American Leftists Believed Corbyn's Inevitable Victory Would Be Their Model

[brooklynite]

New York Magazine

The British election results, like any election result, is the result of unique circumstances and multiple factors. It is also, however, a test of a widely articulated political theory that has important implications for American politics. That theory holds that Corbyn’s populist left-wing platform is both necessary and sufficient in order to defeat the rising nationalist right. Corbyn’s crushing defeat is a decisive refutation.

Many writers, not only on the left, detected parallels between the rise of Corbyn and the movement around Bernie Sanders. The latter is considerably more moderate and pragmatic than the former, and also not laden with the political baggage of Corbyn’s widely-derided openness to anti-Semitic allies. And yet many leftists have emphasized the similarities between the two, which are indeed evident. Both built youth-oriented movements led by cadres of radical activists who openly set out to destroy and remake their parties. Both lost in somewhat close fashion, Sanders in 2016 and Corbyn the next year. And fervent supporters of both men treated their narrow defeats as quasi-victories, proof of victory just around the corner.

Arguments of this sort tend to quickly devolve into straw-man attacks. So, in order to show that the view I’m describing is widespread, I am sharing lengthy excerpts from a half-dozen essays written by American leftists in recent years:

[Crowman2009]

1. The Labour Party's indecisiveness on Brexit had a lot to do with it as well.

How can you have a cohesive platform on a policy matter when your party can't decide which side it's on?

[brooklynite]

9. A big part of the problem was Cornyn proactively deciding to focus on the Left's economic issues...

...and not taking a hard stand on Brexit.

[msongs]

2. maybe its a good message delivered by the wrong messenger nt

[empedocles]

3. Leftist excerpts in the article are very scary. So is 'blue wave' theory.

[First Speaker]

4. It's depressing that both the Tory and Labour Party have come to this...

...they've both given so much to Britain, and the world. Both stood for civilized values when uncivilizing forces, fascist and Communist, threatened the West. How the hell did Britain, of all countries, come down to a choice between Johnson and Corbyn...?

[kimbutgar]

5. Corbyn was not likable or inspiring. And perceived by some as anti Semitic and anti Muslim

That’s the reason labor lost seats. Corbyn was not able to galvanize voters.

[bluedye33139]

78. I would not have been able to vote Labour

Corbyn is a deal breaker

[VarryOn]

6. Corbyn is a horrible comp to Bernie...

Despite political stances reasonably close or at least in the ballpark, the two politicians arent comparable.

Corby's likeability...or unlikeability, should I say...cant be compared to Bernie's. Corbyn is an absolutely horrible politician who, quite frankly, gives all appearances and impressions of disliking his country. The man has never smiled, cant debate, and has positions that completely bogle the mind (i.e. never kill terrorists). He's not very bright, gets along with few, disses the Queen, and is probably anti-Semetic. He's passionless.

Bernie is quite intelligent, and no one has ever questioned is patriotism. He's obviously a good politician. Bernies is passionate about his beliefs, and I love when he's wound up when speaking.he knows what he beleives and defens his positions with passion and eloquence.

[Blue_true]

12. Sorry. Many people won't vote for Bernie is a primary for exactly most

of the traits you attributed to Corbyn, exception is anti-Semitic, Bernie certainly is not that.

[VarryOn]

14. No way he'd ever get my vote, for sure...

But I was just trying to convey how bad a person Corbyn is.

[Recursion]

25. IDK. His position on Palestine would probably get smeared as anti-Semitic

Wouldn't be the first politician of Jewish origin that happened to.

[Blue_true]

87. Bernie's position on Palestine is nuanced and correct. It is not anti-Semitic,

and people would have to be reaching to pull that out.

[Recursion]

93. People will reach

Again, it wouldn't be the first time

[OldRed2450]

15. If Corbyn would have won

People would certainly say, "see, we must nominate Bernie." Lol

[Cha]

20. Oh yeah. Now it's.. "there's

no comparison.. "

[OldRed2450]

22. Isn't this Bernie's campaign?

Link to tweet

[Cha]

23. Yeah, so what happened?! Wrong guy?

.. who I read was indecisive on Brexit, too.

