The long 2018?
Labour’s election performance in England has been good in London and patchy elsewhere with some progress on 2018 but arguably not enough.
John Curtice who comments on elections, and often brings an independent perspective beyond Party spin (not one I always agree with btw) has argued that Labour did slightly better under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership 4 years ago. Perhaps but comparisons are difficult.
However some Labour commentary has blamed ‘long Corbyn’, an argument that people don’t vote Labour because they recall the last Labour leader. There is an obvious problem with this even if we assume its true. Far from everyone disliked Corbyn and those who supported him, a significant number, even if an inconvenient point to some, may well feel that his current treatment by Labour is enough to swerve a Labour vote. In fact people who take that view regularly pop up on my twitter timeline. Its one I understand but it leads to another discussion about alternatives.
Historians are familiar with the concept of ‘long’ and indeed ‘short’. Eric Hobsbawm wrote of the long nineteenth century (to 1914) and the short twentieth century for example.
Politically though its often an excuse. Those who are old may well recall Harold Wilson using the phrase ‘thirteen years of Tory misrule’ at the 1964 Election. There was truth in it but it was still used when he was PM and when he himself might reasonably have been expected to be accountable for events.
Talk of Long Corbyn is a distraction at best. If Labour is serious about winning an Election and I hope it is (Johnson needs to go) it needs to stare reality in the face not play silly games.
Leave a Reply