Last weekend, it was announced that Andrew Feinstein will stand against Keir Starmer in his constituency of Holborn and St Pancras. Feinstein is a Jewish anti-apartheid activist, the son of a Holocaust survivor, who is currently based in London but is originally from South Africa and served in Nelson Mandela's Government in the 1990s. Although he is an independent candidate, his candidacy is being supported and funded by the socialist campaign group OCISA (Organise Corbyn Inspired Socialist Alliance), which I've been involved with over the last year. The group has inspired many other independents to stand against certain high-profile MPs.
I'm personally really excited to see Andrew Feinstein standing. Firstly, I think it's really appropriate that it's a Jewish candidate, given Keir Starmer's frequent misuse of the Jewish community to present himself (falsely) as an anti-racist, and I also think it's really appropriate that it's someone from South Africa, given South Africa's amazing role in leading the way in standing up to the genocidal behaviour of the Israeli state. I'm not normally in favour of identity politics, I find that it usually results in people with extremely harmful views coming across as being more forward-thinking and progressive than they actually are, but all principles have exceptions and this is one of them. But more importantly, I've been really excited to learn about Andrew Feinstein's history, his work with Nelson Mandela, his efforts to keep an awareness of the history of colonialism into politics, his calls to regulate the world's arms trade, and more besides. I'm really quite interested to see how this is going to go.
But, one thing I've come across on Twitter is quite a lot of people saying 'this will just split the left-wing vote and get the Tories in'. This is something we hear quite a lot in relation to any candidate besides Labour or Conservative, and like many oft-repeated political statements, it has an edge of truth to it but completely ignores any contextual circumstances, to the point of becoming completely inaccurate. And it's made me realise that we're so lacking in political education in the UK that many people do not fully appreciate how the system works. So here are some important things you need to remember:
1) Andrew Feinstein standing against Keir Starmer will not make any difference to which party is in Government in the next Parliament. The only way it will make a difference on the national scale is if Feinstein defeats Starmer, and Labour gets a majority nationwide. If this happens, Angela Rayner, the deputy leader of the party, will become Prime Minister by default (assuming that she keeps her seat in Ashton-under-Lyne). How long she stays in that position will depend on whether she's able to command a majority in the House of Commons. But either way, it won't make a difference to which actual party is in charge. That is a matter determined by the number of seats won nationwide, which is irrelevant to the outcome in one particular person's seat, even if that person is the leader.
2) Barring unprecedented acts of God, the MP for Holborn and St Pancras after the next general election will be either Keir Starmer or Andrew Feinstein. There is no other alternative. The Conservative Party has never held that seat since it was established in 1983, and in the most recent general election only had 15.6% of the vote, compared to Labour's 64.5% (more on that in point 4). The assumption that voting for a candidate other than Labour or Conservative is a waste completely disregards the context of any one particular seat, which is something that has to be considered in one's voting choice because that's the only bit of politics we're actually allowed to vote for.
3) This should be obvious from what I said in point1, but I'll reiterate it: Andrew Feinstein is not trying to become UK Prime Minister. This will not happen even if he wins the seat. What he is trying to do is unseat Keir Starmer, and the reason he is trying to unseat Keir Starmer is that under his leadership the Labour Party has become increasingly confused, at war with itself and with its own members, anti-socialist, and, with recent events in Gaza, apologists for genocide.
4) One criticism I've heard is that with such a high majority (64.5%), Keir Starmer is seen as unlikely to lose his seat. Personally I have no idea of the likelihood at all - I don't live in the constituency of Holborn and St Pancras, and I'm not aware of even having visited there. That's a matter for the residents, which I am not. However, what I can say is that the concept of a Labour safe seat means safe from the Tories. It doesn't necessarily mean it's safe from a concerted campaign from the left. And besides, even if Starmer manages to hold onto it, Andrew Feinstein's candidacy by itself can change the conversation a bit. It will be far harder for Starmer to claim to be staunchly opposed to anti-Semitism, for example, when a highly experienced Jewish candidate in his own constituency is expressing the opposite position.
5) Another criticism I've heard is that even if this campaign does succeed, it won't solve the problems in the Labour Party - they'll just pick another toxic leader and carry on. This one I'll acknowledge is true. I don't think anyone on the campaign to get Andrew in will pause to celebrate too hard, even if it does work. This is merely the first challenge in what is going to be a long and drawn-out mission to return a bit of democracy to British politics and create more of a natural home for socialists in this country. I think it's important to remember this even if the campaign against Starmer is unsuccessful - if it doesn't work out, we'll think it a shame, but we won't waste time mourning. We'll regroup and work out what to do next.
No comments:
Post a Comment