A new socialist/ left party in the offing? No, just more rumours.
HOW we set up a new party will go a long way in determining HOW it would function. The signs aren't encouraging. It definitely needs a steer.
By Alan Story
When you look up synonyms for "rumours" in a thesaurus, you'll find an array of terms: gossip, scuttlebutt, hearsay, whispers, tittle-tattle, speculation, buzz, and even terms like “over the back fence.” Recently, I discovered an unfamiliar term from US English: "roorback," which essentially conveys the same concept.
Regardless of the term you choose, there has been a surge of speculation recently about the potential launch of a new left or socialist party in the UK. Only a select cabal seems to have the inside scoop on what's truly happening.
As for the “who,” “when,” “where,” and “how” of this proposed party, all of that remains purely hypothetical and hearsay. In other words, mere rumours.
However, the “why” is crystal clear. Currently, there is no significant left-wing party in the UK that truly represents the hundreds of thousands—if not more—who are deeply concerned about the rising cost of living, the ascent of the far right and Trumpism, issues surrounding Palestine and climate justice, and the escalating repression around us. For many, neither Starmerism nor Reform is a viable solution.
Coventry South MP Zarah Sultana
We can only rely on anecdotal evidence regarding the support for a new mass socialist party. Last week's post in THE LEFT LANE, which urged MP Zarah Sultana to leave Labour and consider joining the uneven movement for such a party, was one of our most read pieces in a while and garnered between 40 to 90 likes and loves on a number of left-leaning Facebook groups. Party building was a central topic at a day-long London event in late March attended by 2000 activists.
Understandably, many are becoming increasingly frustrated by the lack of concrete information about this new party. Over the past 72 hours, THE LEFT LANE has reached out to more than ten left-wing "insiders," seeking interviews to clarify their plans. None were willing to discuss or provide substantial information.
Yet, the issue runs deeper than just a news blackout. The manner in which this new party is established and built will significantly influence what type of party it becomes.
Will it be OUR PARTY—a collective that socialists and workers can genuinely endorse and rally behind, not just during elections? Or will it become a top-down organization dominated by MPs, local councillors, political insiders and figures from other "left" groups? This fundamental question is at the heart of today's edition of THE LEFT LANE.
As we will explore in a few paragraphs, this proposed "new organisation/ party” appears to be rooted in “old” politics and ignoring a vital truth of our time: millions feel alienated and manipulated by the current political system. They are fed up with the paternalistic attitude of "we know what's best for you." The lesson here is clear: learn from this disillusionment rather than replicate it.
To explain: This latest party building effort is almost entirely a closed-door and top-down effort from a small group of self-selected leaders. But this is a very limited notion of leadership and is a wrongly conceived view if we are to create a successful party of the left.
In his excellent 2021 book, “Neither Vertical nor Horizontal: A Theory of Political Organisation”, Rodrigo Nunes stresses the importance of what he calls “distributed leadership” in left-wing organisations. This type of leadership “lifts the weight off a particular organisation or individual with a leadership position and distributes it across the ecology the organisation to fulfil the function of leadership. This shifting of emphasis from position to function not only democratises leadership but also redefines radicality”, as a review of the book explains. Or as Nunes writes on page 34,” successful processes of social change are neither wholly centralised or dispersed, they're always distributed.”
GET OVER HERO WORSHIP
The left in the UK must get over its hero worship, whether that hero is Arthur Scargill, Tommy Sheridan, or George Galloway. When one of them screws up - and the three above definitely have - the whole organisation which they lead can collapse. And has done so. So do stop dreaming a magic saviour for the British left will appear.
B) A second thing never to forget is the need to have proper structures in place for organisation building, whether that be an active membership, a formal and accountable leadership, or the nitty gritty of an organisational infrastructure, such as a website or a treasurer.