I guess they didn't knock on enough doors or they weren't convincing enough.

Thanks for that!

[The Valley Below]

21. Spot on.

[Blue_true]

103. I have been a Corbyn phobe for several years, even before Brexit.

I believe that he is clueless. I watched him debate Cameron and May and was totally underwhelmed every time that I saw him. I have no idea how he came to head Labour, but it should be perfectly clear now that putting him in charge was hugely bad.

[The Valley Below]

104. To me this speaks to the central problem with populism.

When people whipped into a rage by demagogues who exploit and inflame their anger, they almost never make good choices. Rage is linked with irrationality, not reason.

Making smart choices--and seeing the potential negative consequences of policy positions--takes a cool head.

Keeping a cool head is fundamental to liberalism. And fundamental to making wise decisions.

[Cha]

31. Thanks for that.. I'm passing it on..

[Cha]

30. Ya think! nina turner yesterday..

Link to tweet

ETA~I see this has already been posted to you.. by the person I got it from.

[OldRed2450]

32. Yes, see!

You know they would have taken a victory lap had he won.

[Cha]

33. Or a 1000!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

44. So you're happy that Corbyn lost?

I would think DU would generally be pissed and saddened at this. YMMV, I guess.

[OldRed2450]

45. No way.

It was a mistake to run Corbyn

[Cuthbert Allgood]

46. So your position is that when a candidate loses, it was a mistake to run that candidate?

Just making sure I understand your claim.

[progressoid]

68. Apparently so?

[brooklynite]

81. It was a mistake to run the candidate when his weakness was obvious months in advance

If Labour leadership THOUGHT he was going to cruise to victory, that's an even bigger indictment.

[Demsrule86]

90. He didn't just lose...it was the worst defeat since what the 30's so yeah safe to say they should

not have run that candidate...the proof is in he pudding.

[rockfordfile]

101. I don't think so.

[enough]

7. Was there anyone expecting a Corbyn victory in the past year?

[Blue_true]

13. People who have their head in the sand.

The only good thing about the debacle is that it will be impossible for Corbyn to continue to head Labour. Some are saying that tonight was the worse defeat of Labour in 84 years.

[brooklynite]

80. Labour managed to lose seats they had held since the 30s...

...even through the "Loony Labour" period in the 70s.

[Recursion]

26. They can be found on Reddit and Twitter. Search for "#youthquake"

It's the problem with echo chambers (ahem): we forget that we're out of step with most of the country, which is the reason we sought an online forum to begin with.

[Mike 03]

53. I didn't expect a win, but I was hoping for a hung Parliament.

This was a bloodbath, but I'm beginning to understand why.

[LenaBaby61]

59. Not me.

Friends in London told me months ago that Corbyn was going to lose because of the way he was running his campaign/lackluster ideas (Affordable healthcare, affordable college is lackluster?), and because those around him KEPT referring to themselves as 'proud' socialists, and as we know Socialists/Socialism is a buzz-word for everything that is wrong with society. It's the devil It's just like you seeing these thuglicans and right-winged fascists in this country blaming EVERYTHINGracist, or everything that goes wrong or that is immoral in society at large on Liberals, Socialists or on George Soros (USA).

🙄

[Autumn]

108. I don't think anyone who was paying attention was expecting a Corbyn victory.

[abqtommy]

8. For me the basic factor in the recent U.K. election is that the process was NOT fair or secure.

It looks like our U.S. election in 2020 won't be fair or secure either and I believe that's the factor that will
decide who wins.

[brooklynite]

10. What actual evidence do you have the UK election wasn't "fair or secure"?

They use paper ballots, hand counted in a public setting.

