SHARMINI PERIES: It's The Real News Network.
I'm Sharmini Peries, coming to you from Baltimore.Last
week, Britain's Labour Party made a rather
surprising turnaround on Brexit by opening
the door to the possibility of another referendum
on Brexit.JEREMY CORBYN: The Prime Minister's
botched deal provides no certainty or guarantees
for the future, and was comprehensively rejected
by this House.
We cannot risk our country's industry and
people's livelihoods.
And so if it somehow does pass in some form
at a later stage, we believe there must be
a confirmatory public vote to see if people
feel that's what they voted for.SHARMINI PERIES:
Until now, the Labour Party leader Jeremy
Corbyn took the position that the 2016 Brexit
referendum, according to which the UK would
leave the European Union, was going to be
the position of the Labour Party.
However, the recent departure of seven Labour
Party members over how the party was handling
Brexit, and also recent allegations of antisemitism
against the party, all led to the unexpected
announcement by the Labour Party leader about
favoring a second Brexit referendum.Is this
a concession to the Labour Party dissidents
and the Blairites in the Labour Party?
That's a question we're going to take up with
our next guest, Leo Panitch.
Leo is a senior scholar and professor emeritus
of political science at York University, and
he is the author of the book The End of Parliamentary
Socialism: From New Left to New Labour.
Thanks for joining us, Leo.LEO PANITCH: Hi,
Sharmini.SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Leo,
let's start off with why did Jeremy Corbyn
take this step to agree to a second referendum?LEO
PANITCH: They've been trying to balance those
portions of the Labor Party which have been
anti-EU, anti-joining Europe, going all the
way back to the first referendum in 1975 when
the party was split over this.
So was the Tory party.
Those splits in both parties have continued
to this day, and in the context of the great
crisis of the last 10 years, different elements
have used it as a way of reviving the anti-European
mood.
Some of it in reactionary ways; some of it
in ways that tie Europe, quite rightly, to
the politics of neoliberal globalization that
led to the crisis.There's always been these
divisions in both parties, and certainly in
the Labour Party.
The manifesto that Jeremy Corbyn did so well
on, "For the many, not the few," in the last
election said that Labour would accept the
outcome of the referendum.
It did not say, however, that it would accept
an outcome which would make Britain even more
neoliberal.
And since then they've had to walk a tightrope.
Corbyn has always made it clear that he doesn't
want to leave on a racist, anti-immigration
basis.
He's always made it clear that Labour's position
was in favour of a customs [union].
There was no walking away without understanding
that there would have to be a deal with the
European Union of a kind that would be more
or less progressive.So they've been consistent,
in that respect.
And he, for a while, has been quite successful
in avoiding taking a choice.
The right wing of the Labour Party, the Blairites,
joined by others who have starry eyes about
Europe who aren't necessarily Blairites, are
strongly Remain, and so are a lot of the Labour
Party members, especially in the South.
Especially among younger people.
And he was able to, by saying we want a certain
type of linkage with the European Union, one
that has a customs union, as close to a single
market as possible, the acceptance of the
best rules as possible, and human rights,
and labour rights, et cetera, he was able
to make a bit of an appeal to those who actually
want to remain.
At the same time, by saying we accept the
outcome of the previous referendum, he was
making an appeal to those who wanted to leave,
many of whom represent constituencies who
voted to leave, and who are in danger of falling
to a right-wing UKIP anti-immigrant appeal,
which could be revived in a second referendum.
Increasingly--he did well with that because,
you know, if you were going to vote one way
or the other, you might as well vote for this
Corbyn line, which was closer to Europe than
the Tories, and yet was closer to leaving
on good principles.Now, it came to the point
where the momentum, small M momentum, behind
those who wanted a second referendum, which
had been led by the old Blairite element of
the party, has been such, so great, that the
pressure became greater and greater, and it
looked like.
Corbyn was being irrelevant to the debate.
Voting against May's deal as a bad deal, insisting
you can't have no deal.
Than what?
The Party conference had said.
We want a general election.
And if we have a general election, Labour
will negotiate a progressive break with Europe,
one that will leave a very close tie.
That was their position.
It said, though, that failing all other options,
everything's on the table, which everyone
took to mean and did mean even a second referendum.And
that's what they finally opted for.
They they tried to bring down the government
after she was so massively defeated in Parliament
when she brought this deal to Parliament,
and the Tories then voted, those who dissented
from her deal, with the right wing Northern
Irish MPs that are supporting her, as well.
They immediately closed ranks, as, of course,
they would, since it's the last thing they
want, is a socialist in Number 10.
