VENI, Vidi, Vici & # 39; – & # 39; I came, I saw, I conquered & # 39; – is attributed to Julius Caesar. As far as the visit of Jeremy Corbyn to Scotland was concerned, it was more a case of "he came, he saw, he failed." In a TV interview earlier this week, he was asked six times if he believed that Britain would be better off outside the EU and six times he failed to answer, a symptom of his leadership.
Brexit is the biggest political issue of our time. Sterling has crashed, the standard of living has fallen and the future prosperity of the many, though not the few people who drive it, are threatened. The government makes late contingency plans for a No Deal Brexit as it has not been considered since Dunkirk was evacuated or nuclear oblivion was considered, and an election could very well be achieved.
It is therefore not something to be considered on. But what was given was fudge and waffle. "I want to have a good relationship with the EU, which is what we need to keep jobs" was the answer. What does that mean exactly? Even fiery Brexiters do not argue for a bad relationship with the EU, they simply want to "have their cake and eat it". to paraphrase their new de facto leader Boris Johnson.
There are also two other factors. In the first place, Mr Corbyn supposedly voted Remain, in accordance with the official position of Labor. On that basis you would assume that he might have said that Brexit was not his preferred position and that there are consequences that he tried to soften. Instead, there was only an eclipse that confirmed the position of many that he was always a closet Brexiter and equally active in support of the official employment if Theresa May was loyal to David Cameron.
Secondly, he is the alternative prime minister, not a modest backbencher. Indeed, if the last election had lasted a week or if the tragedy of Grenfell had happened a little earlier, he would have been able to occupy 10 Downing Street very well at that time. So it is not a question he can avoid because of his interest and position. But he did it and frankly it was pathetic.
I am ready to give Mr Corbyn a fair wind. I thought his election campaign last year was refreshing and his behavior was exemplary at the time. He captured a mood throughout the country that wanted change and showed great dignity when he was brutally and often unfairly attacked.
I have assisted him because of claims about anti-Semitism, where I think that accusations against him are totally unfounded, even if his treatment of the problem leaves something to be desired. I even sympathized with him when he saw himself isolated and attacked by many of his own MPs.
Despite my doubts that he knew little or did not care about Scotland, because he had no idea of life outside the M25 corridor, I was prepared to give him some leeway. But it has been more than two years since the Brexit voted and as we are reminded daily, the clock ticks and it is more than a year since he was strengthened by the election result. So no more. He not only fails in his leadership, but also fades into his political positioning.
During the Scottish visit he went to Edinburgh Book Festival, where he shared a platform with Yanis Varoufakis, another darling from the left. Fist bumps were exchanged between Mr. Corbyn and the former Greek finance minister, but there is a gap between them on Brexit. The latter has written and lectured on international socialism, not socialism in one country & # 39; and pleads against Brexit. The first, on the other hand, seems to want the Brexit, despite words about a "job-based Brexit" or empty statements about a "customs partnership not customs union". Mr. Varoufakis is looking for unity on the left and works within the EU, but Mr. Corbyn endorses "socialism in one country" that Stalin first advocated and failed wherever it was tried.
The freshness that Mr Corbyn has ever brought has long been worn out. It is not just Britain but the world has changed and it is still stuck in a time-warp. There is no new vision that the left needs so badly. Instead, it must be a siege economy and policy from the 1980s, if not the decade before. Jim Callaghan's Laborism and Michael Foot's socialism both failed and the world has gone further with globalization.
I share Mr Varoufakis's concerns about the future of socialism, since the social democracy I support is collapsing all over Europe, but his solution offers more hope than Mr Corbyn's.
Meanwhile, the party he leads is bitterly divided and unable to work out what his position is in almost every major issue. The old political adage that the opposition is in front of you but the enemy behind you seems to have been written for the Labor Party of Parliament. It is not only in Westminster where the knives are out with MPs refusing to serve in his cabinet, but in Holyrood, where the majority of MSP's supported Anas Sarwar, not Richard Leonard.
How is the party opposed to anti-Semitism? Is it that of Margaret Hodge and her allies or Corbyn and his followers? Who speaks for Scottish Labor? Is it Richard Leonard or Ian Murray, as with critical issues, they often seem to be diametrically opposed? Who is Lesley Laird and what is her goal?
The stay in the north was an opportunity to reset the dial of the constitutional problem, because Labor is trying to regain the support he had destroyed during the independence referendum. A year ago, suggestions were made to expect new statements about federalism. Well, we're still waiting and while never equating Holyrood with a parish council like Tony Blair, his support is just as lukewarm and insincere as his commitment to stay.
His failure is a tragedy for the whole country. Not only the most incompetent government, but the most detestable administration in the living memory can sometimes be returned, where the leader is even supplanted by someone who is worse.
Labor must be able to offer salvation, instead it is almost unattractive and does not offer an alternative to the critical problem. Thousands who recite his name do not bring socialism. A credible and coherent policy is required.