The political choice in selecting Labour’s next leader involves choosing a platform and strategy. The platform choice is pretty clear, growth vs. austerity-lite. The strategy choices equally so, triangulation vs. a clear choice. So that’s simple then; it has to be Jeremy Corbyn.
Why would we not support his vision for 2020 and with People’s QE, a National Investment Bank and the Education for Life proposals he solves the most intractable problems facing the British Economy of insufficient demand, low innovation and low labour productivity. For more see my storify on people’s QE.
Arguments about electability are proxies for arguments about strategy. The one thing for which there is evidence is that Ed Miliband’s Labour Manifesto was incapable of winning a majority coalition. Looking back to 1983 and 1997 is irrelevant, and the allegation that Corbyn can’t win comes from people that supposedly supported the manifestos and strategies that lost the last two elections, or opponents in the media. These aren’t facts, they’re opinions. The crux of the argument about strategy is where do we look for extra support in 2020.
All the froth about entrysm, abusive language, coups and accountability of the PLP are irrelevant to the choice. There is no entryism, the abusive language needs to stop, but it’s deployed on both sides, by both junior and senior partisans. The integrity of the debate and competition needs to be defended and accepted by both sides and the result abided by. As I have said elsewhere, you can’t change the rules of an election half way through and you can’t participate and then complain about the result.
We should all remember that the Labour Party is a cause not a career, and this election for leader will be the most inclusive ever.
I hope it’s the start of something exceptional in British politics.