“I can tell you that your courage and the sheer exuberant nerve with which you stuck it to your enemies, especially in New Labour ... have thereby earned [you] the thanks and admiration of millions of Londoners, even if you think that they have a funny way of showing it today.” Boris Johnson’s comments during his mayoral victory speech were either an ever-so-clever swipe at his defeated foe or a genuine display of the sort of muddle-headed mythology that has surrounded Livingstone his entire political career.

To many people – Labour supporters, some newspaper editors, a good few deluded ‘socialists’ - Ken Livingstone and his eight-year stewardship of London represented a genuine alternative to the New Labour of Blair and Brown. Livingstone’s record – the mythologised version at least - detailed in the pages of the Times, Guardian and let’s not forget his vanity appearances in ‘The Sun’, demonstrate a long arc of resistance to the powers that be: from his days as leader of the GLC, his tenure in Parliament, to the chutzpah demonstrated by his independent stand for Mayor first time round. We can have no time for mythologising. Workers’ Liberty has said it more than once, but it’s worth stating again: the official history of Livingstone-the-politician does not stand the test of scrutiny.

Any honest accounting of his time as mayor, any honest analysis of his defeat should make that more than clear. A commitment to anti-racism, a few speeches on Stop the War platforms, a very public love-in with Hugo Chavez – none of these things cancel out eight years of championing big business, acquiescence to New Labour, Tube privatisation and open scabbing on the RMT. Livingstone had no base in the organised working class, failed to speak for the concerns and aspirations of the labour movement. He was not representative of or accountable to anyone but himself. Ken Livingstone was defeated, socialism was not.

Where Boris Johnson found the “thanks” meted out to Livingstone and Labour by the London electorate “funny”, we can only see a less-than-funny reality and danger sign. What does the sign read? “More Tory Victories Ahead”. The sweeping defeat of Labour was not just a London phenomenon, it was replicated in towns and cities across the country. A balance sheet of the elections show the worst results for Labour in over forty years. The party lost 331 seats nationwide and their total share of the vote was reduced to just 24%. Meanwhile the Tories secured 44% of the vote. If we confined ourselves to psephology, these results indicate a significant shift to the right. The more combative, united, dynamic Tories stuck it to a dispirited, tardy, disunited Labour Party. The voters, sick of Labour and distrustful of Brown, swung to the right.

Vote counting and journalistic phrases can only tell us so much. An electoral swing to the Tories is not a magical phenomenon beyond the comprehension of all but the most learned of sorcerers. It is not even a genuine indication of right-wing popular sentiment. The resentment towards New Labour on a national scale is no mystery. But Brown and his Labour colleagues appeared genuinely shocked by the backlash against them. The disastrous results generated rumours of a stalking-horse challenge to Brown’s premiership. Brown appeared on the Sunday morning political shows to rub dirt in his face and hair: to take the blame. Their shock is just one sign of the arch-arrogance of a government that thought ten years of attacks on the working class – attacks topped-off with significant pay-cuts in the public sector and the slashing of the 10p tax rate – would go unanswered. This arrogance will lead to the election of a Tory government at the next election if the Labour Movement – which has so far failed to take action against New Labour – does not now go on the offensive.

The shape and content of this offensive will mean different things to different sections of the movement. In the affiliated unions it must mean overturning the destruction of Labour Party structures, refusing to ratify the changes at last years Bournemouth conference and overturning the whole Brown/New Labour project. In those unions not affiliated it must mean a serious and honest discussion about the need for working class representation. There is no more time for bluster, no more time for attacking New Labour but failing to answer the need for an alternative. At the grass roots – in the branches and at Trades Councils – it must mean building and strengthening the sinews of the our movement, preparing the ground for independent working class candidates.