Jeremy Corbyn and the double struggle

Cor byn Protecting our Planet

Jeremy Corbyn‘s campaign for the Labour leadership is about doing things differently, about re-discovering the basic Labour values of social and economic justice, but in a way that harnesses the knowledge, commitment and energy of the many, in the changed world of the twenty-first century.

As a Labour affiliate (via the Socialist Health Association, and a union member prior to retirement) I have voted, for him, a decent man and a good communicator, who could lead the majority in both seeing the need to reject,and finally dispensing with the disastrous 35 year history of neoliberalism here in the UK and beyond.

His economic framework (Investment, growth and tax justice: Corbyn outlines economic vision & fairer taxes for Britain 2020) includes a lot to agree with, not least its emphasis on tax justice and the real economy. It is about a re-ordering of priorities, putting people and planet first, rather than profits. Yet at heart it is much the same as other left Keynesian variants. It owes a lot to Richard Murphy and others who I certainly respect, but who seem to assume that using mechanisms like Green Quantitative Easing (or Corbyn’s similar “People’s QE”) it is possible to support the good things (warmer homes, more jobs, cleaner energy…) without the multiplier boosting general consumption and hence the material throughput that inexorably means more emissions (maybe 50% outside the UK). Listen to Richard at Corbyn’s Nottingham rally (37 minutes in), for the repetition of the growth mantra.

The challenge is to articulate credible managed degrowth policies (see the work of people like Tim Jackson, Peter Victor, Giorgos Kallis, Molly Scot Cato, Kate Raworth and Dan O’Neil) that reduce the size of the economy to a sustainable level while guaranteeing decent living standards – it really makes for a focus on equality and community well-being.  It’s a double struggle, against austerity/neoliberalism and for a society and economy that is ecologically viable.

The Corbyn environment plan is excellent: it could have been written by the Green Party. But the contradictions with what’s being said elsewhere are a bit concerning. In addition to Corbyn’s suggestion of re-opening coal mines (with unproven Carbon Capture and Storage) there is a totally uncritical growthism, for instance in his plan for the North.

Now, the totally unexpected phenomenon of Corbyn’s campaign and the broad-based support for it means that there is inevitably a bit of a cobbling together of policies and proposals. What distinguishes him and his campaign is its openness: its inclusive and participative style. This means that these ideas and proposals are not a finished programme, but elements to be developed, as the gaps and contradictions are explored and resolved. Yet they do represent different interests too. When push comes to shove which tendencies would win? It would come down to a struggle within the contested ground of policy articulation and implementation. We are in for a double struggle, indeed.

I am grateful to comrades of the New Economy Organisers’ Network for some of the points summarised here.

This entry was posted in economics, politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Jeremy Corbyn and the double struggle

  1. If Corbyn can put together a coherent and inclusive economics case then there is a strong possibility that Labour could challenge the Conservatives in five years time.

  2. judith515 says:

    Thanks for this Mark. I love the clarity and found it really helpful

    I agree with Mike’s comment that implies that the assumption that Corbyn makes the Labour party unelectable may not be true – perhaps it will make it more electable – who knows????


  3. thebeardyguy says:

    I agree with everything you say here, but I can’t help wondering if it has to be a two stage process. I grimmace when I hear Corbyn and his shadow Chancellor talk about growth. But I find myself thinking “one thing at a time”. If this new movement can continue to grow and ultimately the Labour Party can win in 2020, then there is the potential to implement those basic Labour values of social and economic justice, and to implement those environmental policies, and perhaps that then is the time to change the conversation towards de-growth and a steady state economy. Otherwise, do we risk the movement sounding to radical for the electorate. It’s a difficult one because I also feel it would be disingenuous to ignore the flawed thinking and the message needs to get out there. At what cost though? I can’t stand the thought of Osborne becoming PM and holding office for the same length of time as Thatcher. A real possibility as things stand.

Make a constructive comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.