So the election didn't become possible.And
in that context, the pressure to say, OK,
we have no option; either it's going to be
a bad deal, or even worse, no deal at all.
In the new election, the pressure on Corbyn
to come out for a way of calling for a second
referendum became great.
No doubt these MPs leaving was a factor.
But I don't think--it may have affected the
timing.
But I think the dynamic was in this direction,
in any case.Just to be very clear, all they're
really saying is that they are going to put
an amendment which will say that we want a
referendum if this bad deal of May's goes
through, or if no deal is what's on the cards.
And they'll put that as an amendment.
And if that amendment isn't accepted, they
will possibly abstain on whether to accept
May's deal.
If they abstain, then there'll be enough votes
for May's deal to go through.
But Labour's position would have been this
is a bad deal, and this should be considered
illegitimate, unless you have a second referendum
or an election.
In that way, you may see May's deal going
through.SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Leo, Prime
Minister Theresa May has been very busy negotiating
the new and improved version of the Brexit
deal.
Should it be rejected outright?
Or is there anything in it worth voting for?LEO
PANITCH: No.
All it does is kick the can down the road.
You know, she is promising the unions and
Labour MPs that she would guarantee certain
labor rights.
But really all this does, all her deal does,
is guarantee Europeans leaving the UK and
UK citizens living in Europe that their rights
will be grandfathered.
All the rest is going to be negotiated.
There will be a trade arrangement which will
continue, which is a customs union, until
the negotiations are settled.
The Tory far-right doesn't want a customs
union.
Labor wants a permanent customs union settled
beforehand.
And she's not giving in to that.
She wants everything kicked down the road.So
in that sense, what Labour is calling for
is a set of guarantees that there will be
a customs union.
Permanently.
The Tory Brexiters don't want a customs union
for all.
And what they're afraid is that the temporary
one that would continue while she's negotiating
would be continued forever because of the
problem with Northern Ireland, with the border.
They're saying that they'd have to continue
a customs union until they work out something
with the Irish border.
I think the Tories may give in to something
vague on this.
But for the moment that's what they've stood
on.Labor wants a bunch of other guarantees.
They want something close to a single market,
as far as possible, which has to do with services
and labor movement.
But they also want a guarantee that at least
a minimum of existing European rights, human
rights, labor rights, maybe some capital rights,
would be maintained.
And then if a socialist Britain that does
even better than Europe, it would take the
lead.
Those would come into force.
Labour is also proposing close ties, including
common funding and participation, in a whole
set of European institutions.
Education, environment, industrial relations,
also security apparatuses.
Those are the conditions that they are putting
on for what they would accept as an acceptable
deal.
If those aren't met, then they will say any
deal that it passes, Parliament would have
to go to a referendum.
Or if there's no deal, that, too, would have
to go to a second referendum.So you see, it
could get through.
Labour would be covering their rear end, if
you like, both as those who wanted a second
referendum, and with those who wanted to stay
close to Europe, by taking this tactical choice.
It may still be only a tactical choice that
Labour is making.
I think that this leadership, and of course,
the leave MPs, and the unions, could accept
May's deal only because it kicks everything
down the road.
And then they would hope that there would
eventually be an election, and Labour would
be able to negotiate a much better arrangement
with the European Union.SHARMINI PERIES: All
right.
Now let's go back to this issue of the dissidents
from the Labour Party.
Corbyn's campaign slogan, which was Labour,
"For the many, not the few," really caught
on.
It was a uniting kind of a slogan.
And he was doing very well with that slogan,
even after having lost the last election.
And there was a lot of organizing behind it,
Momentum and others.
Now, this dissident group of seven that resigned
last week, does--and I guess we should add
the antisemitic allegations to that--combined,
does this really represent a decline or demise
in the support for the Labour Party?
And also, tell us what this independent group
is, and what it might manage to achieve in
the context of UK Labour.LEO PANITCH: You
have to remember that the majority of the
parliamentary Labour Party tried to bring
Corbyn down just before the last election,
when he increased Labour's vote by such a
massive amount, from 30 percent to 40 percent
of the total electorate.
The majority of the Labour Party are either
Blairites--that is, gung-ho globalizers of
the Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton variety,
the Tony Blair variety, and gung-ho for the
American empire.
Or there's an old set of social democrats.
Some of them are young people.
But you know, they think in terms of the old
mixed economy, let's get back to the 1950s
arrangement with responsible capitalism.
And then there's a whole bunch of relatively
unformed people who could go either way.
And they tend to be looking primarily at whether
they think they'll get reelected or not.
They're pragmatic, and they'll blow with the
way the wind blows.So you constantly have
to be looking at what Corbyn is doing not
in terms of Corbyn being in clear control
of the party.
