The LRC went on in 1906 to become the Labour Party standing in elections but, at the time, the Labour Party were in the shadow of the Liberal and Conservative parties. The hardy Scotsman, James Keir Hardie, was the party’s first parliamentary leader from 1906-1908 and the name ‘Keir’ is where any similarities with the present leader ends!
In those days liberal democracy was in its infancy and labour parties around Europe were considered revolutionary. Much early socialist thinking was based on the teachings of Karl Max and people like London Dockworkers Union and socialist organiser, Ben Tillet, flocked to the new party.
In 1917 the party inserted the fabled Clause IV into their constitution which made a commitment, on paper at least, to the common ownership of the means of production. Labour enjoyed electoral success in 1924 forming their first minority government under Ramsay McDonald. In 1929 McDonald and Labour won the election but failed to gain an overall majority and relied on Liberal Party support. In 1931 McDonald led a ‘National Government’ leading to his expulsion from the Labour Party. It was not until 1945 did the Labour Party under Clement Atlee enjoy real parliamentary success, defeating Winston Churchill and the Tories and for the first time implementing parts of Clause IV. The Atlee administration nationalised chunks of British industry, introduced the Welfare State including the National Health Service, unemployment benefit (though unemployment was virtually zero until Thatcher then all these hitherto hard-working people decided they would kick their jobs and go on the ‘dole’) and social security payments. Also introduced was the ‘pluralist’ system of industrial relations giving trade unions a greater say.
The party was part of the post war consensus in British parliamentary politics which lasted until the election of the right-wing Margaret Thatcher in 1979 finally ended this consensus. Callaghan was replaced as leader by a labour traditionalist, Michael Foot, who was persecuted by the right-wing media but stuck rigidly to his politics. Most of those principles the party was founded on are no longer present in today’s variant calling itself the ‘Labour Party’. It is not the party I grew up with when socialists and trade unionists were regular visitors to our house.
Labour enjoyed success in 1964, 1966 – some argued on the back of England’s World Cup success – under Harold Wilson. Wilson went to the polls again in 1970 calling a ‘snap election’ and lost to Edward Heath's Conservative and Unionist Party. Just as some claimed World Cup success guided Labour to victory in 1966 the reverse could be said – and was claimed by some – in 1970 after England crashed out of the competition to West Germany. Some claimed at the time this exit from the competition cost Labour the election?
In the 1974 (ironically another World Cup year) general election Heath was booted out and Wilson was back in Number 10. He retired surprisingly in 1976 and Jim Callaghan assumed the leadership and role of Prime Minister. Callaghan lost the 1979 election and Thatcher became the first female – of sorts – Prime Minister in Britain. The Labour Party would not see parliamentary power again until 1997 under Tony (Tory) Blair. He was nicknamed this because he implemented many policies which would be associated with the Conservatives. Blair with his ‘Spin Doctor’ Peter Mandelson implemented many changes within the party supposedly making them “electable” - meaning betraying all Labour’s values and principles. Nobody told these that the art of politics certainly in their parliamentary sense is to persuade the electorate your policies are correct, not move towards the right. Blair and Mandelson, the latter being around chipping away at Labour values since Neil Kinnock's (pillocks) leadership, who had replaced Michael Foot after the 1983 election, advised Blair to abolish Clause IV and continue with the red rose instead of the red flag. This was the end of the British Labour Party despite winning the 1997 general election by a landslide. The party was now Labour in name only. When Blair got rid of Clause IV miner’s leader, Arthur Scargill, announced; “that man in there has just declared war on the working-class” and left the party as an individual, though the NUM continued to affiliate and contribute money to Blair's Labour Party as did and do many trade unions.
