Editorial (issue 33)
Livingstone leaves us stuck with plan B
NEW LABOUR continues to reel over Ken Livingstone’s challenge to Frank Dobson and the support he is receiving. Ken still has a lead of 45% even after the initial wave of support after he announced his candidacy had subsided.
This is based on a widespread backlash against the rightward march of Blairism and Millbank manipulation. A Livingstone victory, which now seems unstoppable, will be seen as a major blow against the control freak tendency in Millbank and Blair’s right-wing project.
But it is more than that. This candidacy has the potential to change the landscape of British politics and is welcomed by all those who are frustrated and disappointed by New Labour’s time in office. It is a situation with huge potential for the left.
New Labour’s crisis stretches far beyond London. They have abandoned their traditional supporters in favour of middle England and big business. The effects of this were felt in a series of election results over the past year where the Labour vote collapsed dramatically.
This, along with the Livingstone challenge, has created a new political situation which poses the possibility of a broad-based alternative to the left of Labour for the first time in the post-war period.
In this Ken Livingstone carries with him the aspirations of a very large number of people who are looking for change and for an alternative. This is true whether he recognises it or not. Unfortunately he seems not to recognise it, or has chosen not to do so.
It was clear that Ken had turned his back on these supporters when he called on them to stay inside the Labour Party, an appeal which is in the direct interests of Millbank. He has the view that he will get back into the party himself at some point in the future. This seems fanciful, but again it helps to hold the line for the Blairites.
He also made it clear, as he declared his candidacy, that he will not form a new party. While launching a new party immediately would not have been the right thing to do, he is not organising his base of support at all. This wastes the enormous potential of his move as well as depriving those who want to work for him of a forum for political debate..
Instead Livingstone’s response to the mass support he has received has been ever more populism. He presents himself as "the best man for the job" rather than as a political alternative to new Labour.
But for socialists, Ken Livingstone as mayor is not an end in itself. What is needed is not Ken Livingstone standing as an independent on a populist platform, but him standing on a socialist platform. He should have organised a socialist slate for the Assembly to support his campaign for Mayor.
Only by doing this and organising his supporters around a political alternative to new Labour can the full potential of the current situation be realised. And there is no doubt that if he did so, even now, the response would be huge. Not only would current Labour Party members join him, but so would others who have left in disgust at Blair’s trajectory. Thousands who have voted Labour in the past would become involved.
To turn his back on such a potential is a stab in the back to all those who oppose new Labour. It deprives the workers’ and social movements of the real potential of the situation. It is a major climb-down for someone who has presented himself as a leader of the left in various incarnations for over 20 years.
Given all of this, the London Socialist Alliance (LSA) has responded very positively to the real dynamics underway. The LSA gives full support to Ken Livingstone for Mayor and is standing its own slate for the Assembly.
This it takes the anti-Blairite dynamic of the Livingstone campaign and fuses it with the socialist perspective of the LSA. On the ground, support for the LSA is broader than anyone initially expected
The LSA has rightly continued to demand that Ken Livingstone changes his mind. He should stand on a socialist platform, with a slate based on some form of democratic selection within the left and the wider labour and trade union movement.
The LSA would give way, at any stage, to such a slate. But it seems likely now that not only will Livingstone not stand such a slate but will in fact go it alone.
But it is not just Ken Livingstone who has failed to rise to the challenge of building a socialist alternative out of this situation. The Labour left, and in particular the MPs, have been in the best position to influence him in the right direction. But they dramatically failed to do so.
They seem to have lost the plot at the point where the battle broke. Some left MPs have gone further and are actively campaigning for Dobson.
All this is creating great opportunities for the LSA, and it is responding accordingly. All those involved have a responsibility to develop its potential to the full and to ensure that the LSA continues after May 4.
But we have to be clear: positive as the LSA campaign is, it is not the preferred option for developing a fight back against Blairism.
It is sad that the person who was in the best position to develop this dynamic – which is in itself far bigger than him – has turned his back on its potential.