[abqtommy]

16. I had a text comment from a Brit in a DU op but no evidence that would satisfy a reTHUG.

I just expect a replay of the U.S. election in 2016 and the Leave Referendum in the U.K. where intelligence reports I read about stated there was ratfuckery all around. Let's not forget that the ability
to influence the vote comes pretty close to changing the vote. And anybody who says that our U.S. vote is fair and secure is lying. Now are ALL the votes in the U.K. counted, and by whom? Just going with my gut here since my nose is expecting a really bad smell.

[brooklynite]

17. Have you actually watched the UK Election tally?

They bring the ballot boxes, under guard, to large public counting site under inspection by all Parties.

As for WHY voters voted the way they did, Johnson clearly went after the half that supported Brexit and Corbyn...didn't take a position.

I don't care what your gut tells you

[dware]

19. I can say with complete confidence that you

know nothing about how Britain conducts their elections and the security surrounding the counting of ballots.

[Recursion]

27. They literally show the two stacks of paper ballots next to each other

It's not clear to me how that's hackable.

[Blue_true]

11. People who believe that should open their eyes.

I don't want to feel like I felt on election night, 1984, looking at an almost totally red electoral college vote map.

[Cha]

18. LOL @ THIS...

And fervent supporters of both men treated their narrow defeats as quasi-victories, proof of victory just around the corner.

[NYMinute]

24. Corbyn is toast

Should be a lesson here

[Tiggeroshii]

28. Labour had a whole anti semitism scandal that pretty much destroyed their chances in the last weeks.

[Gothmog]

34. Moving too far left is a bad idea

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Cuthbert Allgood]

48. Andrew Sullivan

Is there another Andrew Sullivan that isn't a right wing piece of shit?

*checks*

Nope. That's the same person.

Nice source, bro.

[comradebillyboy]

57. Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

58. Or, and stay with me here, it would be silly

to take advice on what the Democratic Party should do from a Republican asshole.

[Gothmog]

98. Washington Post-Britain's Jeremy Corbyn: I got my ideas from Bernie Sanders

Link to tweet

The leader of Britain’s Labour Party credited U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with some of his social democratic campaign planks, telling the writer Naomi Klein that he embraced comparisons with the Vermont senator.

“Bernie called me the day after our election here,” Jeremy Corbyn said in an interview published Thursday by the Intercept. “I was half-asleep watching something on television. And Bernie comes on to say, well done on the campaign, and I was interested in your campaigning ideas. Where did you get them from? And I said, well, you, actually.”

Corbyn, who won the leadership of the Labour Party in 2015 and held it after a 2016 challenge, has frequently been cited by Sanders as an example of how left politics can win. This year, a snap election that began with predictions about Corbyn driving Labour into the wilderness ended with a series of surprise gains, and Prime Minister Theresa May clinging to power in a controversial deal with Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party. According to a post-election analysis by Ipsos Mori, over half of eligible British voters under age 30 turned out — double the youth turnout rate in some American elections. That led to surprising Labour gains in cities with large universities, with student turnout overturning large Conservative majorities.

“There’s a lesson to be learned from what Corbyn did in the U.K.,” said Sanders in a recent interview with The Washington Post. “The remarkable thing about his election — and he did better than I did — was that among younger people, the voter turnout was as high as it was among the general population. That was unprecedented.”

[Cuthbert Allgood]

106. How exactly does that address the fact

that Sullivan is a right-wing turd and his advice about what the Democratic Party should do is worth nothing?

[WoonTars]

49. Is thst the same Sullivan that supported W bush?

Just checking...

Also his "hot take" ignores the results of the 2018 US mid-terms, and just about every other special election since.

AOC? Ring a bell??

But yeah, let's take advice from a republican as to what sort of platform the Dems should run on...

[Awsi Dooger]

94. We'd be fools not to ignore the 2018 midterms

You really think that's going to be the landscape in November 2018...an 8 point generic ballot edge?

No chance. Both parties get caught up in this lazy thinking, after the first term midterm avalanches their way. They can't imagine it won't play out the same in 2 years, and with even greater slant.

Meantime all the natural edges favor that incumbent.