When Labour lost the 2015 election the then leader, Ed Miliband, stood down to be replaced by Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn offered some hope at revitalising the party and wanted to shift back to Labour values and principles. Corbyn was elected three times as leader by the then over 500,000 members despite the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) not wanting him. The 2017 general election saw Corbyn and Labour cut the Tory majority to just four. Tory leader and Prime Minister, Theresa May, was in tears as she had before the election a huge majority which she had now lost at the hands of Corbyn! Some Labour MPs, like Stephen Kinnock (son of Pillock) were in tears, not tears of happiness, but tears of sorrow because Jeremy Corbyn, and despite their best efforts, was proving popular among the electorate. If the PLP had got behind their leader as they should have done instead of undermining him at every opportunity then Labour could well have won the 2017 election. The PLP then set about a hatchet job on their leader who would have more knives in his back than did Julius Ceaser. Instead of Brutus and the Senate Corbyn had Margaret Hodge and the PLP out to get him. With their help the Conservative and Unionist Party won the 2019 general election by a landslide. Corbyn resigned as leader and was replaced by the two-faced Keir Starmer. Starmer had claimed he supported Corbyn when under attack but did not hesitate to expel the former leader from the party. Jeremy now stands as an Independent and holds his seat in Highbury and Islington, and continues to support Arsenal – good luck this year, anyone but City or Scousers!
Starmer and the party calling itself the ‘Labour Party’ won the 2024 general election with a record number of seats. Starmer was taking the party further to the right than did Blair and has betrayed even further the basic principles of the one-time Labour Party. Labours popularity with the electorate appears, in a short period of time, to have gone from an all-time high to a record low under Starmer. Despite this apparent decline in popularity Starmer continues with his policies. He is giving money to Ukraine to fight its war with Russia while, at the same time, implementing cuts in social security to the poor at home. In order to feed the Ukrainian war machine he proposed cuts in pensioners' heating allowance and despite how much many people support Ukraine in the war they do not expect to fund it through cuts to their own living standards, already at rock bottom!
When Labour lost the 2015 election the then leader, Ed Miliband, stood down to be replaced by Jeremy Corbyn. Corbyn offered some hope at revitalising the party and wanted to shift back to Labour values and principles. Corbyn was elected three times as leader by the then over 500,000 members despite the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) not wanting him. The 2017 general election saw Corbyn and Labour cut the Tory majority to just four. Tory leader and Prime Minister, Theresa May, was in tears as she had before the election a huge majority which she had now lost at the hands of Corbyn! Some Labour MPs, like Stephen Kinnock (son of Pillock) were in tears, not tears of happiness, but tears of sorrow because Jeremy Corbyn, and despite their best efforts, was proving popular among the electorate. If the PLP had got behind their leader as they should have done instead of undermining him at every opportunity then Labour could well have won the 2017 election. The PLP then set about a hatchet job on their leader who would have more knives in his back than did Julius Ceaser. Instead of Brutus and the Senate Corbyn had Margaret Hodge and the PLP out to get him. With their help the Conservative and Unionist Party won the 2019 general election by a landslide. Corbyn resigned as leader and was replaced by the two-faced Keir Starmer. Starmer had claimed he supported Corbyn when under attack but did not hesitate to expel the former leader from the party. Jeremy now stands as an Independent and holds his seat in Highbury and Islington, and continues to support Arsenal – good luck this year, anyone but City or Scousers!
Starmer and the party calling itself the ‘Labour Party’ won the 2024 general election with a record number of seats. Starmer was taking the party further to the right than did Blair and has betrayed even further the basic principles of the one-time Labour Party. Labours popularity with the electorate appears, in a short period of time, to have gone from an all-time high to a record low under Starmer. Despite this apparent decline in popularity Starmer continues with his policies. He is giving money to Ukraine to fight its war with Russia while, at the same time, implementing cuts in social security to the poor at home. In order to feed the Ukrainian war machine he proposed cuts in pensioners' heating allowance and despite how much many people support Ukraine in the war they do not expect to fund it through cuts to their own living standards, already at rock bottom!
Starmer is also supplying arms to Ukraine under the false illusion Russia is a threat to Britain and the rest of Western Europe, which they are not, all of which cost money. He is talking about a ‘coalition of the Willing’ sending troops to aide Ukraine which would put Britain in a state of war with the planets largest nuclear power, Russia! Who is this fucking idiot? As the party continues to fall in the polls Starmer refuses to step down despite requests by some trade union leaders to do so. He believes his policies will bear fruit. But if things continue in this vein with support crumbling, even within the trade union movement, the Labour Party could well suffer the fate of the old Liberal Party, near extinction without actually dying!