Let’s return to Nunes on pg. 122 “: … nothing happens without such structures being in place, however informal they may be. However improvised and spur-of-the-moment a demonstration or a riot is, it never truly corresponds to the myth of a multitude unconnected individuals joining together all at once, like a crowd in the musical magically breaking into song. Furthermore, I am saying that unless such structures have a capacity to act that is proportional to the efforts that are expected from them, the likelihood of those effects is greatly diminished.” In short, to build an active and effective UK-wide socialist party we need a very well-honed structure.
Of course, there exists some kind of structure linking those people at the forefront of this new organisation-building effort. One problem is that few outside it know how it works. For example, there is not even a listed national e-mail address or a website and, when you write an e-mail to a group like Collective, you do not get a reply … or a civil one. (HERE was my attempt and I know of others.) It is all a “who you know” type of outfit and “it” doesn’t even have a name. This spells trouble for how a new party might operate.
We could continue in this vein for some paragraphs. But let's move on to the evidence that is available about the current effort an organisation building?
WHERE ARE WE ARE AT ON 22 MAY?
What rumours are we hearing so far? Here are at least nine of them. I stress again that none of them are verified.
1) The first one is from the Transform Party. In a 21 May newsletter, it said that in a recent Zoom call, “EC ( executive committee) members reported that from what they’ve been hearing, the project will finally go public this summer, and the new Party will be launched probably sometime in 2026. It will be a membership-based Party, and although local groups will play an important role in it, it will be a national Party and not some kind of federation.”
Thanks for this report. Not your fault, but unfortunately this is a “what we’ve been hearing” and “probably” kind of statement. And no names are mentioned and the type of “national party” mentioned is given next to zero detail.
2) A 10 May headline in the Socialist Workers Party newspaper told us “ Corbyn almost declares new left challenge to Starmer.”
3) At a recent rally in Huddersfield, another left-wing paper told us that former Labour leader Corbyn said: “Now I hear the call for a new political party…This whole cause is coming together so that by next year’s local elections, long before that, we’re going to have something in place that is very clear, and everyone will want to be part of and support."
The questions that some are asking: Is it really up to one person to decide if and when we need a new “something in place”? How will be coming together? Perhaps insiders know, but who do you contact? And will that “something” be a fully-fledged mass socialist party or not? (See point 9 below where one experienced blogger doubts it will be.)
3) Another left-wing newspaper reported that “at an historic Conference of Resistance in Huddersfield on 10 May, leading figures from across Britain’s left came together to launch the People’s Alliance for Change and Equality (PACE) – a new movement bringing together community campaigns, trade unionists and social movements in Kirklees to build a working-class socialist political alternative.”
No details were given in the article as to how this might occur.
Andrew Feinstein, a political insider on the left, is expected to campaign again against PM Keir Starmer in the London constituency of Holborn and St. Pancras in the next general election. Feinstein previously was a long-time member of the Labour Party.
4) Andrew Feinstein, a political mate of Corbyn, says there is a reason why the “extensive” conversations about a new party “for a few months now” must be kept secret. “There are people who are in very sensitive positions that makes it very difficult to make public some of the conversations that are taking place,” Feinstein told a recent session sponsored by Counterfire.
Do you buy it? THE LEFT LANE doesn’t. Feinstein was a key player in the equally secretive Collective project which seems to have gone off the political radar screen of late. As was reported in a meeting of some Transform members in a 15 May Zoom call, “Questions were raised as to whether we can and should put our trust in any new Party that emerges. Given the current lack of accountability, can we be sure that it will be genuinely democratic?” Yes, a timely query.
Feinstein is NOT in favour of creating a party in the present circumstances. Rather, he says we need to create “a national movement, that, when strategically appropriate, will decide to become a national party, before the next general election and we’re going to introduce to this country a totally different type of politics.”
To people I have been talking with, this game plan sounds terribly similar to the “saviour politics” we have at present and it has very little content. Feinstein’s wish for a significant delay in creating a new party may work well for those from London travelling around the country as speakers at political events. But it doesn’t work so well for those living in places like Plymouth, Norwich, or Lancaster who want to get organised NOW and be rank and file activists in a party they control.
