Ed Miliband was not New Labour in any way. In fact he declared it dead. He was centre left as Kinnock was but more constrained by the economic environment.RobertSnozers wrote:Ed Miliband was still New Labour, even if he moved a bit away from it over time. Was 'approach of Brown and his younger follower unsuccessful'? Or rather, would it have been if they hadn't faced frequent attacks and attempts to undermine them from within the party? Miliband had to expend vast amounts of energy just holding the party together. How do you expect him to shine under those circumstances?SpinningHugo wrote:I see, so Ed Miliband was a Blairite? I suppose from the perspective of the Bennite left we do all look the same.
In addition to David Miliband (see above) the other person who shares a large slice of the blame for the disaster about to inflict Labour is Tony Blair. The source of that was, and is, Iraq.
Iraq completely discredited Blair. The numbers who still support the Iraq War and Blair's part in it are tiny, but are disproportionately represented in the media (and as AK likes to point out, especially the Times).
Within the UK, that disaster not only brought down Blair eventually, it also fatally undermined that right of the Labour movement. Today, if you label someone a Blairite you associate them with Iraq, disgrace. and failure.
Not all of this is rational of course. Corbyn has disgracefully pandered to those who shout war criminal at Blair.
With the downfall of Blairism in 2007, the stage was set for those who consider themselves 'mainstream Labour' to shine. Unfortunately Brown and Miliband proved rather less successful at winning elections than Blair had been.
So, with Blairism not an option, and the approach of Brown and his younger follower unsuccessful, what was the choice?
Corbyn.
Let's look at it another way. Do you think a Blair-led Labour would have won in 2010 and 2015?
I'm not sure your 'Iraq killed Labour' narrative works. Labour won an election after that with a pretty big majority, even with Blair at the helm, though I think if it hadn't been understood that he was going sooner or later, that might not have been so certain. I don't know that 'Blairite' predominantly creates an association in the mind with Iraq - to me it smacks of discredited neoliberal economics, criminally light-touch regulation, private sector encroachments where there should never have been, bloody academies, foundation trusts and so on.
Plus when I think of Labour 97-2010 I look at huge amounts of redistribution (on the quiet) a long period of economic prosperity, Kosovo and the defeat of Serbian nationalist ambitions, Sierra-Leone (also sadly Iraq). I think of the rescue and rebuilding of the NHS and I think of 3 election victories.
Corbyn is going to have to rapidly dissociate himself from his more stupid foreign policy statements (and I think the word is fully applicable here). His position on Kosovo being one such example. This stuff matters in a leader, because people are trusting them to defend the country.
Blair wouldn't have won in 2010, he had lost the plot by then. David Miliband might have, but he does seem to have a complete charisma bypass so probably not.