Authors Shaun Lawson

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Yesterday, of course, Jeremy Corbyn launched his Peace and Justice Project, to much excitement on here. Laudable goals too:

Take on Murdoch ✅
Green New Deal ✅
Support for food banks ✅
Speed up vaccine delivery in developing countries ✅

That's all excellent.

I'm not sure if anyone can argue with those four aims: they're irrefutable and all massively important. You bet I'd like to see Labour doing likewise; you bet I'm frustrated that it's so quiet on all of it.

HOWEVER...

Contained within the announcement was exactly the same selective blindness which makes the entire thing all too easy to shoot down - and again, means Corbyn is pretty unlikely to persuade anyone who's not already persuaded.

The sort of blindness which makes me tear my hair out.

Peace and Justice - sounds great, doesn't it? So why did the Peace and Justice project proudly announce the support of a corrupt criminal not remotely interested in either of those


Rafael Correa, former President of Ecuador. Let's run through his record, starting with the positives.

Slashed poverty from 36.7% to 22.5% ✅

Reduced inequality from 0.55 to 0.47 on the Gini index ✅

So far, so good. Except, um...
This is why I just don't buy that 'Corbyn changed politics'. He did his best, sure - but the movement didn't move anywhere, even under his watch.

It's strange, looking back, how much potential was wasted. And not just because of PLP sabotage either. All very sad.


On a related note: I've seen many tweets insisting that Corbyn *proved* Labour don't need donors' money.

Sorry, no he didn't. Because we lost: in general elections, European elections and local elections again and again and again. Despite the massive membership.

He certainly enthused and inspired many... but ultimately, not enough. And he was like Marmite to the wider electorate for all sorts of reasons: some legitimate, others a lot less so.

See also: Sanders. Enthused and inspired many, dragged the platform leftwards, not corporate funded in any way... and never close to winning.

How big is the Tory membership? It's a heck of a lot smaller than Labour's even now... yet look at their majority. Money still matters.

To be frank, Labour will always be the underdogs. Our entire history - which is embarrassingly bad electorally - demonstrates that.

So we have to think differently, act differently (Starmer falls down on both at present) and combine activism and Parliamentary politics together.