How can we acknowledge that we are losing ground with white America, yet somehow believe we own all the advantages toward 2020? Big picture generalities like that mean a heck of a lot more than any poll. If we somehow defeat Trump it will be by a desperate whisker.

[Gothmog]

97. Blowback from U.K. election burns Warren, Sanders

Link to tweet

“It’s a lesson for all Democrats who are eager to replace Trump,” said former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. “There was no skimping on the progressive agenda and it was the worst performance in two decades. It’s not just economics. You have to have a candidate and a message that’s close to the zeitgeist of the moment — not just a grab bag of giveaways.”

The thoroughness of Corbyn‘s thrashing revived the longstanding debate within the party over just how ambitious the Democratic agenda should be, and provided fresh ammunition for the arguments of moderates who contend that if the party backs Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, the primary’s leading progressives, they’ll lose the Rust Belt and perhaps even elsewhere.....

"Corbyn was basically a satellite project for Bernie world. If there is one lesson to be gleaned from the devastating loss across the pond, it's that we need more than just soaring rhetoric backed up by bravado of organizing,” said Murshed Zaheed, a Megaphone Strategies partner and former Harry Reid aide backing Warren. “We need to have leaders who have crystal-clear analysis of how to solve problems and leverage power to achieve those solutions. Corbyn never appeared to be a candidate with any sound plans on how to move U.K. forward.”

Before the polls closed on Thursday, Sanders’ national organizing director, Claire Sandberg, had tweeted that the “Bernie team says #VoteLabour” with a picture attached of campaign staff. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a top congressional ally who has campaigned with Sanders in Iowa, also tweeted in support of Labour. Two 2016 aides to Sanders, Becky Bond and Zack Malitz, had traveled to London earlier this year to help the pro-Corbyn group Momentum as well.

[WoonTars]

107. Apples and oranges. Brexit was the issue. Lack of a clear policy by the...

Labour party, coupled with extreme character assassination by the media, helped generate this loss.

It has no bearing on a US presidential election.

Naturally that doesn't stop moderates from bleating out their centrist mantras.

The UK already has socialized medicine, so this bullcrap about "too far left" translating over into the States is just that, bullcrap.

We've run centrists before, and they've all lost.

It's time to put up someone who understands that we need bold new plans, not just a return to some mythical centre on the backs of independents, "moderate" republicans (unicorns), and "undecideds".

The correct lesson to learn from last week's drubbing is that the Labour party failed to adequately stand up for working class people and the need to fight back against the "haves".

Simples.

[Hortensis]

35. Of course. Radical leftists always believe they represent "the people."

The more extremist people become, the less anchored their beliefs are to the realities that disprove them. And that particular belief is core to their identify, their excuse for political existence, and their justification for ruthless tactics. Losses prove not lack of support but the power of the evil forces oppressing the people.

And no number of crushing defeats will ever crush that delusion. Because the truth can't be true.

[Act_of_Reparation]

36. "Radical Leftists"?

Are we talking about molotov-tossing bolshevik revolutionaries, or anyone to the left of Joe Biden? Asking for a friend.

[LongtimeAZDem]

37. I'd start with people who constantly throw areound the word "revolution"

[Dem4Life1102]

39. Exactly right

America doesn't do revolution but evolution.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

47. Ummm, I have a fundamental problem with "America doesn't do revolution"

but, hey, you do you.

[Dem4Life1102]

50. It doesn't

so you have a fundamental problem with reality?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

51. The country started with a revolution.

That provides some tension with your claim.

[Dem4Life1102]

52. And none since then

[Cuthbert Allgood]

56. Civil War & Fight for Unions

[Dem4Life1102]

60. Nope

Especially the fight for unions

[Cuthbert Allgood]

61. That was clearly our economic revolution.

France cut the heads off their monarchs. Russia killed theirs as well. We didn't go violent, but it was clearly an economic revolution.

