The_Nation_October_9_2017

10 The Nation. October 9, 2017

O

n November 20, 2016, the Grenfell

Action Group, a tenants’ organiza-

tion for a tower block of low-cost

housing in one of London’s wealth-

iest areas, issued a statement re-

garding the company that managed the property,

the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Manage-

ment Organisation, titled “KCTMO—Playing

With Fire!” The tenants wrote: “[We] firmly

believe that only a catastrophic event will expose

the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord,

the KCTMO.... It is our conviction that a seri-

ous fire in a tower block or similar

high density residential property is

the most likely reason that those who

wield power at the KCTMO will be

found out and brought to justice!”

These proved to be prophetic

words. Seven months later, in the

early hours of June 14, the 24-story

Grenfell Tower was consumed by

flames, leaving an estimated 80 dead

and 70 injured. In this building dis-

proportionately inhabited by immigrants, people

of color, and the poor, some people leaped to

their deaths; others were burned alive.

Ordinarily, following a tragedy such as this,

the political implications would have been buried

even before the victims’ bodies had been recov-

ered. In the version of requiem so often recited

by the political and media classes after a mass

shooting in America, sentimentality is privileged

over the critical faculties: “Now is not the time

for politics. Let us mourn instead.”

But this was no ordinary moment. The fire

took place less than a week after the British par-

liamentary elections. The Labour Party, led by

the left-wing Jeremy Corbyn, had run a campaign

arguing for the redistribution of wealth (includ-

ing more social housing) and against austerity,

thereby challenging a consensus that had domi-

nated British politics for a generation. As a result,

with these arguments still reverberating, the trag-

edy was immediately understood as the product

not of bad luck, but of bad policy.

With the black smoke still billowing from its

upper stories more than 24 hours later, Grenfell

Tower stood as an enormous sepulchre to the in-

human ramifications of inequality and neoliberal-

ism. People started drawing a distinction between

the living standards of the emergency-service per-

sonnel, who risked their lives to save the tower’s

residents and have seen a significant decline in

wages following a seven-year public-sector pay cap,

and the ballooning wealth of those who live in the

nearby Kensington and Chelsea neighborhoods.

Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May

visited the first responders at Grenfell but failed

to meet with residents when she was initially

scheduled to do so—and when she finally did

manage to meet them, she was booed. Corbyn, on

the other hand, was embraced. None of this could

bring back those who had perished,

but thanks to the broader arguments

made during the weeks before, the

incident was framed as an avoid-

able outrage made possible by greed

and neglect.

Corbyn’s liberal detractors are

quick to point out that Labour did not

win the election. On this point they

are, of course, correct. Nobody won

it: The Conservatives emerged as the

largest party but lost their majority and, at the time

of the Grenfell fire, were still cobbling together

a shaky coalition with

Northern Ireland’s

Democratic Union-

ist Party—the UK

equivalent of an only

recently demilitarized

Tea Party. (Indeed,

the main reason Cor-

byn’s supporters were

so buoyed by the result

was that his critics in

the party had predicted

a humiliating defeat;

when Labour actually

gained seats, the bar

had been set so low they couldn’t help but jump

for joy over it.)

But the fact that Labour lost doesn’t mean

nothing was gained as a result of Corbyn’s cam-

paign. There is more to politics than elections,

and more to elections than just winning. This

doesn’t mean elections aren’t important: The

world would be a better place if the Conserva-

tives weren’t in power, and even with their fragile

coalition, they can do a lot of damage. But the

The Grenfell

Tower tragedy

was immediately

understood as

the product

not of bad

luck, but of

bad policy.

ILLUSTRATION: ANDY FRIEDMAN

Winning Isn’t Everything

The Labour Party may have lost the election, but it gained powerfully in influence.

Gary Younge

US-MEXICO

On Shaky

Ground

I

t took President Trump
a week to send condo-
lences to Mexico after
the country suffered its worst
earthquake in a century. Nearly
100 people died and over
15,000 homes were destroyed
in the 8.1-magnitude quake.
Trump’s reason for the delay?
Bad phone reception. “Spoke
to President of Mexico to give
condolences on terrible earth-
quake,” Trump tweeted. “Unable
to reach for 3 days b/c of his
cell phone reception at site.”
Ever since Trump’s election, re-
lations between the United States
and Mexico have been strained.
In September, survey results re-
leased by Pew showed that the
US was viewed unfavorably by
nearly two-thirds of Mexicans,
the highest unfavorability rating
in 15 years and more than double
the figure from two years ago.
After a second devastating
earthquake on September 19
killed dozens of people in the
state of Morelos and destroyed
several buildings in Mexico’s
capital, Trump immediately
sent his condolences, tweet-
ing: “God bless the people of
Mexico City. We are with you
and will be there for you.”
But a polite tweet following
a second disaster is unlikely to
make amends. After Hurricane
Harvey flooded Houston in late
August, the Mexican government
immediately offered food, power
generators, medical personnel,
and other forms of aid—help that
the Trump administration never
officially accepted. Here’s Trump’s
chance to return the favor.
—Miguel Salazar