Britain | Bagehot

Jeremy Corbyn’s pacifist illusion

The Labour leader’s reluctance to use force threatens to make the world a more dangerous place

GEORGE ORWELL wrote, a little wickedly, in “The Road to Wigan Pier” that the British left acts as an irresistible magnet to cranks of every variety: fruit-juice drinkers, nudists, sandal-wearers, sex-maniacs, “nature cure” quacks, and, a particular peeve of his, pacifists. On the whole the Labour Party has done an admirable job of keeping its crank-wing under control when it comes to serious issues like national security. Ernest Bevin was one of the architects of NATO. Nye Bevan slammed supporters of unilateral nuclear disarmament with a rhetorical flourish about sending a foreign secretary “naked into the conference chamber”. Tony Blair’s failure, if anything, was to go too far in the use of force.

There are two exceptions to this tradition. One was in 1980-83, when Michael Foot committed Labour to unilateral nuclear disarmament and shrinking the armed forces. That hardly mattered because Foot was crushed under the wheels of Margaret Thatcher’s chariot in the general election of 1983. Another was in 1932-35, when the party was led by a committed pacifist, George Lansbury. In 1933 Labour’s annual conference passed a resolution calling for “the total disarmament of all nations” and pledging never to take part in any war. The party routinely opposed rearmament. This mattered enormously. Adolf Hitler and his confrères took it as evidence that they could proceed with impunity.

This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline "The pacifist illusion"

What’s become of the Republican Party?

From the April 21st 2018 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from Britain

Why so many Britons have taken to stand-up paddleboarding

It combines fitness, wellness and smugness

Why Britain’s membership of the ECHR has become a political issue

And why leaving would be a mistake


The ECtHR’s Swiss climate ruling: overreach or appropriate?

A ruling on behalf of pensioners does not mean the court has gone rogue