Starmer's reshuffle, following the resignation of his irksome Deputy, Angela Rayner, has been described by his followers, and sections of the sensationalist media as “bold”. Really!? Just look at the crew of characters before and after, and it is almost identical. The only change is that they have been given different labels of the jobs they are supposed to do. Its like a pantomime in which the three ugly sisters are played by the same actors, but between scenes they simply switch costumes. All the time, the audience has been leaving the theatre.
All of the ministers in Starmer's Blue Labour government were irredeemable careerists who, like Starmer himself, would say anything, including the diametric opposite of what they said yesterday, if they thought it enhanced their careers. Many are former Blair-rights, who 20 years ago, were enthusiastic about Blair's conservative-social-democracy, and its support for the EU, but, today, are unashamed in their jingoism and Brexitism. The same characters are in place, today, as they were last week, just in different roles, in which to pursue their careers, and to do so by supporting the same reactionary nationalist policies.
Does anyone believe that the deplorable Lammy will be any less deplorable, as Deputy PM and Justice Secretary, than he was as Foreign Secretary, where he pursued that policy of supporting and enhancing the war crimes and genocide against Palestinians, as well as sucking up to the deplorable Trump? Can anyone see any significant qualitative difference between these “deplorables” than those that Hilary Clinton so described, when referring to Trump, and his supporters? Does anyone believe that the deplorable Cooper will be any less deplorable as Foreign Secretary, than she was as Home Secretary, where she, also, supported and facilitated the genocide and war crimes against Palestinians, and backed that up with her ridiculous proscription of Palestine Action, for protesting that genocide, as well as with her thoroughly racist attacks on immigrants and refugees?
No, no matter how much the reactionary backers of Blue Labour, or the sensationalist media try to spin it, there was nothing “bold” in any of this ridiculous reshuffle. Even some of the walk-on characters on the stage, who seemed to have been asked to permanently walk-off, like former Scottish Secretary Ian Murray, were asked to come back for another minor role, in the following days, as, also, with Liz Kendall. The only permanent removal was Rayner herself, and, of course, the sensationalist media have been keen to emphasise the significance of that, given Rayner's supposed “left” credentials, and potential to be a future Leadership challenger.
But, there never was anything “Left” about Rayner, even in relative terms, compared to just how “Right”, the reactionary Blue Labour under Starmer is. Confusing the fact that Rayner, unlike the lawyers and other middle-class, careerist politicians of Blue Labour, came from a working-class background, and was a trade union, lay official, with being “Left”, is typical of the sloppy, and lazy way of thinking of the media. Even before taking on the role of Deputy PM, Rayner never used her position as Deputy Leader to challenge the reactionary ideology of Blue Labour that makes even Blair-Right, and even mainstream Conservative social-democracy look relatively progressive. It indicated that Rayner was happy to go along for the ride, just like all the other careerists. Nor was there anything Left about the known politics of Rayner before becoming Deputy Leader. So its not as though this was some Left politician, who just got sucked into the system, and the web of careerism.
Had Rayner, actually, been in any way “Left”, she would have used her position to openly attack the reactionary, nationalist ideology of Blue Labour and of its Leader, Starmer, in the same way, but from the opposite direction, that Tom Watson did in relation to Corbyn. Rayner would have challenged Starmer to sack her for such political opposition, not for being drawn into another round of parliamentary sleaze. But, none of that happened, and even at the level of trades union politics, Rayner couldn't even offer support to her fellow union members to an extent that UNITE expelled her in relation to her position in relation to the Birmingham bin strike, where workers are facing losing around a quarter of their current wages.
As I wrote the other day, if the actual parliamentary “Left”, abysmal in itself, has any residual significance, then, it, along with the trades unions would ensure that John McDonnell is on the ballot for Deputy Leader, and that he is elected to that position, in much the same way that Corbyn won the Leadership in 2015, by a landslide. On the one hand, that would be a rallying cry like no other for the mounting opposition, to press on and kick Starmer and his reactionary nationalists out, and to build the opposition to Blue Labour's invitation to their US figurehead Trump for another state visit.
In the next few weeks, we will see whether that parliamentary Left and the trades unions are irredeemably lost, paralysed like startled hares in the the headlights of the oncoming reaction, and whether all focus must now be on building a real, fighting opposition, within the ranks of the near 1 million who have signed up to Your Party.
No comments:
Post a Comment