This from Will Hutton in today's Observer:
It is obvious that the Labour party will only win again around a refashioned Blairism.
Really, Will Hutton?
Are you really saying that the only hope for the left is neoliberalism?
That's a failure of aspiration if ever I saw one.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
It seems to me that the evidence is precisely the opposite. Certainly in Scotland that is not going to work, but I do not believe that the fully fledged narrative, apparently pre-prepared by the neoliberal Blairites within the labour party and trotted out by a complaisant MSM right after the election, is correct. Labour did not move “left” and so precipitate defeat, despite what they say. It remained right, in all the ways that matter, supporting the debt/deficit/austerity rhetoric. So where is the notion they were further left evidenced? Nothing but froth and assertion and cloth ears
In truth labour has been losing support and membership since Blair was found to be another version of the tories, and while they gained some support from traditional tories, who also have nowhere to go these days, that is not enough to win elections for labour, without their core support. As Scotland demonstrates, the post war consensus has massive support and the SNP have occupied that ground, without meaningful challenge from any other party. But for some reason most of the labour leadership seem to imagine that this cannot happen in rUK, and that complacency has untold dangers for them: for ultimately what happened in Scotland will happen in rUK. The difference is not a difference in kind: only the fact that no alternative has arisen in rUK as yet has made their narrative even slightly plausible. This will not last forever, IMO: the electorate there are casting about for that alternative as seen in a rise in votes for UKIP and Greens and other smaller parties. They will find it, and when they do the labour party will be dead in form, as it is currently in substance. Forever, possibly. Once that tipping point is crossed by the traditional labour support, there is no going back, for “tribal” support, once lost, cannot be rekindled.
The libdems also demonstrate that this process is at work in rUK as in Scotland. They offered a left of centre position under Charles Kennedy, and did well. They withdrew that offer when he was ousted and aligned themselves with the ideologues who are now in charge of the tories: we see the results for them.
For decades the MSM have dutifully reported that the people have rejected the social democracy of the post war consensus, and that everyone agrees the left wing analysis is dead. Yet it is noticeable that the parties all continue with the rhetoric of that consensus, and this is cynical because they do not subscribe to the logic which underpins it, nor the values it reflects. By now the cynics are joined by the dupes who have fallen for their own propaganda. But the people are not fooled, or not wholly. Propaganda only goes so far and lived experience reasserts itself ultimately.
I do not know where the alternative in england will come from: but come it will. And labour won’t be it if they continue to live in their bubble. Hell mend them, for me
It is inevitable that the change will come
That is why I do disagree with Hutton
“So where is the notion they were further left evidenced?”
Higher top rate of tax.
Mansion tax.
Rent controls.
Energy price freezes.
Whether that was sufficient to make their package Left wing overall, I do not comment, all I am doing is evidencing the notion that they were further left.
What I don’t think anybody can deny is that Labour went into the GE on their most left-wing platform since 1987/1992, and got their worst result since then. That is the connection that people like you need to make.
You believe those things are left wing policies: fair enough if that is your view. But they do not seem to me to have any relevance at all for labour’s core vote, who do not pay higher rate tax; nor live in mansions; nor pay high rents (since those are met through the housing benefit bill or are not met at all); and who cannot pay current energy prices, so a freeze is hardly attractive when income is falling
Alongside that labour supported the tory cuts to benefits including the cap which will ensure that the rent controls will not prevent evictions; ensure that huge numbers of people are driven into poverty; ensure that more disabled people will die and more children will live in poverty
“left wing policy” is policy which aims to ensure greater social justice and greater equality of income wealth. Which aims to ensure that all people are afforded a decent quality of life, no matter where they are on the social spectrum. Which recognises that we are all “us” and does not demonise particular groups so as to justify throwing them to the wolves. Which recognises the primary responsibility of government to pursue full employment as the defining economic policy issue; and accepts that failure to achieve that is not the fault of the unemployed. Which rejects the very concept of NAIRU, openly and without equivocation.
It is very noticeable that your list includes precisely nothing of any importance to labour’s core vote, as they live their daily lives. It is as if the ordinary people of this country do not exist: and that is what we have come to expect.
The connection that needs to be made is that the SNP took seats of labour with something approaching a vision of a better Scotland for ordinary people.
Which sort of suggests that the fence sitting labour party lost votes because they were sat firmly on the fence.
It’s amazing that Blue Labour people ignore the SNP victory almost as though it didn’t happen.
Or more likely didn’t fit the narrative.