Never has a party lost support so rapidly as his government. With a huge majority, largely now on paper, they should be able to push policies easily through Parliament. The reason for their inability to do this comes not from Kemi Badenoch’s Tory opposition - they were nearly wiped out in 2024 - but from his own MPs. This is creating more than an illusion the party in government is split and fragmented. Despite all the signs Starmer continues his charge to the right trying to beat Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, a far-right party, in the right-wing race to the bottom. Starmer has become obsessed with these fascists and instead of beating them with left-wing ideology he is trying to emulate them. Could Starmer, like Blair before him I suspect, be an establishment mole in there to destroy the Labour Party from within? He has expelled anybody who holds traditional Labour left-wing views including a former leader!
On February 26th 2026 a by-election was held in Gorton and Denton, a seat held by Labour for almost a century, and Starmer’s Labour Party were humiliated into third place. The Greens, who now hold the mantle of ‘left-wing’ ideologists something Labour lost many years ago, won the seat with a landslide. They received 14,980 votes easily enough to see their candidate Hannah Spencer take the seat. The electorate, certainly in Gorton and Denton, voted for left-wing policies rejecting Starmer and his right-wing one-time Labour Party. The Labour candidate, Angeliki Stogia, came a humiliating third place behind Reform UK with 9,364 votes. Reform Candidate, Matt Goodwin, came second with a respectable 10,898 votes. Labour are already making excuses about ‘mid-term governments always suffering setbacks’ which is true but not to this extent. This was a humiliation, a hammering, a shattering blow for Starmer’s party. Reform are also looking for excuses as to why, as their leader Nigel Farage expected, they did not come first. Claims by party Chairman, David Bull, on BBC2 News on 27th February; “you saw around 12% of Muslim voters entering the polling booth with their wives which is illegal”. Could Reform’s major gripe be these voters voted Green and had nothing to do with so-called ‘family voting’? Either way Starmer has just suffered another crippling blow and the question must now be asked, what is the state of the British Labour Party? In a separate opinion voiced on the same programme it was claimed by a so-called political expert that the Greens could not “win a general election because their extreme policies include withdrawal from NATO”. Surely this would be a matter for the British electorate not the BBC? Or was this a subtle hint if they did win a general election their leader, Zack Polanski, could suffer the fate of Marxist Salvador Allende in Chile back in 1973 if Polanski became PM?
This defeat in the Gorton and Denton by-election is just another humiliation for Keir Starmer. He has been forced to U-Turn on so many occasions and this is the second by-election he has lost. Two safe Labour Party seats lost to either Reform UK or the Green Party. Reform UK won by just six votes the Runcorn and Helsby by-election beating Labour. On the same day Reform also swept the board in the council elections as the number of Labour Party councillors dwindled. All bad news for Starmer.
On February 26th 2026 a by-election was held in Gorton and Denton, a seat held by Labour for almost a century, and Starmer’s Labour Party were humiliated into third place. The Greens, who now hold the mantle of ‘left-wing’ ideologists something Labour lost many years ago, won the seat with a landslide. They received 14,980 votes easily enough to see their candidate Hannah Spencer take the seat. The electorate, certainly in Gorton and Denton, voted for left-wing policies rejecting Starmer and his right-wing one-time Labour Party. The Labour candidate, Angeliki Stogia, came a humiliating third place behind Reform UK with 9,364 votes. Reform Candidate, Matt Goodwin, came second with a respectable 10,898 votes. Labour are already making excuses about ‘mid-term governments always suffering setbacks’ which is true but not to this extent. This was a humiliation, a hammering, a shattering blow for Starmer’s party. Reform are also looking for excuses as to why, as their leader Nigel Farage expected, they did not come first. Claims by party Chairman, David Bull, on BBC2 News on 27th February; “you saw around 12% of Muslim voters entering the polling booth with their wives which is illegal”. Could Reform’s major gripe be these voters voted Green and had nothing to do with so-called ‘family voting’? Either way Starmer has just suffered another crippling blow and the question must now be asked, what is the state of the British Labour Party? In a separate opinion voiced on the same programme it was claimed by a so-called political expert that the Greens could not “win a general election because their extreme policies include withdrawal from NATO”. Surely this would be a matter for the British electorate not the BBC? Or was this a subtle hint if they did win a general election their leader, Zack Polanski, could suffer the fate of Marxist Salvador Allende in Chile back in 1973 if Polanski became PM?
