Blue Labour

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

I quite like the sound of this lot! Maybe at long last I have finally found a nest to rest my political eggs in.

Blue Monday. I mean Labour

They're ostensibly left-wing, but they don't really seem to like immigration. They're all for social inclusion, but don't seem too keen on paying benefits to those who don't at least do voluntary work for them. Oh, and forget going soft on criminals. "Family, Faith, and the Flag", apparently, which sounds more like something you'd hear Ian Paisley bellowing into a megaphone than anything else.

Aren't they just the SDP raising its head again? I'm old enough to realise that these things tend to come around, go around ...

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

You mean people who don't think New Labour was right wing enough?

Cunts, in other words

[Anton Gramscescu]

Blue Labour

I'm not sure it's quite as simple as left-right.

If I understand it correctly, Blue Labour is actually trying to re-create the Labour party of the 1920s, I think. Pro-collective, pro-mutual aid but also patriotic, somewhat suspicious of the state as an agent of social change (an agent to purchase goods like health collectively yes, but a "nanny state" no).

I think it's as much a rejection of the 1960s and 1970s new left as anything else.

Here's another good artcile on the subject, from the NS.

[Diable Rouge]

Blue Labour

"And they looked from the pigs to the humans and back again, and didn't know which was which". It's your system that sees the three parties chasing an amorphous middle, maybe if you had a PR-based English Parliament like the other three countries, the parties would have more clearly-defined ideological positions.

[cantagalo]

Blue Labour

You mean people who don't think New Labour was right wing enough?

Cunts, in other words

Have you ever wondered why the Left has problems connecting with people?

Among the 4 million voters lost to Labour since 1997, there will be a sizeable number who believe that Labour was not right wing enough on issues such as the role of the state, the deficit and immigration.

Calling them 'cunts' doesn't really seem to be the best way of winning them over.

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

I am not a politician so am not trying to win people over. I just happen to believe in and work for a system that is fair and just for all in every society. I think it is appalling that we are in a country where the divide between rich and poor has constantly widened over the last 30 years and, for 13 years, it was ostensibly a Labour Government, which is disgusting.

I am wary of patriotism and nationalism not immigration. I know where the deficit comes from. I want justice and fairness for all people across the world and don't want the poor in this country competing with the poor in other countries in order to line the pockets of the rich and to widen that gap worldwide.

I also know that the left has a history of infighting and division that ruins their chances of communicating their message to people. It is splinter groups like this chasing votes that exacerbate that division. I actually have respect for people on the right who actually believe that their view is the best for people. I mean they are mental but still they have conviction. Moving to the right to win votes is appalling.

I don't want the Labour Party to be re-elected under any cost. I don't want the Labour PArty of the last 13 years to be re-elected. I remain to be convinced that the current Labour party is going to anything other than get rid of the "New" and be "Not the Coalition". I want a Labour Party to be re-elected by being a Labour Party fighting for all in society or be in opposition trying. (That would have been a much better 50 Cent album title)

[E10 Rifle]

Blue Labour

Well said Bored.

The problem is, "Blue Labour" is another attempt at teasing out feelings rather than facts. Of course, the reason for people's feelings about immigration need to be acknowledged and discussed, but the evidence that immigration really is responsible for driving down wages and taking people's jobs and houses is faint and contradictory. You shouldn't be trading on falsehoods.

[cantagalo]

Blue Labour

Of course, the reason for people's feelings about immigration need to be acknowledged and discussed

Indeed. I was merely suggesting that calling them 'cunts' is not a very promising basis on which to do this. It just reinforces the perception of large numbers of people that the Left is dogmatic, judgemental and oblivious to their concerns.

[E10 Rifle]

Blue Labour

But Bored wasn't calling them cunts, as I read it - he was calling the focus-group think-tank wonks behind Blue Labour cunts. Big, big difference.

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

Working class fears about immigration (and I am not convinced that such fears are, by any means, mainly amongst the working classes) do have to be addressed but not but kowtowing to them.

The BNP have done well by going into working class areas and helping people with issues that affect them - helping get their benefits sorted out, helping them sort out their housing etc. They then turn around and say that the reason those same people find it hard to get the welfare or housing is because of immigration or 13 years of Labour.

What the left needs to do is counter the BNP, EDL, etc at this level, positively helping the working classes, promoting unity amongst all those who are experiencing difficulties at the bottom, not just the 'British'. I am not sure I wholeheartedly agree with the IWCA but they have highlighted the areas where the Right are succeeding and the Left are failing. Rather than appeal to the prejudices of a section of the working classes, the origins of these prejudices need to be addressed whether it be disinformation from the right, preceived failings at the hands of the state or basic education about the real reasons for the deficit, lack of school places or lack of hospital beds.

