Tony Blair has caused a stir in the Labour Party in recent weeks, due to his controversial comments damning the leadership campaign of the left-winger Jeremy Corbyn, who currently leads the polls. Blair publicly commented that he believes "Labour can win again", but quickly followed this with the claim that this could not be done from a "traditional leftist platform". However, these comments resulted in many Labour supporters, like myself, feeling perplexed. It is the socialist democratic party after all: isn’t it supposed to be left wing? Perhaps not. We have recently experienced 10 years of New Labour privatising the railways, stifling democracy in the party by centralising decision making, and most infamously entering into a morally reprehensible and illegal war in Iraq. Surely now is our time to rediscover the party’s roots and readdress the issues of equality above all else?

Liz Kendall does not agree. She stands shoulder to shoulder with Blair on the right of the party, as the voice of New Labour values which are being continuously questioned over the course of what is becoming a particularly acrimonious race for leadership. Yet, in many cases, Kendall’s policies do not stray far from those of the current Tory government. She has no plans to cut university tuition fees, supports free schools and public education, as well as paradoxically claiming that the Labour Party can be "as much about wealth creation as about wealth distribution". Furthermore, Kendall claims that she does not want to protest; she wants to get into power, happily shooting herself in the foot as this reckless comment reveals her to be nothing more than a career politician rather than someone who truly cares about the issues.

Fellow hopeful Andy Burnham, who was at the heart of Brown’s government, still sits firmly on the party’s centre-left. Burnham recently displayed his supposedly fervent opposition to the Tory budget by refusing to vote either for or against austerity measures. He appears to support sensible policies, particularly for young people (such as tackling the cost of housing by allowing councils to build more affordable homes, and extending the living wage to those under the age of 25), but Burnham remains consistently vague and has proved willing to go back on his word, as shown by his lack of resistance to austerity, as well as reiterating that he will "not be opposed to making tough decisions". The meaning of this remains hilariously ambiguous.

While suggesting that the living wage should be extended to all, he, unlike his fellow candidate Yvette Cooper, does not suggest raising the living wage that the Tories have set out. Cooper challenges this and proposes a more realistic "living wage for all" of £9 an hour, but this still sits £1 below the £10 which left-winger Corbyn has proposed. Many Labourites continue to dismiss Corbyn and his 'old-fashioned' policies as unelectable, but the last Labour government and its failings loom all too large in our collective memories. Unfortunately, Cooper seems to be nothing more than a bad hangover from the days of Brown’s leadership. Surely, if it is problematic for Corbyn to evoke memories of the 1980’s Labour loss, Cooper is an emblem of the government that handed the Coalition (and then the Tories) their victory.

'Corbynmania' is of course as equally improbable as the 'Milifandom', but while the latter seemed nothing more than a joke on Ed Miliband’s behalf, ‘Corbynites’ seem to be popping up everywhere, called forth by the need for change within a party that could be said to be dying. While many would maintain that a move to the left would not be a viable alternative to the Conservative government, I strongly believe it would be exactly that. A party that sits firmly on the left of British politics, that says 'no' to austerity and that rejects welfare cuts may be the only worthwhile alternative to the Tories’ ideologically-driven budget. Whether or not this is the case, Corbynmania has already demonstrated its ability to spark an interest in politics amongst those who were previously disillusioned, disengaged and most likely to utter the commonly-heard edict that politicians ‘are just all the same’.