6) In a 19 May social media post, Corbynite online host Crispin Flintoff made what he called “A PLEA TO JEREMY CORBYN AND THOSE HELPING TO SHAPE A NEW LEFT PARTY.” Flintoff wrote: “Jeremy Corbyn is the only figure with the potential to unite the Left — from disillusioned Greens to Workers Party supporters and Labour members desperate for a politics of principle.”
Former Labour Party and Momentum activist Joe Todd has a different take on the Corbyn years in Labour. In a recent piece in Prometheus Todd wrote: “Corbynism made Corbynites instead of socialists, and this was a big problem. That our entire project rested on the reputation of one man was an even bigger problem.”
At least at its launch of our new party, why isn’t a three-person team elected to lead it?
8) Lots of groups across the UK are meeting in person and in Zoom meetings to discuss “the party question.” Below is the ad for a May 17 meeting in Hastings. There is also a poster for a 3 June online meeting titled “A NEW PARTY OF THE LEFT: THE TIME IS NOW!” A third group, the Network of Independent Socialists contacted Collective, but was rebuffed and got no reply.
An online ad for a recent in-person meeting in Hastings on 17 May. Reports suggest the meeting went well.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As it says, scan the qr code to join the 3 June discussion.
++++++++++++
9) The most worrying report of all - at least for those who want a democratically run party - came out at the start of this week in the blog “Runing Lives” put out by well-connected and long-time activist David Renton. Renton wrote:
“The word is that later this month or probably next month, Jeremy Corbyn will announce an alliance of left electoral candidates to stand in local elections in May 2026…From Corbyn, the model seems to be one in which candidates – starting with the MPs, possible defectors, existing councillors, and stretching down from there – would have the maximum say over the new organisation. They could opt in and out at will. No demands would be made on them.”
Again we do not know if this account is “over the back fence” stuff, but this blog suggests Corbyn does NOT want to help form a real party. Instead, he wants a sort of electoral campaigning group with two types of members: a) those running for office; b) those passing out leaflets and doing related admin tasks.
Within Collective in the autumn of 2024, Corbyn was strongly opposed to creating a new party. It appears he continues to hold the same view. THE LEFT LANE contacted Corbyn’s office on Monday for comment, but got no reply.
[Personal note to David R: Sorry we didn't get to actually talk on the phone the other day; get better soon.]
SEVEN TAKEAWAYS FROM THE PROCESS
1) There is staunch support from a growing number of activists for a new party.
2) This “movement” for a new organisation of “the left” --- in the current circumstances, the words “socialist” and “party” are avoided – is predominantly controlled by ex-Labour Party insiders. Old Labour Party habits and ways of doing politics die hard. An almost exclusive focus of electioneering seems obvious. The dangers of creating a Labour 2.0 formation are clear.
Wrote one social media poster: this top down-group “is choking the life out of attempts to establish a democratic and socialist movement to replace Labour. A Corbyn influenced group is just going to be the Labour Party minus its neocons.”
3) A range of existing left groups, such as Socialist Workers Party, Counterfire, Socialist Alternative, and others already have the infrastructure and membership in place to organise events across England for speakers such as Corbyn and Feinstein. Expect these groups to play a dominating role in any new party if steps are not taken to prevent this. Learn your left-wing history and consider whether you want the leaders of a group like the SWP to also be directing our new party.
4) Access to information (accurate information that is, not rumours) means power. Rank and file activists and independent socialists like you and me currently have little power. This needs to change or we will have a repeat of experiences such as the Socialist Alliance of two decades ago.
5) Those who are said to be leading the creation of this new organisation - and we only know some of them by name - are primarily responsible for the rumours about what their project is all about.
6) In a word, this project seems to lack any sense of accountability to the rest of us on the left.
