Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, alongside former Labour MP Zarah Sultana, has announced the formation of a new left-wing party, a socialist response to Labour’s failure to deliver transformative change. Latest reports suggest over 450,000 people have signed up to support the new party.
Corbyn’s leadership is a necessary challenge to the technocratic, elitist, and pro-corporate New Labour establishment, rooted in a popular counter-hegemonic struggle against neoliberalism. It is 10 years since Corbyn won the Labour leadership and six years since his ousting by the dominant right-wing of the party. His message, in a significantly changed domestic and global context is all the more urgent: austerity is a policy choice and not a necessity, that Britain should stop arming Israel and support the Palestinian people, and stop preparing for war and expanding NATO.
But is the new challenge sufficient to overcome the power of the establishment which relentlessly hounded and smeared Corbyn from the Labour party leadership, and out of the party itself? Or is history likely to repeat itself?
It’s early days but overall this development is a rare sign of hope in what is a truly tragic time in world politics.
It depends on the unity and stability of the leadership of the new party, its broader organisational resources, the reactions of a furious establishment used to getting its own way, and the difficulties of a ‘third’ party in a two-party system based on first-past-the-post electoral system.
It also depends on what the party actually wants to be. Is it a party aimed at winning political power and forming a government, or an influential but relatively small parliamentary bloc of MPs backed by a mass movement based on sustained street protest.
Back in 2015, when he launched his successful bid for the Labour leadership, Corbyn successfully challenged dominant neoliberal hegemony. “Corbynmania” described the intense levels of enthusiasm among young people, as Labour party membership surged to over 500,000. Fans in football stadiums sang his name and he was rapturously welcomed at mass events such as Glastonbury music festival. Corbyn forced open the question of the inevitability of austerity and cuts to working class economic rights and successfully pressured the Conservative government to lean into social spending.
But what are the prospects of the new party today?
Gramsci aids understanding of how power works
With that question in mind, Gramsci’s ideas of hegemony are instructive, emphasising how ruling elites maintain dominance largely by shaping ideological and political norms to secure ‘consent’ from subordinate groups. An elite hegemonic project—like Thatcherism, for example—effectively constructs a new “common sense” that aligns society’s values with the interests of the ruling elite.
Counter-hegemony, in contrast, requires building an alternative ideological and political bloc to challenge this dominance, often through a “war of position” (gradual cultural and ideological struggle) rather than a direct “war of manoeuvre” (revolutionary confrontation).
Corbyn’s 2015 leadership bid was in effect an unexpected (possibly premature) counter-hegemonic moment, mobilising grassroots support to contest the neoliberal consensus. It had no mass movement behind it. It sent shockwaves through the British establishment. Recall the threat by senior British Army officers to mutiny should a future Prime Minister Corbyn consider leading the country out of NATO.
We know the efforts to which the ruling Conservative party, the Parliamentary Labour Party, and the mass media, went to destroy Corbyn’s leadership. This was despite, or because of, his winning 40% of the vote in the 2016 election, and 32% in 2019. Corbyn, according to The Independent, was one of the most smeared politicians in British political history, misrepresented by 75% of all media coverage of him.
Corbyn’s electoral appeal prevented a Conservative majority from taking power in 2017. The 40% vote share he managed to secure represented the largest swing to Labour since 1945, unmatched even by Tony Blair’s 1997 victory.
Labour’s ‘business as usual” and Corbyn’s new [party]
We also know that Keir Starmer won the Labour leadership against Corbyn by suggesting that he would follow through on Corbyn’s popular policies. Starmer was of the stench of antisemitism etc and the toxicity of Corbyn’s public image, which he and his New Labour colleagues had orchestrated and led. We also know that charges of antisemitism in the party under Corbyn were part of a war of the right of the party rather than a reflection of actual antisemitism. The Forde Report found little evidence of antisemitism.
But with Starmer’s 2024 “landslide” victory in the general election, it became pretty clear from the start that his government would offer only neoliberal business as usual. That is, support for the Anglo-American alliance, NATO, and U.S. policies on Israel and Ukraine. The election result highlighted widespread public discontent and little positive enthusiasm for Starmer’s programme, evidenced by Labour’s low vote share (20.4% of the electorate, 33% of voters), a ‘landslide’ victory only due to the workings of the first-past-the-post system.
It should also be noted that several pro-Palestine candidates were elected to parliament, including Corbyn’s independent win. They form the Independent Alliance in the House of Commons, the fifth largest bloc of MPs. In several Labour seats, independents came within 5% of the vote to winning. Coupled with significant recent Labour rebellions over welfare reforms, this signals strong internal and external dissatisfaction with Starmer’s approach.
With mounting popular support for the Palestinian people, opposition to Starmer’s welfare cuts, increases to military spending and authoritarian leadership in expelling or suspending dissenting Labour MPs, the stage is set for a new party.
Corbyn’s new party
In 2015, Corbyn’s leadership emerged from a crisis of neoliberal hegemony. The 2008 financial crash and subsequent austerity exposed the failures of the “Washington Consensus”. Corbyn’s platform—anti-austerity, pro-nationalisation, and anti-war—resonated with a public disillusioned by New Labour’s alignment with corporate interests and foreign wars. Corbyn articulated and popularised a new “common sense” rooted in social justice, equality, and anti-imperialism, mobilising a broad coalition of young people, trade unionists, and marginalised groups.
