A Challenging Letter to The Observer
JVL Introduction
Perspectives on the General Election (1)
As part of our commitment to sharing a range of views during this election campaign, we are pleased to publish this letter by Talal Hangari in response to Sonya Sodha’s Observer article in which she argues that, despite Starmer’s mendacity, it is wrong for Left-wing opponents of his leadership of the Labour Party to support non-Labour candidates. Hangari argues strongly against this position and, indeed, the treatment of Diane Abbott and, indeed, Lloyd Russell-Moyle to say nothing of the shocking ditching of Faiza Shaheen does not make it any easier to support Labour despite the desperate need to end this disastrous period of Tory government(s).
Earlier this year, the New Left Review carried an article by Lorna Finlayson “On Lesser Evilism” making similar arguments because, after all, the lesser evil is still evil. Finlayson does note, however, that “The hollowness of liberal democracy doesn’t mean that different outcomes within that system are not consequential, up to and including the distinction between life and death.” So sometime voting for the lesser evil does matter – at least sometimes and it is this reality leaves is just part of why so many on the left find themselves on the horns of a dilemma.
See also the JVL statement Election 2024 – For The Many.
LL
This article was originally published by talalhangari.com on Wed 29 May 2024. Read the original here.
A Letter to The Observer
Loading article text…
What would Machiavelli have said about Starmer especially if he’d known of Corbyn’s recent failure to break through the neoliberal media’s successful amplification of false consciousness in the proletariat?
The late philosopher , broadcaster & one time Labour MP Bryan Magee wrote in ‘Confessions of a Philosopher: A Journey Through Western Philosophy’: ‘Whatever people may write, say, want or believe, the only reality is what actually happens. [He had thought of himself as a socialist since childhood until] ‘one day, at the age of twenty-one or -two, I was sitting reading about Lenin in the Radcliffe Camera … when suddenly the thought invaded my mind with almost traumatic clarity: ‘It’s never going to happen. There just isn’t ever actually going to be socialism.’ And once I realized this, it became obvious that no matter how attractive the idea might be, and no matter how good it would have been in practice if it could have come into existence, to advocate socialism was worse than useless because it meant being divorced from reality. For anyone, being serious about politics means thinking in terms of what can actually be done, and this therefore involves, among other things, not being a socialist. As a result of this realization I felt for the first time inclined to support the Labour Party, which I had always hitherto regarded as pragmatic and compromising, and therefore not really as socialist. When I told my friends that the reason I had begun to support the Labour Party was that I had ceased to be a socialist they thought this a witty remark, but it was simple truth.’
There are three points worth making regarding Sonia Sondha’s article. Firstly, why wasn’t she writing this demand for solidarity when the Blairite entryist right were destroying Labour’s chances under Corbyn in 2017 & 2019, when the manifesto was economically progressive and genuinely traditionalist?
Secondly the excuse that Starmer’s violation of his Leadership Manifesto oaths including nationalisation of utilities is somehow down to changed deteriorating circumstances doesn’t hold water. From near post WW2 bankruptcy Atlee’s government nationalised the railways, built the NHS, a million council houses, and staged an Olympics.
Thirdly given MS Sondha has repeatedly shown contempt for the left why does she think an appeal from her to this political base has any validity. She even appeared on the BBC News channel and when the issue of petition against Blair’s knighthood was raised – of which there were 1.5million signatories – contemptuous exclaimed ‘that’s just the left’.
Thanks Gavin; some of the points you make were also made in another piece we published today on “lesser evilism” https://jewishvoiceforliberation.org.uk/article/is-starmer-the-lesser-of-two-evils/
Excellent. I’d add only two points regarding the notion that Starmer has abandoned his left wing pledges in order to win votes. In reality, most of these pledges are widely popular among the electorate. However, the are enormously unpopular with the corporate media and the private property elite that own or control the resources of this country and, indeed the world. Starmer has abandoned his pledges to reassure these elites, probably because his normal stance is obeisance to power and possibly because this is in line with his true beliefs – as for his appalling factional allies, god alone knows what sort of motives, conscious or unconscious, account for their sociopathic behaviour.
There is only one flaw in what Talal Hangaris writes when she says:
‘It is remarkable that our author does not venture to deny that Sir Keir renounced his pledges: for the fact is undeniable. She aims, instead, to excuse this deceit, on the ground of political expediency: Sir Keir had to “shift position” to appeal to the broader public outside his party; she elevates this course even to the level of an overriding democratic duty.’
There is no evidence at all that pledges such as putting public services in public hands or increasing income tax for the top 5% or clamping down on tax avoidance are off putting to the electorate. Quite the contrary. Nor is opposition to illegal wars or abolition of universal credit unpopular.
Starmer’s treachery is of an entirely different order. He has shamelessly lied in order to reassure the British Establishment that they will continue to preside over an imperialist order where inequality is hard wired into the system and where racism is its lubricant.
This above all is Starmer’s crime. He is there to reassure the powerful at the expense of the powerless.
It is for each individual to decide who to vote for & we don’t need a Sonia Sodha to tell us what to do!
If one’s conscience sees two evils why should we vote for either of them?
Sadly the Labour Party has been totally destroyed by Starmer & there is no chance of voting for this confirmed Zionist whose racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia & misogyny is in full public view!
It is an arrogance for this Sodha woman to give advice on who people should vote for!
There will never be a Labour vote from true loyal Labour voters all the time that a Tory Zionist is in charge!
Starmer is a shameful hypocrite & turncoat whose loyalty is more towards America & Israel!
He has chosen strange criminally minded MPs & Councellors ones who are so devious & aggressive enough to cause physical violence & have!
Starmer is untrustworthy & does not warrant my vote ever !
‘The Observer invites the public to submit letters “of up to 250 words” in response to articles such as these. Perhaps one explanation of why our commentators are so careless in their reasoning, is that more attentive members of the public are denied the space required to answer them.’
Sonya Sodha’s approach is a variant on “The ends justify the means.” The problem is that the means will always colour the ends. Violence as a means to achieve peace amplifies violence and leaves a violent echo of itself; lies breed distrust, and distrust hangs around like a poisonous gas; intolerance of alternative views is a form of fascism, and leaves violence and intolerance in its wake. All of these involve a denial of integrity and humanity, and thus perpetuate themselves as forms of evil. Evil does not magically disappear because it is declared no longer to exist.
98 words.
I read this article with gritted teeth..
The author has wilfully whitewashed the campaign against Corbyn by the corrupt self serving traitorous liars who now run Labour like a Right Wing Authoritarian tool of Israel, Private healthcare and Tory Donors to ensure THEY get what THEY want at the expense of Palestine and the British people..Labour sold to the Highest bidders..
Hear absolutely hear. I will always vote according to my principles and my conscience. It would be folly to elect a man so lacking in sincerity, integrity, honesty and decency, one who thinks nothing of betraying the man he once called his friend. .
Good article.
I am not against voting for the ‘lesser evil’ but I am not at all convinced that Labour is the lesser evil.
At the 1997 general election, there were still several important differences between Labour and the Conservatives. I do not believe that to be the case today.
Consider the positive aspect of voting for other parties: Those parties will have a voice and Labour will fear losing further support to them and it might even try to win back some votes from them. That would be a very positive thing.
On the question of Gaza, Starmer could have ‘clarified’ his position during the interview or afterwards. He did not do so. No, the ‘clarification’ only came when he realised how costly the original statement was. So, yet another lie.
And the lying continues. Labour’s campaign slogan is ‘Change’. A truthful slogan would be ‘No Change’ or ‘Continuity’.