Labour should be streets ahead in the polls. For months it has been level-pegging. Living standards are sinking. There is real and growing hatred of inequality in Britain. Austerity is failing and the government's solution is ... more austerity. It is true that only a small minority are thinking about an entirely new system of society. (Which, by the way, is not at all the same thing as saying that the majority think that capitalism is working.) That's ok though. The Labour Party doesn't stand for a new system of society. It hasn't for a long time, if it ever did. At least it could stand for major reforms; for a different direction; for a change of purpose. But it doesn't.
The lesser Miliband is under attack. Quelle surprise!
'Support more Coalition cuts,' thunders Captain Jim - shadow defense secretary. Lord Glassman, Ed's guru, wails that his protege has,
"No strategy, no narrative and little energy" and that his economic policy is "all crap."
The bright boys and girls from Oxbridge, on their way to 'safe Labour seats' have not stopped their calculating at headquarters. They tell Ed that only 60% of the UK population votes these days; that large swathes of the busted up working class don't vote at all; that Scotland may soon leave the Westminster stage; that conquering the South East England middle class is the only show in town. Thus we get a meeker version of Cameron and Clegg! 'Austerity - but less so!' This approach appeals about as much as a slow amputation.
What might Labour do? What could they do? This is another way of saying - what is possible now - if a party with the size and base of the Labour Party had the will? It is not another forlorn fantasy about the prospects of 'changing' or 'capturing' or better yet 'seizing' the Labour Party; a dream almost as old as the party itself.
Let's start from essentials. First politics. Labour strategists are paralysed by who votes. Obama mobilised nearly 10% of 'new' voters in the US. He did this by being something that looked completely 'new.' He broke from worn out Clintonism. His 'newness' consisted in the mobilisation of millions at the grassroots, outside of the party machines. (It was, tragically for reform and perhaps even for the future of his presidency and the US, the first and last time he mobilised. But that's another story.) Labour urgently needs to learn British lessons from this experience and develop 'new' British politics.
Labour still has a mighty machine and £ millions, mainly from the unions. What could be 'new' about its politics? Labour could, should (won't) decide to turn over 50 safe seats at the next election to real champions of the people. Let me name some of them. You know many more. The Lawrences; their brave and steadfast solicitor, Imran Khan; Bob Crow - who will not bend his knee; Rose Gentle, the soldiers mother who confronted Blair; Grandmother and singer Pauline Pierce who 'noised up' young rioters in Hackney. The honours list of the people. I know some others - not known to you. You know thousands. People we trust. People who have done something more than fight for the best seat in a restaurant. We could choose them in town hall meetings. And Labour could help us make them into MPs. That's what is possible - even for Labour. That's what could be done. That would be new politics that would inspire new voters. But the old adage sticks 'If you want something doing then do it yourselves!'
New economics next.
No comments:
Post a Comment