By 2024, it was clear that public demand for change persisted, driven by dissatisfaction with economic stagnation, welfare cuts, geopolitical alignments, and unwavering military and diplomatic support for Israel’s war on Gaza. The UK has also provided support for Israel’s illegal attacks on Iran and other parts of the Middle East. Corbyn’s new party aims to capitalise on this, offering a counter-hegemonic vision that challenges Starmer’s “business as usual” approach. Issues like Palestine, where Corbyn’s stance has proven electorally potent, provide a moral and ideological rallying point.
The party’s ability to challenge the hegemonic narrative, however, depends on its capacity to resonate beyond sectional groups. The 2024 election’s low turnout (60%) and Labour’s weak mandate (20.4% of the electorate) indicate a fragmented political landscape, offering significant space for a radical project. However, entrenched neoliberal “common sense” remains strong in the media and main political parties. Their hostility to Corbyn poses a significant barrier to reshaping public consciousness.
Corbyn’s new party aims to form a new Left bloc. The success of independent candidates and Labour’s internal rebellions suggests a ready base of disaffected leftists, young voters, and minority communities. Community groups and movements could form the nucleus of this bloc. An alliance or pact with the Green party could be critical. The Greens have four MPs at Westminster and over 850 local council seats across England and Wales. In Scotland, their Green counterparts boast seven MSPs and 35 local councillors.
The party’s success hinges on uniting these groups into a coherent force. The 2015 Corbyn surge benefited from Labour’s infrastructure (e.g., membership, unions), but as an independent party, Corbyn’s new venture lacks this. The first-past-the-post system remains a challenge, as Labour’s 2024 “landslide” was achieved with minimal vote share. The new party must target urban, progressive constituencies and leverage social media to bypass hostile mainstream media, as Corbyn did in 2015—17. However, internal divisions (e.g., differing priorities among left factions) and the absence of union backing (most unions aligned with Starmer) could weaken this bloc.
Recent polls provide suggest strong support for a new party of the Left. Support was particularly strong among younger voters, with 33% of 18- to 29-year-olds backing the new party, ahead of Reform UK (24%) and Labour (18%). A 10-15% national vote share could translate into significant local election gains in targeted areas, particularly urban constituencies and student-heavy wards. For comparison, in the 2025 local elections, the Greens gained over 40 seats with a smaller vote share, while Reform UK won 677 seats with a projected 20% national vote.
The Corbyn party’s focus on issues like scrapping the two-child benefit cap, opposing austerity, and banning arms sales to Israel could resonate in Labour-leaning areas disillusioned with Starmer’s leadership, potentially flipping seats in cities like London, Birmingham, and Newcastle
The new party will add further turbulence to an already volatile political situation, and show that levels of electoral alienation from mainstream political parties and media has intensified.
War of position vs. war of manoeuvre
In 2015, Corbyn’s strategy was in practice a Gramscian “war of position,” focusing on long-term ideological work rather than immediate electoral victory. This involved shifting Labour’s discourse leftward, even if electoral success was uncertain due to media bias and hostility from the right of the party. Corbyn’s new party may adopt a similar war of position, building influence through grassroots campaigns, community organising, and alternative media. However, the party may face pressure for a “war of manoeuvre” (e.g., rapid electoral gains), which is risky given the UK’s electoral system and Labour’s entrenched position.
A war of position is viable if the party focuses on local victories (e.g., council elections, by-elections) and cultural influence (e.g., Palestine solidarity, anti-austerity campaigns). The 2024 election showed independents can win in targeted seats, but scaling this nationally is daunting.
Global and domestic context
Corbyn’s rise in 2015 occurred within a global crisis of neoliberalism, when movements like Syriza and Podemos came to the fore. This global context amplified Corbyn’s counter-hegemonic potential, as anti-austerity sentiments resonated across borders.
By 2024, global tensions such as U.S.-China rivalry and right-wing authoritarianism, and domestic discontent, demonstrated a continued crisis of legitimacy for neoliberalism. Corbyn’s party could align with global left movements, but the UK’s insularity and Brexit’s legacy (which Labour has embraced) complicate this. The party’s focus on Palestine and anti-austerity could tap into international solidarity networks, but domestic priorities (e.g., cost-of-living, NHS) will dominate voter concerns.
The party’s global framing may attract younger, cosmopolitan voters but risks alienating those focused on local issues. Balancing internationalism with domestic relevance is critical, as is avoiding the perception of being a single-issue party.
The new party has great potential but faces steep challenges. Jeremy Corbyn’s strength lies in his ability to inspire a movement, but translating this into a viable party requires overcoming the same hegemonic forces that destroyed his Labour leadership. But those right-wing Labour forces are now discredited on the left, seen as fuelling the far right and ReformUK.
Starmer’s Labour paved the way to the Independent Alliance bloc which is translating into a mass movement for change. That is the essential difference in the political situation since 2015 which has galvanised Corbyn’s renewed political challenge.
Inderjeet Parmar is a professor of international politics and associate dean of research in the School of Policy and Global Affairs at City, University of London, a fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, and a columnist at The Wire. He is an International Fellow at the ROADS Initiative think tank, Islamabad, and author of several books including Foundations of the American Century. He is currently writing a book on the history, politics, and powers of the U.S. foreign policy establishment.