[Dem4Life1102]

64. No

More evolution than revolution.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

66. Have you read about that time period? There was nothing easy and gradual about it.

It was a very violent time both literally and figuratively. It didn't "just happen" over time; people made it happen. Without the movement forcing it to happen, the rich would never have taken care of the workers. And, I would argue, if the union movement didn't work, we would have had a more violent revolution like the European countries did but it wouldn't be monarchs being killed but the rich.

[Dem4Life1102]

72. Still not revolution

Stop pretending that it was

[Cuthbert Allgood]

76. Define revolution, then.

And evolution. Because I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

[progressoid]

71. Martin Luther King wouln't agree.

A social movement that only moves people is merely a revolt. A movement that changes both people and institutions is a revolution.

[Dem4Life1102]

73. What event was he specifically referring to

[geardaddy]

74. Um, there have been huge violent labor riots and strikes since colonial times

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Labor_disputes_in_the_United_States

Here's one that happened in my lifetime in my area:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2010/08/09/hormel-strike-summary

[Dem4Life1102]

75. Still not revolution

[progressoid]

84. Well, since you refuse to define what you think a revolution is, I think this "discussion" is done.

[Dem4Life1102]

86. Nothing in American history

after 1789.

[Act_of_Reparation]

40. And how many would we then have to rule out because of equivocation?

[LongtimeAZDem]

41. No worries; that's only a problem if people are being deliberately obtuse

[Act_of_Reparation]

43. Yeah, THAT's it.

The college student talking about revolution is literally talking about overthrowing the government. I'm just being obtuse. Good call.

[progressoid]

70. "We are involved now in a serious revolution. This nation is still a place of cheap political...

“We are involved now in a serious revolution. This nation is still a place of cheap political leaders who build their careers on immoral compromises and ally themselves with open forms of political, economic and social exploitation. What political leader here can stand up and say, "My party is the party of principles?”
― John Lewis, March: Book Two

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. I appreciate Sanders precisely because he is not "a radical leftist"

Sanders occupies the left flank of the American mainstream. The vast majority of those who support him now in polls, or who voted for him in 2016, do not self define as "leftists". However it is easy to understand why those who do see themselves as decidedly "leftist" would support Sanders as coming closest to representing their views among those who stand any real chance of getting elected president. As the author of this piece acknowledges:

"Many writers, not only on the left, detected parallels between the rise of Corbyn and the movement around Bernie Sanders. The latter is considerably more moderate and pragmatic than the former, and also not laden with the political baggage of Corbyn’s widely-derided openness to anti-Semitic allies."

[Happy Hoosier]

42. I am not a Bernie fan, but Bernie isn't Corbyn.

Having said that, too many American progressives were Corbyn fans, to their discredit, IMO.

[Crowman]

54. My analysis (short)

the two largest right parties cut a deal (BREXIT TORY)
the two largest left parties did not cut a deal (LABOUR LIB-DEM).

BREXIT + TORY is 2% + 42% = 44%
LABOUR + LIB-DEM is 32.5 + 11.5% = 44%

Over and over constituency results that came in during the election coverage showed that one of the 2 left parties took just enough votes away to allow a Tory to win. The right party deal prevented that from happening.

[totodeinhere]

65. Most of Corbyn's proposals were mainstream progressive. I don't think it's to anyone's

discredit to have supported him. Yes I know about the charges of antisemitism, but he has always denied any antisemitic leanings and I take him at his word. I think his main fault was that he is not a very good politician, but most of his ideas are sound.

[Happy Hoosier]

67. It's not just about policy though....

It's about leadership and judgment. Corbyn has been a shitty leader, and exercised poor judgement.

Bernie needs to learn form this episode, IMO. It's not enough to have policies people support. He needs to a able to lead the party, and not staff up his campaign with people who have trashed the party and encouraged people to vote for Jill Stein. Until he does that, I can't see him as the leader of the Democratic party.

[brooklynite]

83. Nationalizing industries is not "mainstream progressive"

There's actually a word for it, but it escapes me.......

