A general election is upon the British people. General elections in Britain are theatrical affairs that rely on the generation of enthusiasm through manufactured differences in policy and outlook. By doing so continuity is achieved through the semblance of genuine controversy and the myth of liberal democracy is preserved. That myth rests on the idea that there are two substantial views of how the country should be run that are in contention and that the electorate is free to choose between the two.

The one genuine exception to this account, where substantial and genuine differences were in play between the Conservative and Labour parties, took place in the summer of 1945. The Labour Party had a programme in the working-class interest that it was determined to enact. It had the solid backing of the trade union movement which had played a key part in mobilising the country during the war, many soldiers and ex-soldiers supported the programme and civil society, after years of war and the experience of collective sacrifice and collective action, was also ready for change.

Seventy-eight years later those conditions have long ceased to apply. Civil society is despondent, the optimism generated by shared collective hardship has disappeared and the trade union movement has ceased to regard itself as a dominant social partner in the renewal of politics and society. Between 2015 and 2019 there appeared to be a chance that the Labour Party would represent the working-class interest. This danger was rapidly and ruthlessly dealt with by the use of a smearing technique against the then party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who was too mild in personality to put up effective resistance. His lack of clarity about what exactly constitutes ‘anti-semitism’ was also a handicap. He should never have accepted that criticism of Israel could be construed as anti-semitism. The ICC and the ICJ are now as ‘anti-semitic’ as so many expelled Labour members (many of them Jewish) ever were.   His political career and the mildly social democratic turn that he represented have been extinguished.

 The two main political parties are dominated by career politicians with an interest only in being useful and congenial to large corporations. The Labour Party still relies heavily on funding from the majority of trade unions but gives virtually nothing to them in return, which they accept. In addition the Labour Party is heavily subject to the covert influence of two foreign powers, Israel and the United States. The Conservative Party is also under the domination of these two foreign powers, together with extremely rich individuals with their own agendas who provide the finance for its operations. It should be noted that much of this finance originates from overseas. There are no differences, even in appearance between the two parties on foreign and trade policy, and there are a few differences of detail on domestic policy, which will not necessarily manifest as differences in substance should Labour come to government. This despite the fact that the country faces enormous problems that require close political attention, substantial funding and a considerable degree of patience. In this issue of Labour Affairs we reprint an article by Nikola Bryce of the Workers’ Party of Britain that illustrates just how dishonestly the issue of national renewal is treated.

Even were the electorate inclined to do some critical thinking, the BBC and the private media, who effectively control information, make that difficult if not impossible to do. You cannot think critically if you have no access to reliable information about which to think coherently. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the UK is in practice a one party state which maintains a clever theatrical illusion that this is not the case, in which all the players know their part and play it to the best of their ability. A big problem for the ruling elite (career politicians, their funders, their media organisations and the clubs and think tanks through which they operate) would be an independent civil society with an independent trade union movement at its core. Fortunately for them, this does not exist and what dissent exists is confined to a few independent-minded trade unions like the RMT and aspirational political parties, by far the most promising of which is the Workers’ Party of Britain. The WPB has identified the problems that the UK faces and has achieved some success against the odds. 

The UK works on the basis of a two-party system. This would be the case even were there genuine differences between the parties. If follows that the Labour Party, which is probably too corrupt to reform, will have eventually to be displaced. No-one should underestimate the magnitude of such a task. It will take many years to achieve from a standing start. The focus on parliament is important, but so also is a focus on the institutions that sustain working class life, first and foremost the trade union movement. It is a dilemma for any political party as to where it should most productively direct its resources. But if the Workers’ Party is in business for the long haul, the renewal of civil society in the locations where it is strong has to be a priority. We recommend that our readers vote for the Workers’ Party or like-minded independents where an opportunity offers itself in their constituencies and believe that it will develop as a mature and coherent national organisation with strong roots in local communities.

Jeremy Corbyn is standing as an independent in his own constituency. Unfortunately his political destruction has already been completed. He now has an opportunity to point to the external forces that destroyed him, to alert the British people as to how their political system is abused and manipulated. We doubt that he will take that opportunity, partly because he is too heavily invested in some of the assumptions about ‘anti-semitism’ that helped to destroy him. If he cannot tear away the veil that hides the operation of liberal democracy then it must fall to someone else to do so.