Political parties
finding themselves in difficulty whilst retaining an absolute conviction that
they are right about everything have a tendency to start to believe in the idea of a Messiah. If only, the
story goes, we had a different leader, all would be well. That’s the first
stage of messiahdom.
The
second stage comes when they alight upon the Chosen One. He (and it’s
invariably a ‘he’) might not be immediately available: perhaps he’s overseas or
at the very least stuck in political exile in the frozen and inhospitable north.
These are simply obstacles to be overcome.
The
third stage is when the Chosen One himself starts to believe that he really is
the Messiah, the one the whole world has been waiting for, and the only one who
can put right those things which need to be put right and lead his party to the
sunlit uplands. That seems to be about the point at which the Labour Party has
now arrived.
The
fourth stage is the anointment of the new leader, and it’s the trickiest of all.
It’s far from clear at this point whether Labour will overcome this particular
hurdle. There will be those who lay obstacles in his route, such as re-opening
a debate which makes it harder to persuade ordinary people outside the party
to vote for him, whilst smiling sweetly and uttering welcoming words. Maybe his
silvery northern tongue will win round the doubters, both inside the party membership
and amongst the wider electorate, maybe not. I have a suspicion that at least
some will feel more than a little p****d off at being taken for granted in the
power games being played with and around them.
Whether
the Labour Party gets through stage 4 or not might be an open question, but if
they do, then stage 5 has a degree of inevitability about it. This is when it
becomes clear that he’s not the Messiah at all, just a very naughty boy. Heroes
almost invariably turn out to have feet of clay. The chances
that a change of leadership will solve the problems of the Labour Party are
slim; the historical record (particularly over the past decade) does not
exactly convince me that switching out the person at the top will change any of
the fundamentals, even if it may deliver a short term boost based more on hope
than experience. A glib tongue and a chameleon-like ability to change position
are no substitute for substance, and a few years spent in the political wilderness
do not necessarily equip someone to succeed in the top job.
The potential for
doing more harm than good is high, particularly if he falls off the horse at
the next hurdle. Still, as spectator sports go, it’s better than a lot of
politics.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment