No politician is perfect - not even Jeremy Corbyn

Tomorrow comes the end of a very long three months for the Labour Party. They will, supposedly, be instating Jeremy Corbyn as their leader. He is the champion of British radicalism currently, with so many who left to the Green Party returning to Labour and so many lefties who had not voted Labour since pre-Tony Blair suddenly feeling loyal to the Party. He is the sort of leftie populism that many want to hear more from our Westminster politicians, especially against the Tory majority Government now in power.  However, I have noticed a worrying trend about him amongst the left: the blind eye that many take concerning ANY criticisms of his politics. 

I get it. Corbyn has appeared an underdog, it appears a far-left candidate gets unfairly treated by the established journalists we have. The BBC, usually a respectable organisation, has taken to a very comfortable centre-right which had tainted their journalism for quite some time. Even I, a centrist at heart, felt that their over exposure of Farage was obvious in the Election this year and they didn’t really seem to bother to balance their reports. And the Telegraph obviously has some partisanship bias; it is often known as the “Torygraph” by so many. Even the Guardian, once an okay insightful paper, has become sludge in recent times and it has resulted in it writing very…bad articles on Corbyn, to put it mildly.

But my problem with “Corbynmania” has been that it equates any hint of criticism that you’re secretly some variation of Tory (in my instance a “Yellow Tory”). Even when Owen Jones has strayed away from his own bias and been critical or when the New Statesman has opted to do a more critical piece, suddenly the entire media is launching a war against Corbyn. And while I can understand the frustration of the left – the Labour Party has been claiming bias since Harold Wilson led the party – it is not very help or constructive to pick a leader without knowing anything that one might consider a fault. 

For instance: I voted for Tim Farron after re-joining Liberal Youth and am glad to have done so. Why? Because in a time where we have betrayed ourselves, I think a grassroots long-time member of the Party is the one to bring us back. He never was a part of the previous government, giving us a fresh Liberal-strong image as a party. And to quote my own Party, it’s now more than ever that Britain needs a bit of liberalism pumping into our veins. Despite his involvement in building up the party and his strong message, there is a black cloud concerning social politics – he is supposedly against gay marriage. 

It was the first question for everyone: Are you a homophobe? When he couldn’t answer in a 10-second soundbite, suddenly that was all he was. I would like to take this opportunity to inform you, he vote for the Gay Marriage Act in 2013, he merely abstained from one of the readings (the second, I believe). And Tim Farron sits in one of former safest seats for the Tories in the country, transforming it into his own. He is a conservative Anglican, meaning there is a certain clash of his liberty and of his faith. I’ve spoken to Anglicans who are LGBT who understand that this is a tough line for them spiritually and personally. 

It is difficult to excuse, however, especially as LGBT issues are so personal for some people (myself included). But I made a call – to elect someone who I think will defend my personal liberties despite disagreeing with them or to not do so on the grounds he abstained from a reading this one time. Considering Farron was calling for 60,000 refugees to come to Britain 4 weeks ago, as well as visiting Calais, I’m quite glad that I made that decision. But I was in fact aware of that issue during the leadership election and I’m glad that I was because it meant that I could make an informed decision.

Why can the same not happen with Corbyn?

This issue is not limited to the Labour frontrunner, of course. If you go across seas, the populist “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders is protected by the fact he’s “more left than everyone else”. I agree with a lot of Sanders’ political ideas for the United States but, I also recognise he is pro-Israel, a position I’m not quite in agreement with. In the same way I can appreciate the radicalism (albeit not agree with it) of Corbyn but, we can’t simply shutter ourselves away from positions which make us uncomfortable. For instance – many claim that he is far left to the point of being a Eurosceptic, something much of the left has difficult stomaching. 

So then you have to prioritise issues/policies. Why? Because that’s what we do with every other politician. Jeremy Corbyn has been around since 1983 – why is it suddenly he’s a saint like figure, above everything that every other politician is? And similarly, Sanders has been in US Politics since 1975 – why is it suddenly that he’s not got a single bad mark on his record? [An interesting side point: the women against these two men are continually, openly criticised….even by those who agree with them. Interesting that, isn’t it?] 

So for example: Corbyn has been known to hang around George Galloway. This is perhaps comparable to how we condemn David Cameron for being a member of the Bullingdon Club or his friendship with Rebecca Brooks. I’m all for holding our politicians accountable, for actually calling them out on their faults. And I don’t think anyone on the far left to the far right are perfect. It’s just not capable in the wheelings-and-dealings of the political world. But, of course, to suggest any of this evokes the great hivemind of the far left which seems to plague most comment threads on a New Statesman article. 

Immediately I am a Tory, as mentioned, that I am suddenly “the enemy.” As an amateur blogger I’m suddenly painted as the big, scary Media instead of someone who is trying to think critically. It is vital that we, as an electorate, think about what we’re voting for. And by all means the message of Corbyn are valid but this blind eye thinking is not necessarily beneficial for people who do not vote for him, people who are Jewish, people who are Palestinian, who are pro-European Union or to anti-European Union. Because even if people are still Pro-Corbyn after learning this information, at least they know this information. 

We should not blind ourselves to faults – no politician should be placed on a pedestal and we should be aware for what we’re voting for. No exceptions.

Self care, romanticism and 'during' the illness - comments on Mental Health.

Recently, I talked quite extensively and very open about my mental health. That was possibly one of the hardest things I’ve endeavoured to do in my life and one which was received very warmly. A friend of mine reached out to me and said that I did not clearly address some issues. And that they felt I had not inculpated mental health issues. To be honest, I think that’s a fair point. I talked a lot about recovery because from where I’m sitting now, that’s easier to talk about. And I talked a lot of the lead up to what became a lot of my struggle but I never know how to talk about the struggle without it sound…wishy-washy.

You know what I mean.  “It’s all a journey”, “it gets better”. They’re all nice sounding phrases but I know people who take genuine offence at them. Because as nice as they’re sounding, if your endorphin levels have dropped and you can’t muster much energy to get up and do things, it’s bloody well hard to do anything else. I say I can never offer that much advice despite having been ‘there’ before. I don’t think of myself as qualified, I will simply try to see if I can see something similar in what I experienced and what a friend might being experiencing. But it’s really difficult sometimes to really know what to do because one feels that they should be better at it. But truth is, it’s not some float-y journey. It’s actually really hard.

I read a lot of things on the internet which bang on about ‘self-care tips’. And they usually say “get some chocolate, watch something nice”, etc. The messages themselves are nice enough but unfortunately, they tend to gloss over a lot of practical problems which arise with mental health. You tend to lose any patterns of hygiene you may have once have had and any desire to move your clothes out of the way on the floor. So maybe just grabbing some coco and sitting watching Orange is the New Black isn’t actually a way for you to progress. Sometimes it’s about doing the difficult thing – moving a couple of t-shirts so you don’t break your neck, clambering into the shower. That low point makes you lose any desire to function and it makes you lose any want to carry on. I think part of the illness is the inclusion of routine.

Even if it’s gentle things at first. You set a little task maybe, change your t-shirt today because you’ve been wearing the same pyjama top for 4 days consecutively. And here’s where, I think, the “mental health discussion” is actually finding problems. There’s one side which try to claim upon the beauty of people that has seemingly “Lost” throughout their ill period and the other side, which is harsh and cutthroat. We must understand that these are not the orthodox physical ill but instead, their mind is not necessarily responding to what seem normal human activities. And by simply bubble wrapping up people we are not actually helping. Whenever I break my leg, I’m told that the best way to recover is to get mobile as soon as possible.

That isn’t to say I should exist myself on crutches but make sure that I allow myself to get back to putting weight on it. Mental health cannot (nor should it) be treated exactly like physical health – for the quantifier of ‘mental’ makes it a much more subjective type of illness – but the analogy still holds some truth. You can’t make someone come out from the cave which they’ve built immediately but we shouldn’t be advocates of the cave to begin with. And it’s understood that people are struggling and are taking easier options but we need to have reality in this discussion. Without it, we will end up indulging emotional avoidance and people will be perpetually ill. Sometimes, my Mum would support me by making me get out of bed. That was hard, it was strenuous and I don’t always advise it (it worked for me but may not for you) but it was important that I had to begin a normalisation process.

Romanticism will not help nor will being overly harsh. Sensitivity is key to all these issues but I think sensitivity must go along with remembering what else is going on. Step by step.I think analogies and nice phrases are good at times but I guess one of the important factors of someone who has recovered is that it is particularly difficult to put yourself back in that place again. It's very difficult to remember what it was like because for a lot of it, you were very ill and you weren't entirely sure what was going on. You don't know if it was scary or bad but you perceive it to be as such now. And that is immensely important to discuss and to remember. 

I'm ending rather abruptly to allow space for discussion on this topic - I imagine it's one that can be discussed very lengthily by people more qualified to talk about this stuff than myself.

Charles Kennedy, 1959-2015.

I’m a Liberal Democrat.

I mean, that’s not all what I am but by literal definition I am a ‘Liberal’ and I am a ‘Democrat’. I believe in internal radicalism – where one may challenge the institution from the inside and change it from the inside. I believe, under a reformed electoral system, we will live in a fundamentally fairer and better represented society. I believe in Open government along with strong social justice tendencies. Through defeating the plights of economic injustice, I think we can find ourselves dismantling several social and cultural injustices around us. From what was said in the ‘launching video’ of the Liberal Democrat Party’s video in 1988, I subscribed to several of those ideas.

Trouble is, being a Liberal Democrat in the last five years hasn’t been easy. We’ve often felt betrayed, lied to, that we’ve been sold out by a bunch of Machiavellian scoundrels, to put it more…academically. Our former leader (and technically still current) Nick Clegg sold out the party’s principles for a part in the game. We turned back to our short but interesting history to the many figures who helped build the Party and wonder if they despair at the choice that Clegg makes? Does Roy Jenkins shake his head from somewhere? One man I know did despair to some degree, for he is the only member of the Party to have openly voted against the Coalition in 2010, has just passed away.

That man was Charles Kennedy.

I've been a member of this party, on and off, since I was 13/14. I followed the coverage as we entered Coalition, I saw how internally and externally we battled. To me, Kennedy is a towering figure from a hopeful yesteryear. The sort of man we wanted to lead now. And the sort of man we hoped we arrive in our future. When I, as a Quaker, learnt of his plight against the Iraq War my respect for him grew more and more. I think, even if you’re unfamiliar with Kennedy, we all want men and women like him in politics. Here he was, in all his humane glory. He suffered a very difficult illness while leading his party, a party which he had helped build over some two decades.

Despite his youth, Charles Kennedy still managed to connect with the people of his constituency thanks to his immense personal touch in his politics. He really set up the idea of “there is another option” for people in politics and for myself as a young person, he helped establish that there can be more than just the same old, same old Tory/Labour. Perhaps without me realising, he joins a list of people who have helped me find a political voice and indeed, helped me formulate views. To me he devised the idea of modern, “sensiblepolitik.” 

And for that I thank you – for you have left with me an immense political hope and to understand that issues are not always so black & white.