New Leader, New Era, New Labour?

Finally! Something of a break from COVID! Yesterday saw the very exciting announcement of the new leader of the Labour Party and, frankly, I forgot excitement levels could get so high. In what proved one of the most predictable results of the century, Keir Starmer romped to a first round majority, with an impressive 56% of the first preference votes. Meanwhile, Angela Rayner comfortably took the position of deputy leader in what was a highly congested field of candidates.

What, then, is the Labour movement (and country by and large) to take away and forward with this? Are we seeing a great departure from Corbynism, with many on the Labour left arguing that Starmer has Blairite credentials; or are we seeing a continuity candidate, as many in the media and on the Labour right have been seen to be arguing (though appeasing them seems impossible in any case these days).

So, what are the real takeaways here? The most immediate and obvious one is how stunningly strong Starmers jaw line is. Next, I suppose we ought to look at policy. I reject both predispositions that Starmer is either a Blairite or a continuity candidate: I think this branding does an injustice to a candidate that clearly has his own and well formed views. Namely, he should be judged according to himself; not as a comparison to a war criminal nor a man who lost two consecutive elections.

Rather, I believe Starmer can be regarded as representing the electable and modern face of a genuinely centre-left Labour Party. Now, I can already hear the sighing on both sides of the political spectrum, but hear me out. I greatly respect what Jeremy Corbyn has done policy wise for the Labour Party, cementing the partys position as a firmly left of centre party. Bringing to the spotlight the forgotten people and the need for genuine policy change: gone are the days where an opposition party could get away with merely mirroring the government and departing with them on only a few, noncontroversial issues: a lot of this is owed to Corbyn and his genuine and very reasonable concern for the increasingly struggling and ignored people within our society.

We must not, however, ignore the two election defeats that came under his leadership. Of course, much of this can be owed to the repugnant and unfair portrayal of him within the corporate media and we would be wise to not forget the impact mass media, be it online, on TV or in paper form, still has on all of us. In this sense, I don't think it's an incorrect assertion to say that Corbyn was slightly ahead of his time for many within the UK, though he has certainly sped up the development of ideas and legislation that will be needed to take this country forward. The Labour movement by and large recognises this, as does (and I don't think this can be understated) Kier Starmer.

Kier Starmer is a means to an end for the Labour Party: a small step backwards policy wise but a large step forward into Downing Street. In the eyes of many across the nation and media, he is far more palatable and, while we may not like to admit it, we do seem to love a nicely polished middle class white man as Prime Minister (lest we forget Blairs 3 consecutive election sweeps).

The future of the Labour Party is with the ideas of Jeremy Corbyn; the present isn't quite ready for that yet. Kier Starmer is the necessary transition into a palatable Labour left, he neither represents continuation nor departure from the current Labour Party: he is the person who I regard as being best to get us back into government to implement some of those dismissed Corbyn ideas. After this, I think Corbyn will be vindicated, his ideas legitimised and himself recognised as the best Prime Minister we never had.