7) THE LEFT LANE has been writing about the tangled web of party building efforts since September 2024. I hope we can soon cease … and have more positive news to spread and do our bit, our very minor bit, to report on news that will keep Keir Starmer awake at night.
CHECK THIS OUT
Starmer has put Enoch Powell back in the news again. Comedian Lenny Henry responded a few years ago.
Thanks to EXPOSE RACISM ( https://www.facebook.com/ExposeRaciism) and HERE
In June, we welcome suggestions ASAP for guest posts in THE LEFT LANE because, at present, we have a brief publications break scheduled.
+++++++++++++++++
Edited by Alan Story, THE LEFT LANE is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber: http://theleftlane2024.substack.com/subscribe
You can reach us at: theleftlanepolitics@gmail.com
Read all previous columns of THE LEFT LANE ( 77 in total) here
Follow us on THE LEFT LANE Instagram and on THE LEFT LANE Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/leftlanepolitics.bsky.social
I'm curious to know what "national" means and what 'local' elections in 2026 mean? Is this England only ... or are there really utterly stupid attempts by those in England to have something that is wider?
Good article on Heckle.scot here: https://heckle.scot/2025/05/no-line-of-least-resistance-the-left-in-the-2026-holyrood-elections/
"In every serious challenge made by the socialist left in Holyrood elections, it has been on the basis of a pro-independence position. Yet part of the current impetus for socialist realignment in Scotland is prompted by processes taking place in England following the defeat of the Corbyn project in Labour. With the SWP and various ex-Corbynistas and trade union officials jockeying for position in big rallies in London, we can (as ever) expect little understanding of the specifics of the context in Scotland, Wales and Ireland from such processes.
It’s a basic question, but one that must be asked when considering how “broad” an alliance is being considered: will it have a clear position on independence? The appeals we have seen so far have made little mention of it. This is despite the fact that one of the forces pushing such appeals (the Socialist Workers’ Party) has also spent the last decade organising All Under One Banner marches with some of the most nationalist (as well as transphobic and conspiracist) sections of the independence movement, and has put itself on to platforms trying to claim status as leaders of that movement. It seems that this has become yet another item for the SWP tactical memory hole. For the SWP, Scottish nationalists were just another set of rubes to be used to organise big demos, claim influence and sell papers. They are, as ever, crap comrades.
Unfortunately for those searching for a new British Road to Socialism, Scotland is never going back in its box. Somewhere around half of Scotland supports independence, and this is clearly a bedrock that has endured give or take for a decade now. The days when Scottish and Welsh issues can be fobbed off by all-UK socialist organisations saying the relevant local sections will have a degree of autonomy are long gone."
It's practically an article of faith that, unlike, say, a new right-wing party, any new left-wing party will come immediately under fire from several different directions:
- the center-right and right, for obvious reasons;
- hardcore left factions, who believe any attempt to create left momentum outside their direct command is a theft from them;
- political, dug-in opportunists; who want to wield the -potential- of such an organization existing without the toil and struggle of building one.
As a result, (again, unlike any such thing on the right), the moment where such a new left party first sticks its head up is crucial; and many political people believe it must be "managed" + "fireproofed" to the utmost degree.
To a point, this is both slightly true and very unfortunate; being as spontaneity can be a powerfully left-coded weapon in politics. There's also the hazard of saboteurs being salted into the ranks by other actors; people who will poison the public's perception of the effort any way they can. Capital is never shy about using (+ often compensating) such saboteurs in these efforts. This is also the conundrum of "organizing democratically"; as it provides the opportunity for sub rosa hostile actors to infiltrate.
This comment is already too long, but the most successful effort might be best built as small groups on the ground, with plans to suddenly "coalesce" at a given point in the near-term future. Who "leads" should be chosen last, + viewed solely as an instrument of the new party's will, rather than dictating that will.
The only true "new politics" would be a turning away from "personality politics", where the party is perceived as both the bus and the driver.