This defeat in the Gorton and Denton by-election is just another humiliation for Keir Starmer. He has been forced to U-Turn on so many occasions and this is the second by-election he has lost. Two safe Labour Party seats lost to either Reform UK or the Green Party. Reform UK won by just six votes the Runcorn and Helsby by-election beating Labour. On the same day Reform also swept the board in the council elections as the number of Labour Party councillors dwindled. All bad news for Starmer.
The irony is it was Starmer who expelled former left-wing leader, Jeremy Corbyn, and it was the PLP who stabbed the same man in the back. The voters of Gorton and Denton voted for Corbyn policies, could this be repeated nationally? Not if the BBC and, I dare say, MI5 have their way! It was the polices similar to those of a former Labour leader expelled by Starmer which the electorate of Gorton and Denton voted in their droves for. Could there be a subtle message in this result?
There is still time for the Labour Party to pull itself out of the ashes but not, I suspect, under this leader. Urgent repair work is needed and traitors like those who stabbed Jeremy Corbyn in the back, including Starmer, would have to go or take a back seat. Perhaps a think-tank could be organised consisting of sensible left-wing government MPs, Rachel Maskel MP for York comes to mind, starting by reducing money for Ukraine and spending on the home front. People want to see an improvement in living standards, safer working terms and conditions and a lot, lot less grovelling to US President and far-right nutter Donald Trump. Remember Britain has a Labour Government not a right-wing republican one based in Washington!!!
 |
| Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist. |
The Marxist Left have failed lamentably to preserve a radical politics. Time and time again it has failed to break through to the 'common sense' of the working class.
ReplyDeleteStarmer is simply a right winger with no left vision for society. That he gets support seems to be because a Left vision for society seems not to be widespread.
The British Labour Party has had no 'Marxist' group unfortunately since the early years of the party. Individual Marxists have been present but as for a coherent Marxist faction no, not even the Militant were a proclaimed Marxist organisation. Again individual Marxists found a home in Militant and the purging began under Neil Kinnock of this group. Starmer had a clear vision to purge the party of the left, Marxist or otherwise, and he is not well supported as you appear to think, though MPs are afraid of losing the whip if they speak against him. Some trade unions, all Labour affiliates, are now calling for him to go. Ordinarily I would agree, go and go now, but if he were to stand down the opposition, Tory and Reform UK, would demand an election. Technically an election cannot be forced under British electoral rules, but Reform UK in particular could make life difficult. The British could end up with a para-fascist government based on racism and corporatism. That's the dilemma.
ReplyDeleteThe "Marxist Left" are too busy, stupidly granted, fighting each other. This does not have to be the case forevermore, though time may be running out for other reasons, and a genuine revolutionary Marxist party may yet evolve learning the mistakes of the past. You are too pessimistic Anthony, must be supporting Liverpool 😅😅🤣⚽️⚽️⚽️⚽️⚽️!!
Within or without the Labour Party, the Marxist Left have been pretty much ineffectual.
DeleteStarmer won a landslide victory over everybody else despite not being popular. Western societies show not the slightest inclination of taking up Marxism. Marxism is reduced to squabbling sects and as Marx pointed out when the sects flourish socialism doesn't. Joan Robinson got it right when she quipped Marxism is the opium of the Marxists - when in the hands of the sects.
I get your point about replacing Starmer but he is making Labour look more like Reform by the day.
This is one of the challenges intrinsic to multi-party democracies - parties chase the vote and are unwilling to get ahead of their constituency. With Marxism appealing to nobody but the Marxists, parties seek to be politically and ideologically promiscuous in order to maximise their vote. Telling them to stand on principle butters no parsnips.
I think we will see Fascism in the ascendancy before we ever see Marxism there.
It is true bourgeois ideology, which does not appeal to everybody, is the dominant one and will never promote Marxism. I would not expect it to. The middle classes, via their media, promote, clandestinely, fascist and racist ideologies because fascism is their insurance against socialism, communism, or anything remotely left-wing, Marxist or otherwise. It has been said by elements within the bourgeoisie of all the "isms" the one capitalism could not live with is "communism". Marxist groups do not promote Marxism very well, granted, but that does not mean Marxist ideas will never take root perhaps, even preferably, with no mention of Marx. After all the right-wing use the economics of the free market advocated by the late 18th century economist, Adam Smith, but they do not spout Smiths name every sentence. They do not shout about Milton Freidman at the end of every sentence either.