[totodeinhere]

85. Good point. But as a progressive myself I guess I tend to defend politicians on the left.

n/t

[Humanist_Activist]

88. Many countries have nationalized industries, Norway's Oil industry comes to mind...

also a lot of heavy industry around the world is at least partially owned if not outright operated by national or regional governments, its not exactly a radical policy.

[brooklynite]

89. Have Senator Warren advocate the same and see how far she gets...

[Humanist_Activist]

95. Sorry, for a moment I forgot we are talking about the US.

Didn't know Corbyn was running here.

[TheRealNorth]

55. I'm so glad I can come on to DU

And find Democrats attacking other Democrats.

Blue no matter who, unless it's Bernie Sanders.



Btw - the problem with the left in Britain is that it is broken up into 3 other major parties, and parliamentary votes are not allocated purely on a percentage of the vote. Otherwise, the Conservatives wouldn't have 56% of the seats with 44% of the vote.

[totodeinhere]

62. If American leftists really believed that Corbyn's victory was inevitable then I want

to try whatever they've been smoking. 🤣 There was never any indication that his victory was inevitable. The Conservatives were consistently polling ahead of Labor running up to the election. The only surprise was that they won in a landslide, but that they won was not a surprise.

[Odoreida]

63. Nonsense. It was all about Brexit.

Once they really get Brexit out of the way either Labour will have a comeback (minus Corbyn at the helm), or else some other socialist party.

For that matter, by USA Republican standards even Boris Johnson is kind of "left" on a lot of issues.

[brooklynite]

69. BUT, it reflects ignoring the issue voters cared about in favor of the candidate's issues

Sanders has had this problem in the past.

[bluedye33139]

77. Whaaaaaat? Corbyn is awful

[booley]

79. Given 2016 are you sure you want to make this argument?

I seem to recall another Inevitable" election.

And we don't need to look at another country with a different election system to find an example of trump beating a centrist.

All you seem to be doing is reminding everyone of that time the "safe candidate wasn't really safe.

Though I am reminded of that time the guy who was seen as the most progressive in the race DID win.

2008.

Hope and Change? Remember that?

[Demsrule86]

91. Obama did not run left...he ran as a moderate.

[booley]

109. He ran a s a Progressive. People saw him as Progressive

That was why Obama chose Biden. He felt he had to reach out to more conservative members of the party.

But things like the ACA and other things, that all moved us to the left.

And MY POINT is that he didn't run on small incremental changes. He ran on big ideas. He inspired people, probably to the point that many thought he was more progressive than he really was. But the idea that he ran a "safe" campaign is not supported by the facts. There is a reason why Obama beat Clinton in the primary.

Also what probably really bugs me is the selective amnesia some appear to hold. That "center" used to be considered radical. The ACA and the consumer Protection Bureau and other stuff used to be considered out there.

If we don't give people a reason to vote, many of them won't vote, no matter how bad the other guy is.

[BlueTsunami2018]

82. Corbyn is a repugnant asshole.

Only slightly above BoJo. I didn’t expect him to win at all.

No one running in our party is the kind of person Corbyn is. We need to remember that this upcoming election is not a radical change election, it’s a return to normality election. People want to stabilize the country, re-establish relationships with our allies and get someone with sense and experience at the helm.

[Gothmog]

92. The NYT has some great comments

Link to tweet

[tenderfoot]

96. Everyone seems to be happy Johnson won

It's all about "likability", "optics", "pizzazz" with Americans. Even with Democrats.

[Gothmog]

99. I dislike Johnson

Johnson is a clone of trump and is not qualified to be Prime Minister

[whathehell]

105. Nonsense..

and don't blame Americans for this --- We didn't vote for him.

[rockfordfile]

100. I don't know any leftist that thought that. It's clearly propaganda to push fascism

More left leaning supporters thought he should step aside

[whathehell]

102. I don't either, and I agree that its a propaganda effort,

an attempt to conflate the anti-semitic Corbyn with the American Left and it's complete and utter bullshit.