And those who wanted to bring him down are
still there, and they, cynically, may want
to be bringing him down either on Brexit,
or by using this appalling trumped up charge
of antisemitism in a completely cynical way.
I don't think the majority of them are doing
that, but they certainly can get on a bandwagon
when a fire is lit under them, or when they
fear that they might lose their seats.
So you know, this is continuing to plague
the core of the leadership turning a Labour
Party into a democratic socialist party, even
with Corbyn as the leader, even with Momentum
having pulled in so many young activists.
It was never going to be easy.
On the contrary, the more that it looked like
Corbyn had wind under his sails, the more
determined were those who were antisocialist
to keep the pressure up.
And while they sometimes take principled stands,
some of them can genuinely believe that to
recognise a Palestinian state is ipso facto
antisemitic.
You know, I think that's objectively, of course,
absurd.
Bit they can believe it.
And there are people who are so committed
to the notion of the European Union representing
progressive human rights values, despite all
of what they've done in terms of imposing
austerity on Europe, they will act on this.And
holding this coalition together, even with
Corbyn as leader, is by no means easy.
And that's what you see playing out.
The Labour Party cannot be a socialist party
without splitting.
If it splits, however, it can't win the next
election, or maybe even the one after.
People desperately need a Labour government
for defensive purposes to finally stop the
austerity.
A report just came out today on the massive
effect of austerity on local councils, who've
had to sell off libraries and community centers
in order to pay for the next round of cuts
that are being imposed upon them by the central
government.
So the desperation to get a Labour government
in--and of course a Corbyn Labor government
would be clearly committed against austerity.
The Ed Miliband-led Labour Party accommodated
through the Tory demands on austerity.
The difference between the Corbyn leadership
is that it's absolutely clear that it would
not do that.But you know, this is a very,
very shaky enterprise that Corbyn is sitting
on top of, and he's not helped, I think, to
some extent, by activists who don't see the
long run strategic perspective.
They're are so committed to Palestinian rights
that they're prepared to split the party now,
if need be, in order to take on the cynical
people who used that as itself antisemitic.
Whether it's worth having this fight at the
moment, they're not thinking about.
They're acting on principle.
Similarly with Brexit, there are some people
who are so in favour of the European Union
that they aren't strategically thinking, or
so against the European Union, either way.
They aren't strategically thinking in long
run terms; in terms of, well, even if we left,
we still would be facing the main opponents
to a socialist Britain inside Britain itself,
and in our links with the American empire.
So you know, getting out of Europe in a progressive
way doesn't necessarily mean that you're able
to do what you want in the world.
Far, far from it.So I don't think people are
holding on to the--and I'm talking of activists
now, who are strongly supportive of Corbyn.
They can also screw things up by not looking
in a strategic way.
Now, it's true if Corbyn is not giving them
clear leadership in this respect, then he
can be really judged as a failure.SHARMINI
PERIES: No greater point of that, Leo, than
when the Treasury off the United States actually
asked the bank of England to freeze the accounts
of Venezuela, their gold holdings, and the
Bank of England.
And quickly the UK complied with that request,
strengthening the point you're making, which
is that the American Empire has a grip on
the UK with or without the EU.LEO PANITCH:
Right.
And you can see why it must be the case that
the security apparatuses are doing what they
can to undermine Corbyn from, you know, at
levels we can't see.
You know, I don't want to engage in a conspiracy
theory.
But it's very much the case, obviously, that
a government that is doing everything it can
to bring down Maduro doesn't want a leader
of the British Labour Party going into Number
10 who has spoken well of the Chavez experiment,
just as the Israeli government, it's to be
expected, and the Mossad, where it's their
job to be looking at who might become head
of a major political party, or head of the
state, who would be sympathetic, as Corbyn
has not backed down at all on recognizing
a Palestinian state.This is a very, very ugly
international world that we're talking about.
It's not a matter of conspiracy.
It's a matter of real forces at work which
are pro-capitalist and anti-capitalistSHARMINI
PERIES: All right, Leo, let's leave it there
for now, and we will probably be back to next
week as this vote for the new Brexit deal
goes forward.
And apparently Theresa May is expected to
make some concessions to Labour there.
Look forward to speaking with you then, Leo.LEO
PANITCH: Keep up the good work, Sharmini.SHARMINI
PERIES: And that was Leo Panitch joining us.
And Leo is a senior scholar and professor
emeritus of political science at York University,
and he's also the author of the book The End
of Parliamentary Socialism: From New Left
to New Labour.Thanks again, Leo, and thank
you for joining us here on The Real News Network.
