Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

‘Lovely people but utterly deluded’?

British political science’s trouble with Corbynism

  • Original Article
  • Published:
British Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

This paper argues that political scientists in Britain have, for the most part, failed to adequately understand Corbynism (i.e. the movement surrounding the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn) as a distinctive iteration of left politics. To substantiate this claim, we begin by mapping a consensus in British political science scholarship about the central features of Corbynism, namely that it is a misguided politics characterised by poor leadership, a ‘hard left’ ideological orientation, and a populist flavour. In the second part of the paper, we suggest that this unfavourable characterisation of Corbynism relies on problematic analytic assumptions about leadership, the left, and populism. Furthermore, we argue that such narratives do not withstand empirical scrutiny, largely because they fail to do justice to the heterogeneous strands that constitute the politics of Corbynism. In the final part of the paper, we offer an explanation for political scientists’ trouble with Corbyn, highlighting the continued dominance of the Westminster Model, widespread confusion surrounding the descriptive/normative relation, and considerable convergence between academic and media depictions of Corbynism. Overall, we suggest that political scientists’ failure to take seriously the full complexity of the Corbyn movement requires rectification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a much fuller account of some aspects of our empirical research on left politics in Britain and its relationship to feminism see Dean and Maiguashca (2018).

  2. For an interesting take on the gendered fallout of the Impact agenda’s requirement for academics to engage with the media, in general and with social media, in particular see Savigny (2019).

  3. Indeed, the anti-Corbyn thrust of much of pol sci twitter is so familiar that there is even a well-loved parody account—@ProfBritPol—which satirises political scientists’ tendency to combine visceral normative opposition to Corbyn with an ostensible commitment to ‘objective’ data-driven political science. In one case, for instance, @ProfBritPol announced the publication of an ‘analytical essay’ entitled ‘The Nightmare Rise of Jeremy Corbyn’. For the record, the authors of this paper would like to dispel any rumours that one or other of us is behind the @ProfBritPol twitter account.

  4. Unlike in the UK, in Southern Europe there is a tradition of using ‘populism’ to describe a particular form of politics favourably, particularly by analysts of left parties (Stavrakakis and Katsembekis 2014)

  5. Although disapproving from a policy standpoint, the Economist has recently and grudgingly acknowledged that it is the British Labour Party, of all mainstream left parties, that is offering the ‘most radical, detailed plans for the democratisation of the economy’ (Economist Feb 16th 2019).

  6. Arguably both the Labour Party of 1983 and the breakaway centrist Social Democratic Party defended more radical or ‘hard left’ economic platforms than the current Labour Party under Corbyn (Hannah 2018, p. 235; see also Goes 2018; Jackson 2017).

  7. This is, of course, complicated by the ongoing anti-Semitism crisis. It does seem clear that while the scope and depth of the problem (as well as the way in which is defined and measured) is a matter of much debate and controversy, this form of racism is finding some oxygen in certain corners of the Party and wider movement. And despite the fact that the attacks on Corbyn have been highly personal, unforgiving, and relentless and, therefore, his defensiveness and that of his team understandable to a degree, we still think there are valid questions being raised about the way in which the Party is responding to these accusations. At best, an opportunity has been lost to educate both party members and the public at large about the nature and specific workings of this particular strand of racism with the publication of a report entitled ‘Antisemitism in Contemporary Britain’ in 2017 by Daniel Staetsky of the well-respected Institute for Jewish Policy Research, a potentially constructive starting point for dialogue about a range of issues. At worst, various actors within the leadership team have allowed diverse factions, including opposing Jewish groups, e.g. the Jewish Movement for Labour and the more recently established Jewish Voice for Labour—to bed in and refuse to listen to each other with any care or respect. In this febrile context, the import and effect of antisemitism – whether actually widespread or not—risks becoming trivialised.

  8. Goodall’s (2018) journalistic book Left for Dead? is also, in our view, an analysis of Corbynism which, while coming from a position opposed to Corbyn’s politics, is nonetheless refreshingly detailed and considered in its analysis and critique.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research for this article was funded by the Leverhulme Trust, research Grant RPG-2015-252, ‘Exploring Left-wing Populism in an Age of Anti-Politics’.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Politics, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

    Bice Maiguashca

  2. School of Politics and International Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Jonathan Dean

Authors
  1. Bice Maiguashca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan Dean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bice Maiguashca.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maiguashca, B., Dean, J. ‘Lovely people but utterly deluded’?. Br Polit 15, 48–68 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-019-00124-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-019-00124-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation