![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.gfdesign.co.uk\/culture\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1f77879b610476cf4577162eb46bba35.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
James Crossley<\/strong> writes about Jeremy Corbyn’s Christmas message<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Christmas is a rare time when politicians can, without too much embarrassment, openly talk about issues relating to popular understandings of religion. As I\u2019ve argued in detail elsewhere<\/a>, Christmas functions as a soft authority for various political ideologies and a particularly good indicator of the kinds of acceptable\u2014or competing\u2014ideas about politics and religion.<\/p>\n Since he became leader of the Labour Party in 2015, Jeremy Corbyn\u2019s Christmas messages have been an indicator that socialism has returned to mainstream political discourse. In his first Christmas message as leader<\/a>, Corbyn spoke openly (and, then, strikingly) about his socialism and presented it through the prism of English or British radicalism which has often referenced the Bible to make socialism palatable. As Corbyn put it, \u2018the Christmas story holds up a mirror to us all. \u201cDo unto others as you would have done to you\u201d\u2014that is the essence of my socialism, summed up in the word\u2014 \u201csolidarity\u201d.\u2019 Indeed, Corbyn referenced a famous socialist saying that could, depending on tastes, be attributed to Marx or the Bible (or both) but here was carefully presented as a \u2018maxim that inspired our party\u2019: \u2018From each according to their means, to each according to their needs\u2019 (Acts of the Apostles 4.32-35).<\/p>\n Corbyn\u2019s 2018 Christmas message is striking because he explicitly referred to the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10.29-37). This parable, said Corbyn, was one that particularly moved him and which he liked to think about at Christmas. Corbyn even narrated the contents, something not so typical in English political discourse where anything smacking of too much religion is usually deemed problematic (by voters and politicians alike).<\/p>\n In the past, Corbyn has typically alluded to the parable (rather than naming it, or indeed mentioning that it comes from the Bible) with reference to not \u2018walking by on the other side\u2019. He has done so regularly and consistently to promote welfare and social housing and to criticise the rise in homelessness. His comments made during his first speech as Labour leader<\/a> are typical: \u2018we want to live in a society where we don\u2019t pass by on the other side of those people rejected by an unfair welfare system. Instead we reach out to end the scourge of homelessness and desperation that so many people face in our society.\u2019<\/p>\n In the case of his Christmas message this year, there was a slight shift in focus. Certainly, the themes are typical of Corbyn\u2019s Christmas messages and biblical allusions: homeless shelters, foodbanks, and refugees. However, the focus is now on people and communities providing support where the state has failed, hence people helping in homeless shelters, those supplying foodbanks, and volunteers aiding refugees. As Corbyn put it: \u2018These are people who will not \u201cwalk by on the other side\u201d. They do what\u2019s become so necessary in a system that\u2019s failing to provide people\u2019s basic needs. They embody what\u2019s best and most compassionate in all of us.\u2019<\/p>\n This use of the Good Samaritan should be seen as part of a wider debate about the role of the state in the provision of welfare. Corbyn has re-popularised the role of the state against a dominant neoliberal position which became increasingly popular among political leaders since Thatcher. Where, for Corbyn, the role of heroic individuals and communities is a good thing because of the failings<\/em> of the neoliberal state, for Thatcher and her followers, outsourcing the state was a sign of success<\/em>, that welfare was not so important for national wellbeing. Thatcher famously claimed<\/a> that charitable giving was crucial and that \u2018no-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he\u2019d only had good intentions; he had money as well\u2019. By the time David Cameron was leader, this sort of thinking was deeply embedded in mainstream political discourse. Cameron too thought related sentiments like \u2018love thy neighbour\u2019 (also used in the relation to the parable of the Good Samaritan\u2014Luke 10.27-29, 36) involved helping in homeless shelters and in soup kitchens, as he claimed in his 2014 Easter message<\/a>. But whereas Corbyn\u2019s emphasis was on general societal support, Cameron focused more on churches, including his praise of vicars canoeing to help victims of the 2014 storms. This was because Cameron wanted to promote his own particular take on outsourcing the state\u2014Big Society (remember that?). Indeed, Cameron even claimed the highest authority for his brand of neoliberalism<\/a>: \u2018Jesus invented the Big Society 2000 years ago, I just want to see more of it and encourage as much of it as possible.\u2019<\/p>\n For Corbyn, and some in the contemporary labour movement, building a kind of cultural socialism to prepare the way for support for socialism in power underpins the counterargument to Thatcherite neoliberalism. As Corbyn put it in his latest message, such people \u2018make me certain that we can build a fairer society which works for everyone.\u2019 This is also a sentiment tied up with the history of the English left. In his 2014 memoirs Sailing Close to the Wind<\/em>, Corbyn\u2019s close ally, Dennis Skinner, argued that the parable of the Good Samaritan was not about individualist improvement (\u2018a load of crap\u2019) but rather collective good of the sort he saw in pit communities (\u2018solidarity and struggle\u2019) and in trade unionism. This parable, Skinner claimed, was about helping \u2018someone in need\u2019 and was an example of \u2018a socialist story\u2019. A little blunter than Corbyn perhaps, but Skinner likewise developed these sorts of ideas in order to confront capitalism for the \u2018transformation of Britain\u2019 in the interests of working people and their families, and for public ownership of electricity companies, rail, and the whole of the National Health Service.<\/p>\n However, there is also a third reading of the Good Samaritan at play. Corbyn\u2019s reference to \u2018raising money for refugees who\u2019ve been forced to flee war, oppression and devastation\u2019 continues his stress on tackling the material causes of migration but also an implicit counter to the uses of the Good Samaritan to support military intervention and North Africa. Cameron tried to justify his own take on military intervention<\/a> by focusing on ISIS as a deviation from a purer, democratic Islam (a typical construction of Islam in English political discourse) and thus in need of the assistance of benign violence. And he did so with reference to a more physical Good Samaritan: \u2018we cannot just walk on by<\/em> if we are to keep this country safe\u2026we have to confront this menace\u2026we will do so in a calm, deliberate way but with an iron determination\u2019.<\/p>\n