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the state of the British Labour Party, not Marxism. The Labour Party are not, and never have been, a 'Marxist' Party though in the past, risk repeating myself, Marxists have found a home there. You appear to be using it as a way to attack Marxism, why could this be? The article is not about Marxism. The non Marxist left aid fascism with their constant sniping at fascisms number one ideological opponents, Marxism. To opposse fascism a United anti-fascist front is needed. Now I am drifting away from the subject which is neither fascism or Marxism but the British Labour Party, I don't think Marxism was mentioned, was it? It was my critique of the British Labour Party and it's right-wing direction taken over the years, certainly in my lifetime.
The piece would appear to be written from a Marxist perspective. It refers to Karl Marx in the context of Labour history and another Marxist, Arthur Scargill, who battled against the type of Labour Party you described and lost. It also speaks of Allende. So I think it is fair to characterise the piece as a take on the shortcomings of the BLP through a Marxist lens which you, as the author, presumably feel holds the answers. If you have discarded Marxism then my comment is immaterial. If you still hold to Marxism, then my comment has relevance.
DeleteWith the failure of Marxism, the question is what other way is the Labour Party likely to go in a world deeply infused with the logic of capital?
There is not the slightest sign of Marxist ideas taking root, never mind becoming the hegemon. At the moment Marxism is like a religious belief - as the 19th century art critic said of Berlin: always in a state of becoming but never in a state of being.
I think this from a book onThe Long Search for a Third Way: The British Labour Party and the Italian Left Since 1945 reflects the point I seek to make.
DeleteThe Left, in other words, has constantly had to adapt to the development of a social structure that did not reflect the proletarianisation foreseen by vulgar Marxism. Today as never before, socialist parties face the need to cement their consensus among the middle classes.
I suppose in that context my question is the old Lenin one 'What is to be done?'
That is a fair point, "What is to Be Done"? From my ideological political position 'cementing a consensus among the middle classes' is not on the agenda. Neither is quoting straight from the writings of Karl Marx, enjoyable reading I may find it. It is possible, even preferable, to explain in simple language Marxism. Some NUM Pit Agents were skilled in this, hence flying pickets successes in the 1970s. The language used by some student and middle class dominated so-called Marxist parties, though OK for educationals, tends to alienate the working-class audiences. Such talk should be avoided, as many simple legible ways, can be used to transmit the same message. For example quoting direct from the Eighteenth Brumerie of Louis Bonarparte would not light up the imagination of a workers picket line!! Class divisions, particularly among the working-class, can be explained and how to avoid such class cleavages in simple legible ways.
ReplyDeletePolitical strategy seems not to have been Marxism's strong point. It is good at analysing economic factors but when it slips into class reductionism it sounds like bible thumping - banging out a message that causes people'e eyes to glaze over. I think this is what Foucault was trying to get at when he argued to get rid of Marxism because of its ‘impoverishment of the political imagination. He even went further and alleged that "Marxism exists in nineteenth-century thought as a fish exists in water; that is, it ceases to breathe anywhere else."
DeleteHe came to identify with the non Marxist left.
Is that what the future of the left will look like - non Marxist?
If so, what strategies should it construct?
He was wrong to do that, identifying with reformists and parliamentarian is not the way. Once on the rightwards conveyor belt which has no breaking system, it is only a matter of time and distance on this belt before the so-called 'non-Marxist left' are indistinguishable from the other capitalist parties. Sinn Fein consider themselves non-Marxist and if they ever become the 26 County government all the left sounding hype will disappear. This Harold Wilson discovered in 1964. The British Labour Party, which, like all early socialist parties, used the writings of Marx, even clause iv had a Marxist air to it, though not distinctly Marxist, as their early blueprint have, like the German SPD, dropped any pretence of being socialist.
ReplyDeleteIt is true no credible Marxist party existed in either Britain or Ireland, 26 or 6 counties, but that does not mean this will always be the case. That party could grow out of any revolutionary workers councils, that's my train of thought. Following any party presently claiming to be Marxist would be fatal for the working class. They can't even face down tha fascists let alone the forces of organised capitalism.