Following the leader – or not!

I rarely comment on politics, as my silence, even on Brexit, shows. However, the current leadership row in the Labour party has me intrigued. That is, I started out being somewhat angry and frustrated because it seemed like a pointless distraction at a time when the country really needed to be holding together. However, as the situation has continued to develop, I find myself watching with increasing fascination over the way different people are responding.

The argument that has been given, repeatedly, by those who engineered the vote of no confidence, is that Jeremy Corbyn is not a leader. But what does this mean, I wonder? I mean, it’s been claimed that he has no vision. Yet, if the figures are to be believed, the public vote of confidence in him now numbers over 200, 000. That’s 200, 000 people who have caught this vision that he doesn’t have and are following him. Doesn’t that make him a leader? Well, apparently not.

One of the more major gripes has been his apparent indifference to the ‘Remain’ campaign in the lead up to the EU Referendum. This is interesting because the one thing that nearly everyone in his party seems to agree on is that he is a man of principle. So, surely, the next question that must be asked, if Jeremy is looking luke warm about a campaign, is which of his principles is the campaign not living up to?

Well, people have done this and come up with the stated purpose of the ‘Remain’ campaign as the obvious candidate. Clearly, Jeremy really wanted to leave!

Did he? Or could it possibly have had something to do with the campaign itself? For myself, I’d put a pretty good bet on it having something to do with theatrics and gimmicks and (dare I say it) possibly even lies that were all too apparent in the ‘Remain’ campaign. And I say this as someone who voted to remain, so it’s not about personal bias against a particular viewpoint. Rather, it’s about a method of campaigning that is all about trying to appeal to the voters rather than presenting a case with integrity. I would suggest, if he’s anything like me, that a man of principle isn’t going to sit easily with any such campaign.

It’s also been said that he ‘just doesn’t get it’ on immigration. Really? I’m quite sure Jeremy does ‘get it’. I’m sure he knows full well how some members of the public feel about immigration. But I suspect he also knows that (to put it bluntly) they are wrong about it.

The UK is a wealthy country and has (or had) one of the strongest economies in the world. That’s why people come here. They come because, in a wealthy country with a strong economy, they believe there is always going to be enough for them to be able to pick up a few crumbs off the floor, especially if they are prepared to work for them. In other words, they come because they believe there is already enough to go round. We know this because it’s been shown that immigration falls when our economy crashes and rises when it is stronger.

However, many of the folk in this country don’t believe there is enough to go round. They believe they have to fight for what they have. Hence they resent anyone else coming and getting it. And why do they believe this? Well, some of it will be because we have lost the industries upon which their livelihoods once depended. There are areas of the country where this is a real problem. However, at least in part, it will also be because that’s the lie that those with the wealth and the power would have them believe. They call it ‘austerity’ and they tell us it’s necessary. But this is always going to be a lie in a country with a strong enough economy to have an ‘immigration problem’ (as opposed to a refugee crisis). Somebody, somewhere, has got the money and presumably believe they deserve it. The ‘austerity’ lie is just a convenient means of ensuring that they hold on to it, with immigration being an equally convenient means of encouraging the population to point the finger away from them.

So does Jeremy ‘get’ immigration? I would suggest he gets it only too well, which is why he isn’t going to play smoke and mirrors with it like the rest of those in power. If there isn’t enough to go round, it isn’t because of the immigrants.

Then it’s been said that Jeremy is stubborn and won’t do the decent thing and resign. Excuse me? He is the elected leader and the elected leader has a responsibility first and foremost to the people who elected him. They are the people who must say if he is to step down. Until they do, as a man of principle, he going to hang on in there, whatever it costs. And, let’s face it, it takes a fair bit of courage to stand with a beleaguered cabinet in front of a Prime Minister who is determined to humiliate you and now has every excuse to do so. It’s not fun. But it’s what true leaders do. Call it stubborness if you like. I’d prefer to call it commitment and perseverance.