Just because one doesn't accept a pragmatism that means that prejudices have to be appealed to get elected doesn't make one dogmatic. Idealistic, I will accept, but not dogmatic

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

Bored wasn't calling them cunts, as I read it - he was calling the focus-group think-tank wonks behind Blue Labour cunts. Big, big difference

I genuinely had to think about that, E10, but, yes, you are right. I am criticising the people that feel that they need to chase the votes rather than stick to their principles, not the constituency they are targeting. Just join the Liberals, Conservatives or UKIP rather than try to drag Labour even more to the right.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

Blue Labour

the divide between rich and poor has constantly widened over the last 30 years and, for 13 years, it was ostensibly a Labour Government, which is disgusting

The gap between the likes of me and the uber-rich, definitely, but surely the gap between the "poor" and the middle classes has been narrowed considerably by tax credits, etc? You don't seem to be measurably worse off (in terms of disposable family income) as a shop floor worker than a middle manager nowadays, and that wasn't the case 30 years ago. I remember as a kid when we could first afford things like a colour TV, and a holiday to Majorca, and I was twelve by then - and my Dad, I would say, was in a reasonable job even then.

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

That's if you can find a job as a shop floor worker. The poor that I am speaking of are the unemployed or 'just-on-minimum-wage' call-centre or checkout workers.

My dad was in the merchant navy, construction, the pub trade and then back in the merchant navy and we were lower-middle class. This was the class that prospered to an extent over the last 30 plus years of Thatcherism.

There has, however, been a growing -what has been perceived as - underclass and that is where the gap starts and it is this class that appears to blamed for much.

[Sean of the Shed]

Blue Labour

Bored of Education wrote:

I am criticising the people that feel that they need to chase the votes rather than stick to their principles, not the constituency they are targeting. Just join the Liberals, Conservatives or UKIP rather than try to drag Labour even more to the right.

They don't, though. The current political system is still either Tory or Labour, and nothing else matters, even though the Liberals might try to convince you that the are a major influence on current political decisions, they are merely propping up an otherwise weak Tory government pushing Tory policies. As for UKIP or the BNP and suchlike, there will never be any chance of power whilst members of these parties, so only two choices remain, and if you can't stomach the thought of joining the Tories, no matter how alike yours and their belief are, then the other option is to join the Labour party and then mould it into the party you want it to be, at the same time drawing it away from the core values behind it's original creation, and the people it was meant to represent. How often has Miliband shown his concern for the middle classes?
I really struggle to to find any affinity with the current Labour party. It already is Blue Labour.

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

I am finding it difficult to ascertain whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me there, Sean.

[Sean of the Shed]

Blue Labour

I definitely agree, Bored. There are elements in the Labour party who patently shouldn't be there, and would be better off with parties such as UKIP, but know that allying with such a party would be political suicide, so instead they stay with Labour and try to manipulate it into the party that they want it to be. I thought the Labour party couldn't be any more right wing than it was under Blair, but now we are being told that it should be even more right wing just to chase wavering Tory voters, so why not just go the whole hog and merge the two parties to make one huge right of centre super-party for the middle classes, and fuck the poor and the oppressed minorities.

[Anton Gramscescu]

Blue Labour

Bored of Education wrote:

I think it is appalling that we are in a country where the divide between rich and poor has constantly widened over the last 30 years and, for 13 years, it was ostensibly a Labour Government, which is disgusting.

Except it didn't widen constantly over the 13 years of Labour government. If I'm not mistaken, it narowed substantially over the first two terms, thanks to things like the minimum wage and the introduction of tax credits. It widened again quite substantially in the third term - Im not sure why but assume the property bubble had quite a bit to do with it.

I am wary of patriotism and nationalism not immigration. I know where the deficit comes from. I want justice and fairness for all people across the world and don't want the poor in this country competing with the poor in other countries in order to line the pockets of the rich and to widen that gap worldwide.

Except it's not that simple, is it? Hundreds of millions of people have come out of poverty over the past decade and a half, and trade liberalization is part of that. The fact is that the econmies - and hence the welfare states - of all western countries got an enormous boost from the inabilty of low-wage countries to participate fully in the world economy. As those countries started to participate in the golobal economy, the competitive position of western workers has eroded, and so too have the welfare states which depended on their tax contributions. Yes, some multinationals got rich on this, but this process also undeniably raised living standards enormously, for hundreds of millions of people right across Asia and more recently Latin America. If you're a utilitarian, it's hard to argue this is a bad thing overall - but it is very, very hard on people from countries who've become used to being in a privileged in the world economy.

