On last Thursday morning, Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn held a big meeting to kick-off Labour’s General Election campaign on its first day. Now indeed, he made a rare rousing first official speech, to the delight of hordes of loyal lefty supporters who were cheering him to the rafters, but will it actually inspire the UK voters, who the polls indicate are totally un-enamoured with him as a potential PM and of Labour forming an effective government, eh? He answered (lamely?) a few questions from the media present then afterwards.
Did he have anything useful to say or any message that would at last inspire the general population to vote Labour? Probably NOT?
The new (perhaps surprising?) thrust of his platform was that he is the British Anti-Establishment candidate to be PM (as an outsider from it?) and that it is the powers that be and the system which is the devil incarnate, so Labour will not play by the rules, will rip them up, and will break-out to save the Nation, eh? He announces his view that it is now ‘the Establishment against the people’ and it is in a cosy club with the media its followers. Now he is going to overturn a ‘rigged system’, and an Establishment that is in cahoots with the powerful, but he doesn’t mention the glaring fact that Labour did NOTHING about it when in power under Blair and Brown for thirteen years, eh?
Now, he is of course trying to emulate Donald Trump, who against all the odds, seized the American Presidency by storm just a few months ago, using exactly that strategy, didn’t he? Well perhaps Corbyn should wake-up to the fact that the British people are no way like their USA cousins and what goes on over the pond and is acceptable there, has no relevance here at home when it comes to politics, don’t you think?
Furthermore, what goes down and is appealing to a few hundred thousand likeminded left-wing supporters in Britain will not come home to roost with the multi-millions of voters who will go to the polls on seven weeks’ time, will it? The general public seek stability, security, and a government in control, in addition to improvement in their lives and a promising future for their children, don’t they?
Now, despite the glaring fact that the apparent mood of the Country is strongly against him & cronies, and therefore the Labour Party, Corbyn (understandably?) utterly rejects the very idea that the outcome of the election is a forgone conclusion and relies on the fact that he secured the leadership itself against outlandish odds. Inexperienced and like a drunk, he has got into a bar fight that he should and clearly could have avoided, which is what you need to do in a confrontation where you are outnumbered and outgunned – you calmly keep your composure, ignore any taunts, forget tough talk, and walk away, don’t you? Pride is a fault here and his wouldn’t let him do that, wouldn’t you say? This General Election may not be a fist-fight but nevertheless much political blood will be spilt, won’t it?
Now, Corbyn is claiming that this will all be fought on the streets of this Country but that is naive, surely? Despite his vain hopes, rallies and marches won’t do the trick for Labour here, and neither will claiming that Theresa May is running scared because she won’t unnecessarily give him the time of day on the issue of a direct leaders head-to-head televised debate during the election campaign [just as Labour PM Blair wouldn’t do it for Hague (as it would be a “distraction”), as did Tory PM Cameron to Miliband (as “it wold suck the life out of the campaign”)].
Corbyn thinks Labour can rely on good policies that appeal to the electorate (and indeed they have some good ones), but he is wrong, because voters override that by the messenger – and he doesn’t seem to fit the bill, does he?
The last ‘really lefty’ leader (1980 – 1983) was Michael Foot who soundly lost Labour the general election some 30 years ago to Margaret Thatcher, with what was described by deceased iconic Labour Party MP Gerald Kaufman, as ‘the longest suicide note in history’ because it was excessively long and over emphasised socialist policies that weren’t popular at that time – like a National minimum wage (now implemented and fully accepted?), withdrawing from the EEC (last year the public voted for BREXIT, eh?), outlawing of hunting with dogs (brought-in over a decade ago, eh?), abolition of the House of Lords (widely desired nowadays?), re-nationalisation of some major privatised industries (wanted by many in current times particularly the railways?), Bank of England control over bank lending (now enacted too late because we have suffered a financial meltdown and economic crash as a consequence of such lending, haven’t we?), as well as of course unilateral nuclear disarmament to encourage worldwide the removal of such weapons of mass destruction (many of us want significant progress on that when the likes of North Korea are trying to join the club, eh?). so that manifesto has many parallels with thinking today, doesn’t it?
In some ways, you can’t blame Corbyn for wanting to fight dirty, or for even saying that the system is rigged by a cosy cartel (again copied from Trump?) and that the Country only works for the rich, as he has to find a ‘non-conventional’ way of doing things different to overcome the antipathy of the voters towards Labour, so roughing it up a bit is his only chance, isn’t it?
But he isn’t doing a good job of it, as he shies away from specifics and sticks to generality. Like in in his speech he, as before didn’t deal with the BREXIT issue and if he continues to swerve around it in that vein, he will antagonise both the remainers and the leavers who ‘might have voted Labour’, but who as a substitute will turn to the LibDems and Conservatives respectively. Labour haven’t yet established a simple, coherent, believable, position on the matter, have they?
Then there is the fact that he blatenly doesn’t understand the mindset of the British people, does he? The average person who will vote in the elections in May and June are not revolutionisers who want to overthrow the aristocracy or pull down the rich into the poor’s gutter, are they? Mostly, they are people who aspire, through opportunity, risk taking, and hard work, to climb up into the ranks of the rich themselves, don’t you think? Telling them if they manage to get to earn £70thousand a year makes them the rich elite who should be heavily taxed, isn’t going to pull-in many votes, will it? That ranks with Labour Chancellor Denis Healey’s (misquoted) plan in 1974 to “tax the rich until the pips squeak” [actually he was referring to ‘property speculators’ but that never really got to the public, whose votes resulted that year in a Labour Wilson win but a hung parliament (mind you Corbyn would more than settle for that, wouldn’t he?)].
[As it stands Jeremy Corbyn has and is placing Labour firmly in the position of “Laugh Out Loud” as the popular internet slag would have it, wouldn’t you say?]