Electoral democracy, like the upcoming general election, functions as it was made to: as a tool for maintaining a power establishment, and to preserve those who move within it. It is also perhaps true that periodic elections are the strongest pillar of the illusion (and convenient fiction) that democratic processes are completely free and fair. But is this always the case – especially with candidates like Jeremy Corbyn?
General election: voting for the prize hen of the corporate class
Public discourse in the run up to an election is at best biased and at worst propagandist manipulation. Such malignant narrative management makes it impossible for people to reach an informed choice based upon impartial and accurate data, a forebear of sustained democratic health.
Media and political broadcasting corral people into marching formation to vote for the prize hen of the corporate class. Another aspect of deleterious corruption suggesting democracy is only notional is the fact of enduring relationships between super rich donors, politicians and party leaderships, the secretive, protected lobbying industry.
Electing people who end up making policy reflecting the influence and needs of corporations, rather than public needs, is not meaningfully democratic.
The existence of corporate lobbying and the democratic dysfunction it creates suggests that the surface rift between the main parties in the UK bipartisan system is illusory.
Both teams are unified at the core by clear contempt for the sovereignty of parliament and the sovereignty of the public, an attitude blatantly obvious to anyone observing the recent deluge of dangerous anti democratic and illiberal policy.
Corbyn launched a sea change
All those moving in the corridors of power, regardless of party affiliation, share tendencies to neglect public interest issues, seldom pursuing the common good. Significant numbers of politicians breach the parameters of parties, the bipartisan divide, in shared pursuit of a narrow calculus of self interest.
As a result most policies benefit only the upper and corporate classes, far removed from addressing concerns of everyday people.
Jeremy Corbyn’s ascent to Labour Party leader in 2015, a shock result, was sunny with the promise of deep reform to this flawed, failing system. He galvanised one of the most vibrant, hopeful, and inspiring examples of a powerful popular resistance movement in recent British political history.
His ascent heralded a new era of rehabilitation for original, founding Labour values, a mission to bring the soul and substance of the party back to life. This was a promising time in which mass enfranchisement significantly expanded, particularly amongst a hitherto apolitical youth constituency, driving a profound forward shift in political consciousness, political literacy, and social awareness.
Corbyn’s tenacity, resilience, and grace in dealing with a vile, relentless smear campaign marks him out as a person who leads by example, with more integrity in his little finger than most politicians have in their entire body.
Starmer: coiled up in the corporate corruption
Should his successor Keir Starmer command a victory in the upcoming general election, the only thing we can look forward to with any certainty is the continuing retrenchment of the ideals, values and altruism Corbyn symbolised.
A glimpse into Starmer’s professional history helps us understand why and how he became the reactionary figure he is recognised as today by many leftists.
His professional timeline began, promisingly, as a senior human rights lawyer, with a vast portfolio of casework relating to human rights abuse, which he tended to conclude successfully and according to the path of justice.
However, when he was later appointed as head of the Crown Prosecution Service, it turned out to be a juncture in his career in which he gravitated heavily in the direction of serving the empire, phasing out his earlier orientation in human rights activism.
Such seniority, power and authority in an office that is an auxiliary and subsidiary of the crown inevitably corrupted the man. Many decisions made by the CPS during his tenure have proved questionable at best, downright sinister and dubious at worst.
One suspects that if all the truth were told about Starmer’s intentions, that he is a composite element in the ongoing attack on socialism and the working class, that he is as coiled up in corruption as the conservatives, his opinion poll advantages would collapse, as well as the pledge of votes he has marshalled.
A vote for Corbyn may well not be wasted
To conclude, the aggregate result in a general election, such as the one we are about to face in the UK, is not necessarily a vote of approval for, or confidence in, those who attain power, despite the declarations of politicians that it shows people trust them.
Deep down many voters don’t believe those they vote for deserve a mandate, and recognise them as reactionary, but vote anyway, to assert what’s left of the slim bargaining power of the vote.
The peril to the establishment of Corbyn is that he explicitly sought to fix and reform this dysfunctional political system, whose dysfunction benefits elites.
The real story of how he “failed” is not that he lacked political competence, but that he was subject to a deep, coordinated attack, to neutralise the existential threat he posed to the status quo, even from within his own party.
Ultimately, to topple the status quo we must go beyond merely voting in a general election. However, voting is completely justified where the candidate is a threat to the status quo. There is one running in Islington North.
Featured image via Wikimedia
This post was originally published on Canary.