Will history repeat itself?

For over a hundred years, the primary political dichotomy within the world of English politics was between the landed aristocratic class, being generally more socially and constitutionally reactionary, and that of the up-and-coming capitalist class, empowered by the capital created through industrialisation and generally being more socially and constitutionally liberal. They were united however, by their belief in the necessity of the oppression of the lower classes. Be their justification god or money, the outcome was the same. But 100 years ago, something began to change. One of the key issues separating these two groups: the matter of trade policy: of a protectionist or free trade disposition, was no longer a dividing matter. The political similarities between these two groups, now represented by the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party, was becoming increasingly apparent. Sound familiar at all?

At the same time, a new political force was arising. One dedicated to representing the heretofore unrepresented part of society: the working class. In the face of the rising Labour Party, the similarities between the two major political parties made the Liberal Party, previously the major left party, obsolete. They came 3rd after Labour for the first time in 1922, supported a Labour-led coalition Government in ’23, a Labour minority Gov in ’29 and finally were displaced entirely by a landslide Labour Government in 1945.

Our current political epoch is similarly defined by a dichotomy of two sides, where like the Tories and Whigs that both represented the ruling classes, we now see that both of our modern, major political parties represent the same political ideology: they hold a commitment to an entirely privatised economy; a belief in complete individualism and submission to markets. In short, they submit to an ideology perfectly designed to maximise wealth accumulation for a small few through isolating people and removing the power they can gain through working together.

As a societal form, this ideology has not entirely encompassed us. Forms of collective working-class power remain and the echo of our country’s historical, pre-industrial culture (which whilst mostly reactionary is still antithetical to the contemporary dogma) hang like a snagged cape holding back neoliberal domination. But within the political sphere ALL major political parties adopt neoliberalism’s mantra and commit to it with only minor alterations in the specificities of policy.

They say history repeats itself, and whilst we humans do possess a remarkable ability to identify patterns where none exist, the rapid and overwhelming growth of a political movement during the last 7 years that rejects this pre-agreed political agenda is unmistakably reminiscent of the growth of the Labour Party and the inclusion of the working class into the political theatre 100 years ago. Of course now, the Labour Party is a function of that mainstream consensus it once opposed and something new is building in its place. You know what they say, you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain...

This all begs the question: what exactly is being created and how will it manifest itself? This new movement, which one might designate as being Democratic Socialist (an ideology I would define as being an anti-neoliberal from of Social Democracy), is fortunate in that it has had around 5 years of practice within the political arena through the medium of Corbyn’s Labour Party. Whilst obviously in its own right, history has proved the project of democratic socialism within Labour to have been unsuccessful; within a wider view of our movement, the experience gained in terms of electoralism, the experience of being an elected representative and fighting those factional conflicts will prove to have been vital in what is to come.

Our movement is already developing into an organised political force, however prematurely that might be. Attempts at creating a new socialist political party are numerous and yet remain individually unsuccessful. When there is supposedly a potential MINIMUM membership of 200,000 people ready to join a new party within our movement, the failure of the overly-online Breakthrough or Northern Independence Parties to capture the potential innate within our movement is blatant. Whilst the separatism of socialist councillors in various local authorities such as Liverpool to form new groupings is bold and invigorating, without wider organisation, their bold efforts will be swept away come election time. The Unions too have been inspirational leaders for socialists over the last few years. A newfound sense of political independence from their traditional home in the Labour Party alongside the collaboration of industrial efforts across unions has produced some of the most successful expressions of working class power in decades. the utter speed with which hundreds of thousands of people joined the frankly underwhelming Enough is Enough campaign is a clear sign of the enthusiasm for change. And yet, without organised political direction, what hope is there of achieving permanent solutions to the issues that demand industrial action in the here and now?

In comparison, it feels fair to say that our movement is more scattered and un-invigorated than it was during the years of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour? One could easily ask "Is the situation hopeless?" To that I would say that once again, it is history which provides us with an opportune mirror through which we can analyse our own situation.

The labour movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries was not some singular bulk force of working class power nor was the Labour Party the offspring of such a singular group. Represented now in the various affiliated Trade Unions and Socialist Societies which the party has, the Labour Party was born out of a confederation of working class and socialist parties and organisations. The fundamental value of democracy, which lies at the heart of the labour movement, dictates that this unite-and-compromise form of organisation is the only legitimate basis for a new party. This can be seen elsewhere on the left. In the 1910s and 20s the communist movement too had the organisation of a political party at the top of its to-do list. The breadth of theoretical and practical thought that existed within the communist movement was astounding and great effort was made to unite the various parties and tribes into a singular political force. It even came to the point where Lenin himself personally intervened to get Pankhurst’s Left-Communists to unite with those of his own more dominant disposition here in the UK. One can only imagine what success the communists may have later had if that attempt at unification had worked in the long term. With the 1926 General Strike on the horizon, history may have been very different if the communists had been able to come together like the Labour movement and made the most of that unique and revolutionary opportunity.

So that brings us back to today. A vast array of political groups, firing on all cylinders to try and regain that political excitement and dynamism which we know is out there and that we saw in Corbyn’s Labour. It seems apparent to me that history will repeat itself. When the time is right, all of these many parties, groups and unions will come together and a new political party will confederate and the fight for a better world will have truly begun.

That is not to say that the inevitability of such a thing should breed complacency. The bodies and parties which will come together to create a new, national party are not yet themselves manifested. What is left up to us humble folk now is to get together on our own basis, organise around our ideals within our communities and build ourselves up so that when our movement organises into this new party, we’ve given ourselves a running start.