Anyways, I'm not entirely clear why you think Blue Labour is "right wing". I think it observes that a lot of the people who used to support Labour were quite culturally conservative, and that maybe Labour would do well to think this way, too. I can't see anything in any of those articles which suggests that it should be more right-wing economically in the sense of less regulation, smaller state, etc.

[Wyatt Earp]

Blue Labour

Toto Gramsciddu wrote:

Here's another good artcile on the subject, from the NS.

Really? I must admit, it struck me as extraordinarily superficial and ill-thought-through.

[Anton Gramscescu]

Blue Labour

The article, or the concept of Blue Labour?

How was your vacation, btw?

[Wyatt Earp]

Blue Labour

The article; I'm scarcely any the wiser abour Blue Labour, though the term nauseates on a number of levels.

The thing is, it's not as if the author says nothing true during the course of the article. It's quite true, for example, that New Labour had a kind of bossy middle-class Fabian managerialism. But the point about them is that they lacked the Fabian egalitarianism to do with it. The author comes close to arguing that New Labour drifted away from the working class by failing to be sufficiently right-wing, although (perhaps sensing the absurdity of such a claim), he fails to say so plainly. Or, indeed, to say much of anything plainly.

I think the faith and flag stuff sounds very dangerous, to be honest, although it's hard to tell exactly, or even approximately, what it means in policy terms. Now that even the Tories are making the right noises about teh gays and teh blacks, it would be a huge mistake, and more to the point the wrong thing to do, for Labour to try to outflank them to the Right: taking, as it were, the moral low ground.

And as for treating people's concerns about immigration with "respect", what world is he living in where this isn't going on? The political class and the commentariat never shut up about immigration. What does the bloke want done about it? He doesn't say.

[Wyatt Earp]

Blue Labour

It was brilliant, by the way. Glorious weather. And, I have to, say, great food, including (but not, I admit, limited to) some properly workin bleedin class fish and chips.

[Anton Gramscescu]

Blue Labour

Why on Earth... wrote:

The author comes close to arguing that New Labour drifted away from the working class by failing to be sufficiently right-wing, although (perhaps sensing the absurdity of such a claim), he fails to say so plainly.

Again, I don't think he is making a point at all about being right wing unless you consider Ernest Bevin to have been right wing.

I think the point he is making - admittedly not in the clearest of terms - is that what has turned the working class off the labour party is its dalliance with small-l liberalism and the various types of identity politics that flow therefrom. This isn't that novel, really - in some ways it's just a Brit-ified version of "What's the Matter With Kansas" - the working classes will vote against their material interests if they don't feel that their representatives are culturally in tune with them.

We're seeing this all over the place these days, btw, with the True Finns the latest version: mostly working class, very protective of the welfare state, but insular.

I wouldn't find such a party particularly appealing (and nor, I guess, would any self-respecting North London guardianista). But I don't think Glasman's wrong to suggest that a party genuinely representative of the working class wouldn't be particularly cosmopolitan.

[NHH]

Blue Labour

I read this piece by Glasman yesterday, and found myself agreeing with every single word.

[wingco]

Blue Labour

It was hard to disagree with any of it, NHH, but I suspected it was a spun attempt to charm and reassure Guardianistas. I was also wary of the strong emphasis on "faith" groups, as if they were going to be significant mainstays and allies of this new movement, with all that that might entail. I also didn't catch why a movement that was there to espouse and put into practice the values as stated by Glasman here would naturally gravitate towards the moniker of "Blue Labour".

[Bored Of Education]

Blue Labour

Some odd buzzwords used there. When I think of Labour values, "faith" and "patriotism" don't come into it and "citizenship" is questionable and woolly as well.

Even as someone who is in a faith group, I don't see what they have got to do with the Labour movement. Many people feel drawn to such movements because of their faith so faith groups can and have fed into the Labour movement but it isn't an intrinsic element.

As I have pointed out before, I don't see that there is anything to be gained from talking merely about the 'British' working classes or poor. As Toto pointed out, part of the deficit here has been to do with improvement of the working classes in developing countries but that doesn't mean that those at the bottom have to suffer here or in other developed countries.

"Citizenship" I naturally baulk at as it suggests to me a socially constructed idea of what it is to a citizen of a country rather than a organic evolving idea. For centuries, immigrants have brought their own ideas of citizenship to Britain and added these to existing concepts within the framework of British law, itself somewhat evolving. I just don't like the idea of codifying such concepts further especially not from the perspective of still a mainly male WASP establishment