger nationalist and Brexiter than Corbyn ever was.  At each step, Starmer has failed to mount any kind of principled opposition to Johnson and the Tories.  Its reported that Labour is not even going to stand a candidate against the Tories in the by-election to replace Owen Patterson!

Starmer must be the worst Leader that Labour has ever had, and the rest of the PLP are no better, except for the odd exception.  Simply replacing Starer, therefore, is not the answer.  At the moment, it could simply open the door to someone even worse.  The answer certainly is not to run away from the fight, into another sectarian venture of building some LP Mk II.  The tasks is to rebuild from the grassroots upwards.  That starts with turning the branches and CLPs outwards to local community and industrial struggles, linking up with trades unions and community groups involved in those struggles, and bringing their political struggles into the party.  It means linking CLPs with local Trades Councils/TUC's, and turning them into organs of struggle, and democratic debate and decision making.

We need to make the party much bigger, by such means, and we need to also make the unions and other bodies much more democratic, as well as turning them away from their own inward looking, single agendas into a recognition that only general political solutions provide a viable way forward.  The Labour Right could never defeat the combination of a radical grassroots and trades union movement, because they are tiny by comparison, and exert influence only via bureaucratic means of control of party organs, and machinery, and support from some of the trades union bureaucracy.

But, that will also require that thee general political solutions are also constructed as an agenda that the Left can fight for within the grassroots, within the trades and other organisations.  It cannot be enough to simply focus on ditching Starmer, or even replacing right-wing careerist MP's, Councillors and so on.  Even at this stage, perhaps two years away from a General Election, we need a Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory, and a platform that can be used to campaign around now, one which rejects the nationalist, populist politics of Starmer and the Labour Right, and which can mobilise the working-class, here and now on practical political issues, as well as forming the basis of a socialist manifesto come the election.  That is the basis, then upon which we can judge parliamentary candidates, select ones up for the task, and from which we can elect the new leadership of the PLP.