The Ill-Conceived General Election – ‘Weakness’, Lies and Mugwumps

So we’re into the final week of our special bonus, unnecessary General Election, and whether it's inspired the recent spate of violent attacks in UK cities no one knows, but what has become clear is that our Prime Minister endorses 15 years of interventionist foreign policy while apparently believing this surge in terror is somehow the fault of social media and ‘the internet’. Meanwhile the mud-slinging, U-turns and lies are ramping up on Theresa May’s side and something that might have once seemed strange to many commentators is happening elsewhere – Labour are narrowing the polls with a surge of support and Jeremy Corbyn’s personal popularity levels are rising.

Part of this is down to an excitingly progressive, well thought-through and fully costed manifesto. At this point in time, only those on 80k+ a year who have no conscience or individuals deceived by the neoliberal lie that it’s not possible to tax corporations without damaging the economy could possibly be against extra money for the NHS, free university tuition, support for our schools, help with childcare, more police, a million new homes, four additional Bank Holidays and a real living wage increasing to £10 an hour. Aside from everyone gradually seeing Theresa May’s true colours – the hubris, the mendacity, the incompetence, the inability to eat chips without gurning – the electorate has now been presented with an opposition leader who bears little resemblance to the Marxist firebrand / anti-semitic IRA hugger much of the press have portrayed for months. And they’re reacting accordingly, because voters aren’t stupid.

The only ad hominem attack that can’t be easily disproved by facts (aside from the allegation he’s a “Mugwump” made, ironically enough, by a massive Cockwomble) seems to be the continuing taunt Corbyn is “weak” and not a “leader”. Now, leaving aside the wooliness of this sentiment and the way perception doesn’t always match reality (particularly in today’s febrile climate where some parts of the electorate seem to be hankering for Mutually Assured Destruction), you would think Corbyn refusing to back down when 90% of politicians, including his own party, were compelling him to would indicate a kind of inner strength and single-mindedness of purpose? It wasn’t so long ago Jeremy could have saved himself the hassle, scrutiny, misrepresentation and endless personal attacks by stepping aside for the substance-free, bandwagon-jumping likes of Owen Smith. But he didn’t. Corbyn doubled-down, won another leadership contest easily and now here he is, focussed, single-minded, determined. Cometh the hour, cometh the man. Given all that, exactly where does such a mistaken impression come from?

I think it’s partly down to the kind of person we expect to put themselves forward to lead a country these days. Such individuals tend to be slick and assured egotists, good with a soundbite; extrovert and ‘alpha’. They’re the kind of driven household names we once expected to light up the cinema screens with their charisma but are now more likely to be found on reality TV, yelling out powerfully decisive catchphrases like “It’s a ‘no’ from me!” or “You’re Fired!”

And yet, that kind of personality hasn’t worked so well lately has it? Not least because the kind of ‘alpha’ who plays to the crowd’s basest emotions, inspiring whoops and cheers for meaningless slogans like ‘Make America Great Again’ or ‘Strong and Stable’, often possesses more self-belief than knowledge. They’re good on supposed certainties but reluctant to delve into the nuanced shades of grey where complex real world issues tend to reside. As Susan Cain points out in her essential book ‘Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking’, being unreflective, inflexible and utterly confident in your own abilities has led more than one bullish CEO into the realms of financial disaster. It’s also one of the reasons the 2008 crash happened.

Having a personality that tends more toward rationality, contemplation, diffidence, empathy and the consideration of ambiguities myself, I simply don’t recognise the word ‘weak’ in association with Jeremy Corbyn. Perhaps I’m biased, but I only see a collegiate approach to getting things done, an utter absence of belligerence combined with a willingness to listen and work with others from across the political spectrum. Yes, there’s a concentration on substance over style in an electoral system too often focussed on the latter, and I know a lot of us males (and some females too, as the 53% of white women who voted for Trump proved), aren’t too comfortable electing a non-dominant, non-alpha PM. But maybe those people should look at Corbyn’s manifesto regardless, consider the team he’s assembled and focus on his dogged fight for justice when it came to Apartheid-era South Africa, the Orgreave violence or his consistent position against the Iraq war. These are all manifestations of the way Corbyn genuinely cares about the underdog, something that often costs him popularity in the press when those people are Palestinian or Irish Catholic. Voters need to focus on his deeply-held set of principles instead; his fight for worker rights and the vulnerable, against inequality and suffering, then ask whether their family would be better off under him or the Conservatives. The question is whether Corbyn or May would be more likely to take this country in the direction we want it to go – toward prosperity, harmony and opportunity.

Because many people my age and younger have been waiting our whole lives for the leader of a major party to offer a set of genuinely progressive policies, someone who will govern for the majority rather than the rich alone, someone who can work collegiately with the leaders of other countries rather than insult them from afar then hold Trump’s hand whilst aping his isolationist strategy. We’ve been waiting for someone who can offer an alternative to deregulated ‘selfish’ capitalism and careerist politicians saying anything, demonising anyone, U-turning however many times it takes, simply to get themselves elected. We want someone who has a genuine desire to tackle the major issues that affect us all, from climate change to zero-hour contracts to tax avoidance to the deindustrialisation of large parts of the UK.

But if your antipathy to the man is such you can’t look beyond the individual to a future of re-nationalised railways, giving nurses the occasional pay rise so they don’t resort to food banks, failing to endorse the bombing of Middle Eastern civilians from a great height, helping the homeless off the streets and generally promoting a nicer, fairer, more human way of doing government business, then you really have to ask yourself what the priorities are. Ghandi said a nation’s greatness was measured by how it treats its weakest members, and you don’t need to watch ‘I, Daniel Blake’ or know any of the four million children currently living in poverty to see that the UK hasn’t done too well of late under Mahatma’s rubric.

As Harold Pinter observed back in 1996: “There exists today widespread propaganda which asserts that socialism is dead. But if to be a socialist is to be a person convinced that the words ‘the common good’ and ‘social justice’ actually mean something; if to be a socialist is to be outraged at the contempt in which millions and millions of people are held, by those in power, by ‘market forces’, by international financial institutions; if to be a socialist is to be a person determined to do everything in his or her power to alleviate these unforgivably degraded lives, then socialism can never be dead because these aspirations will never die.”

On June 8^th, let’s keep those aspirations alive. More than that, let’s give them a chance to effloresce.