September 15, 2015

a shift at Labour

I agree with JG's comment on there being a massive political shift in action. Certainly, BHO's unlawful acts have paved the way for the new Alinskey's to try to take by force what they could never win by election.

Here is a Telegraph article from American-born Janet Daley about UK Labour electing the Trotskyist Corbyn as their leader that I've found fascinating. It makes me think of what might happen should Sanders win the Democratic nomination.

...one of two things will happen. 1. Either the Parliamentary Labour Party will go momentarily quiescent while it regroups, refusing cooperation … Jeremy Corbyn will be isolated and vulnerable in his inexperience, and likely to be cautious. This will hasten the tendency of the wildly naive “idealists” who believed in him to become disappointed – which will happen inevitably at any rate since no mortal man could possibly maintain the purity that idealised Leftism demands. Or 2. the Corbyn crew will be brought down within months by a Labour assassination squad. This will result in a decade of division within the party

Many, many things in this very well-written article make me think of the Progressives tugging the Democrat party around by the nose, which surely is partly represented by the Sanders story of success.

the dogma that is espoused has been discredited everywhere it has been tried: the insistence on purity of principle quickly degenerating into either totalitarianism (the Soviet model) or a shambolic failure to come to terms with reality (as more recently in Greece).

Shambolic failure... Taranto would be proud!

Seriously, does this not sound like the crazy man from Vermont?

Instead of dealing with these questions (How should we regulate free markets? What is the proper role of government intervention?) in ways that most adults know they must be addressed, Labour will be pushed into presenting a prospectus of state control, punitive taxation and a command economy which would scarcely appeal to anyone outside the zealous enclaves of the far Left.

And this reminds me of a long-ago WSJ article about the Doughnut-hole Democrats (no middle; now that unions have shrunk so far)

Without a commitment to the basic Marxist creed … there was no identifiable centre to the movement. [“ordinary] working class people... fallen away, and it is their absence that has allowed these tiny activist minorities to take control of the abandoned entity formerly known as the Labour party. That is why the real story of this leadership election has not been the triumphal march of Corbynism – which simply rushed in to fill a vacuum – but the uninspiring mediocrity of all the other candidates.

I have to a cautionary note from another Daley post:
Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters are not interested in the compromises required to win an election

Egalitarian Socialism Posted by nanobrewer at September 15, 2015 12:36 AM

I've been following Corbyn with mortal terror.

There's been a peculiar synchronicity between the UK and USA: JFK and Macmillian, Reagan and Thatcher, Clinton & Blair. Seems like when a new strain of politics shows up, it manifests on both sides of "the pond." Sanders and Corbyn could reek unthinkable havoc on the world economy.

But both are unelectable. Right?

Posted by: jk at September 15, 2015 10:12 AM

Bret Stephens at the WSJ Ed Page is also disquieted:

Jeremy Corbyn's election as leader of Britain's Labour Party is being cheered on the right as a gift--as close as you get in politics to a guarantee that your side will win an election that's still five years out. Mr. Corbyn leans so far left that he might not be able to assemble a parliamentary shadow cabinet, never mind a governing majority.

That's one way of looking at it. Another is that the political ascent of a man who admires Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and keeps company with Holocaust deniers is another milepost in Britain's long decline amid a broader unraveling in the West.

Posted by: jk at September 15, 2015 12:40 PM | What do you think? [2]