Lindsey German on left realignment, bankrolling genocide and waterways in crisis

The words of Shakespeare’s Macbeth on plans to murder the Scottish king seem appropriate to discussion on left organisation today. There is widespread sentiment on the left that the setting up of such a party is urgent, and the long drawn out and largely private discussions about a new left party need to reach fruition rapidly.

The time is propitious.

Firstly, the Starmer government shows record levels of incompetence and unpopularity for a landslide government only a year into office. This means that it is beginning to dawn on a lot of Labour politicians that there are few ‘safe seats’ that they can rely on to avoid defeat at the next election. One of the triggers of this is Zarah Sultana’s declaration of a new left party last week. It may have been unwise to relegate Corbyn to co-leader without his explicit agreement and the outcome of that issue between the two is still not clear. But Sultana was not wrong to press for a declaration, and she has received a large number of sign-ups and donations to the account she set up from those keen to join.

Those people are from a range of backgrounds, including former Labour members under Corbyn, young people disillusioned with all main parties, long-term socialists who see the need to unite their different forces. They have already broken with Labour organisationally and have voted Green, Independent or not voted in recent elections. They are determined not to support Labour again and there is no sign that Starmer is likely to appease the left any time soon, despite the humiliating defeats he is suffering from his own once-trusted backbenchers.

The reaction of Angela Rayner to Unite’s decision to suspend her membership over the Birmingham bins dispute is an exemplar of the arrogance that we have come to expect. Many who were desperate for a Labour government find that there is so little on offer that there has to be a left alternative. Polls show that such a party would take votes from both Labour and the Greens.

There is still a degree of opacity about this new formation. There is also a fair amount of discontent and even anger that its future is decided by small numbers of self-appointed people behind closed doors, and there is also a widespread sense that whatever is going to happen needs to happen quickly. That’s because the situation is urgent – economic crisis, poverty, employment, are all if anything worsening. The rich are not being touched by any constraint on their wealth – a wealth tax is too often dismissed as ‘unworkable’ when there is no such evidence of that. 

But there’s also a second reason: other forces will get their act together if the left does not. A Guardian analysis of the new party includes dark warnings about such a party splitting the left vote. Well yes, this is exactly what it is designed to do. Only a party as entitled as Starmer’s Labour could assume that it will be able to witch-hunt the left for years, drive them out of positions as MPs and councillors, introduce policies that attack working-class people and help arms dealers, and mimic the Tories in their scapegoating of migrants, without any consequence from those on whom their votes rely.

But Labour’s left will put this argument strongly in the run-up to the next election, and they will argue that a split in Labour’s vote will let Reform in. They are already saying that the rebellion over disability cuts gives hope that new MPs will stand up to Starmer. There is also a burgeoning left in the Greens hoping that Zack Polanski will win the leadership next month. As ever, this means that a new party will have to fight for its politics against established organisation.

This brings us to a third problem: it is not clear what the politics are, except in the most general terms. It is very clear to me and no doubt many others that reform of the system – as characterised Labour for the postwar years – is simply inadequate to deal with those who control it, and to challenge the unaccountable wealth and power which dictates our lives. It is also clear that whenever protest movements of any sort challenge these priorities, the state moves to crush them.

To discuss these issues and to ensure that any such party does not fall into the trap of a new form of Labourism, we need a democratic structure which discusses what political direction it should take, how to ensure maximum unity, and how to present a real challenge to the system. We’re still some way from this.

The US funds most of Gaza genocide

The economist Michael Roberts has some astonishing figures on his blog about how the US is bankrolling Israel’s merciless assault on the Palestinians. He writes:

According to Brown University’s Costs of War project, Washington has shouldered 70% of Israel’s military costs since Oct 7, 2023. That includes $17.9 B in direct aid, $4.86 B in Pentagon regional ops, $20.3 B in deferred arms deals, and billions more in shipping losses, stockpile transfers, and corporate handouts.

That’s a cool $124m a day in the last year. It should come as no surprise that the US spends so much. According to the Brown report ‘In five years, from 2020 to 2024, private firms received $2.4 trillion in contracts from the Pentagon, approximately 54% of the department’s discretionary spending of $4.4 trillion over that period.’

Huge amounts went to five firms including Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. So while the Palestine movement quite rightly has the key demand of ‘stop arming Israel’, the Trump government is doing the opposite – and so did Biden before him. They are all complicit in the war crimes and ethnic cleansing carried out every day – and a growing part of our campaigning must be to hold our own governments – as well as Israel – to account. Every one of them is complicit in these crimes.

Not getting better by water

I had bad news this weekend when my canal trip was curtailed by the announcement that the South Oxford canal was to be closed indefinitely, that movement of boats was limited and that we would have no holiday on the water this summer. The reason given is drought caused by climate change in turn leading to water shortages. It actually turns out that the Canal and River Trust reduced water levels in the reservoirs feeding the canal in spring, which was particularly dry, instead of after very heavy rainfall in the winter.

Extreme heat caused by climate change is frightening and damaging to all sorts of livelihoods, people and wildlife. And you have to accept changes in behaviour to deal with it properly. But climate change plus cuts in government funding plus incompetence is what we are facing on the canals. And that is going to take political opposition to change.

My problems over this are trivial compared to the many who live on the canal, earn their living from it, and are now stuck possibly for months. But it’s another indication of how the systemic crises facing capitalism can only be fought from below and as part of the fight against capitalism. 

This week: My main priority is building next Saturday’s national demo in support of Palestine. Given the events going on it is as important as ever.