Finally, it’s been said that Jeremy is ‘unelectable’. Well, they may have a point there. But that’s got very little to do with whether he is a leader or not. It’s got much more to do with whether the country is willing to follow him, which is another thing altogether. Ask anyone what they look for in a leader and they will say things like, ‘Honesty. Integrity. Someone I know I can trust. Someone who cares.’ Well, it looks like they’ve got all those in Jeremy Corbyn. As I have said, nearly everyone in his party seems to agree that he is a man of principle and that the leadership row has nothing to do with his character. It’s about whether or not he’s electable. In other words, it’s about his policies – the things he is standing for. And that’s another interesting one. Jesus was a leader. But the people didn’t want to follow him so they killed him instead. Jo Cox was a leader – at least as far as her constituency was concerned – and it only took one person to kill her. In the end, it’s not about whether or not the person is a leader. It’s about whether or not we want to follow where they are going.

So, Labour MPs, The Mirror, The Guardian, the rest of the media and anyone else pointing the finger. Please stop telling me that Jeremy Corbyn is not a leader or doesn’t have vision. Instead, have the honesty and decency to admit that you don’t want to follow him.


6 thoughts on “Following the leader – or not!

    1. Ros Post author

      Yes. Thanks 🙂 I’ve been looking at the original UN report and it does say those things. Whether the Government will pay the slightest attention is another matter, but it does demonstrate that the alternative view has some substance.


  1. beetleypete

    Well said, Ros. Labour has had its share of ‘unelectable’ leaders in the past, not least Michael Foot. The members chose Jeremy, and he has a good pedigree as a socialist in the past. If the members of the PLP don’t like him being the leader, they can always resign.
    Best wishes, Pete.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Ros Post author

      ‘If the members of the PLP don’t like him being the leader, they can always resign.’

      I agree. Even if they are right about Corbyn being ‘unelectable’, going behind the backs of the party members is never going to be right. It will be interesting to see what they decide to do if they force another leadership election and then lose.


      1. Faith & Beauty

        I dunno about this…Remember he isn’t the only person with an elected mandate. After all the PLP members are elected as MPs by a broader church than Corbyn as I’m sure none of them got their votes from Labour party members only.

        But moving on to the actual blog post, you are so very right. He is a leader, just an unelectable one. I think the issue is whether you want him to be a good leader of the opposition or a PM. I think the membership are focused on the former and the PLP on the latter.


        1. Ros Post author

          You are right. The other PLP members do have an elected mandate, but it’s to serve the people, not to stab the present leader in the back. I’d be happy for one of them to challenge Jeremy for the leadership, particularly if he’d done something that warranted his resignation, but orchestrating such a coup just nine months after his election looks to me like a massive betrayal of the trust the voters put in them, especially at a time when the country is in crisis and they could be supporting constituents and facing down the Tories instead of their own leader. By rights, the Tory-backed media should be tearing into them for such behaviour. But they aren’t because it suits them not to. The more trouble they can stir up, the weaker the Government’s opposition becomes.

          As for whether Jeremy is an unelectable leader, I really couldn’t say. I’m old enough now to have given up trying to predict what the British public will or will not vote for! The rise of both UKIP and Corbyn suggests that there are a lot of people who want change, but how many there are, precisely what kind of change they are wanting and whether they believe they can get it, is much harder to gauge.

          Clearly, there are those in the Labour Party who think Jeremy is unelectable, but I suspect those beliefs are based largely on the ‘golden’ days of Labour under Blair, when being a more centrist party was working well for them. Now it isn’t. If it was, they’d be in Government. So, despite the fact that someone like Hilary Benn comes across as far more Statesman-like than Jeremy ever will, he’s actually no more electable. None of them are. So I’d say there’s a distinct ‘Pot calling the kettle black’ thing going on, although they probably can’t see it.

          Is Corbyn unelectable? I really don’t know. It depends what people are looking for in terms of both policies and a PM. But two things I do know:

          1. I’d rather have him as PM than anyone on the Tory front bench or anyone responsible for the current Labour coup. Honesty, integrity and a heart for the people are what matter most to me. Both Cameron and Blair failed to impress me as PMs for precisely this reason.

          2. Right now, the right wing press are doing everything they can to convince people that Jeremy is unelectable. That’s what they want us to believe. And they want us to believe it because his is currently the only anti-austerity voice with any potential power. Take him down and anti-austerity is sunk. Split the party and Labour is also sunk. Both outcomes suit them admirably. That’s why I’m not prepared to play along.

          Edited to add: Thanks for commenting, by the way 🙂 Sorry to have gone on. I guess it’s something I feel strongly about. But my frustration isn’t aimed at you 🙂

          Liked by 1 person


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s