“But they do not seem to me to have any relevance at all for labour’s core vote, who do not pay higher rate tax; nor live in mansions………….It is very noticeable that your list includes precisely nothing of any importance to labour’s core vote, as they live their daily lives.”
Fiona – this line of argument is very odd indeed. If you increase taxes for the more wealthy then obviously you don’t need to make as many cuts to spending which DOES impact Labour voters on a day to day basis. How can you not make that connection?
Do you really think that Scottish people are inherently left wing? I’m not sure. My reading of it is that 45% of people voted to leave the UK in the referendum, and since only one of the mainstream parties was in favour of that, they voted for that party in the general election.
It doesn’t seem to be a glowing endorsement of socialism, more than the no vote was split between three parties.
Certainly the SNP under Salmond was not a left wing party – corporate tax rate competition with the rUK and Ireland does not paint the picture of a socialist state. Sturgeon seems to be more naturally radical so perhaps the SNP under her will be left wing.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years as SNP policies kick in – the income and corporate tax raising powers will be particularly telling.
I think that the majority of the people across the whole UK support the social democracy of the post war consensus.
People did not vote SNP because they support independence: as yet the majority do not. The election was not about independence: but it was about an anti-austerity policy, and that is what people want. At least that is my reading of it.
I think that is not much different from what people across the whole UK want. It is not what they will get, despite the rhetoric.
The powers which will be devolved will ensure that the alternative will be weak in Scotland: for it is not possible to deliver social democracy under the current proposals: and that is by design.
Indeed, it’s time these guys come clean and stop sucking up this hole idea.
But possibly true? So are we stuck with a dysfunctional banking/monetary system until it really does collapse in a BIG way as it is ultimately unsustainable. Or will WW3 reset the clock with a few mere tweaks at the fringes?
This isn’t really the battleground now is it for progressives? It is Labour’s battle for sure. A market & business brown-nosing Labour party is just what we don’t want. Let them get on with it but I certainly won’t be touching them with a ten foot barge pole.
But the real move in politics has now surely to be in a voting system that is better than FPTP and enables others parties to represent those of us who are essentially disenfranchised by it as it stands now so that we can have a say in politics and also authentically balance the power of the bigger parties.
I still think that the true art of politics is compromise – not the total defeat of those who think differently to you as things seem to be now.
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/12042-that-which-can-be-asserted-without-evidence-can-be-dismissed
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Respectfully I think you’re being a bit pedantic here, to no great gain. What’s neoliberalism the vast majority likely ask themselves, and moreover its seat of power is the EU which has no place in this particular article. Neoliberals are characterised as “the hard right” and he talks of “the right’s deep game” moreover he champions “taxes sufficient to fund quality public services”. And he makes clear a toxic political brand, which doesn’t represent mainstream opinion, is running the show. I don’t see the problem..
You may be blind to the issue
Non-neoliberals are not
I should have said the EU is currently the seat of power given it brooks all loyal opposition, witness Greece; individually neo-liberals are characteristically footloose and fancy-free of course. But nevertheless the article is for a broader audience surely? That’s my point, and likely as not it will get that audience because its about Charles Kennedy. And importantly he makes clear that what we have now is the hard right, from which consequences will follow albeit that inevitably, public perception lags behind.
But as you suggest, perhaps I’m missing something here, so I’ll leave it at that.
If I wasn’t cynical one could almost imagine someone in Labour has the ambition to mimic the American political system, you know, the one with 2 parties separated ideologically by one major difference, which name corporations are writing on their donation cheques!
I agree – we certainly seem to be going down that road!
This is disappointing to read as I had held Will Hutton in high regard and considered him a very intelligent man. In point of fact he has actually published two books in which such a defeatist statement never appeared once. In his most recent book he has proposed some fairly radical ideas for change. How quickly he has abandoned the cause. Very disappointing.
The next election won’t happen tomorrow. It’ll happen in 5 years time.
The worrying thing, for me, is that the female candidates and Will Hutton really think the Tories will run the economy well for those 5 years. In which case, why bother standing?
Personally, I’ve told the boys that they must learn German because I honestly believe the next 5 years of Tory rule are going to tip us into a chasm that we won’t be getting out of soon, or at all. We are going back to the days of a tiny handful of Toffs & a vast majority of underlings.
Neo-feudalism
I think I mentioned this before, but my lad recently did 2X 3 hour shifts at a restaurant & the manager did not seem willing to pay. “it was a trial” she said. I pointed out to her that trials are what people face when they commit crimes, such as, e.g., employing staff at below minimum wage. He did get paid.
I honestly think things are going to get much worse. We’ve voted for hell on earth & that’s exactly what we’ll get.