Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

This is no time to hang Labour

Neal Lawson replies to Anthony Barnett.

Anthony Barnett's article reminded me of that old Socialist Workers Party slogan, "Neither Washington nor Moscow, but international socialism", reincarnated as "Neither Cameron nor Brown, but a hung parliament". David Marquand has already reminded NS readers ("Let 'em hang? Not so fast", 22 March) that someone will form a majority or minority government, and that that person will either be David Cameron or Gordon Brown.

So, we have real choices to make. For reasons that everyone already knows very well -- be they to do with Europe, or the economy, or public services, or the voting system -- people should vote to stop the Tories getting a sniff of power. Once that is done, but only then, new opportunities will abound. But anything short of that, and it won't be readers of this magazine in the main who will suffer, but the people least able to defend themselves against the deluge of Tory cuts that will surely follow.

There are two things wrong with our politics. Barnett alludes to both, but never quite nails either, and crucially fails to connect them. The first is market fundamentalism; the second is its alter ego, state fundamentalism. The former sees society as a subset of the economy, and leads not just to increasing inequality, but to a debasement of what it means to be human and a diminution of the public realm.

It also leads, paradoxically, to a new form of state fundamentalism, geared to policing the free market and clearing up the social and economic mess that it causes. In this way, it provides modern politicians with a reason for existing: if they refuse to manage the market, they can at least manage us.

Getting out of this mess demands more than a hung parliament. It demands a realignment of progressive forces into a campsite of centre-left parties that keep their autonomy, but are bound by a set of values. Those values are a commitment to a more sustainable and equal society through a democratic revolution in our political, economic and social institutions. In this unfolding pluralist project, a transformed Labour Party is a necessary but insufficient vehicle for our politics.

Yes, we have to capture the state to democratise it so that it becomes the people's state; but we also need alliances with a range of other parties and campaigning forces if we are to prise open the grip that market and state fundamentalists have on it. I understand and share Barnett's frustration with New Labour and Gordon Brown. Yet we should also be frustrated with ourselves for failing to build the ideas and organisation that could create something better. As the polls show time and again, the people are ahead of Labour, and we have to break the mould of British politics.

However, that is not going to be achieved by placing a noose around the Tories' neck and Labour's, too. Even the Socialist Worker has told its readers to vote Labour -- albeit with no illusions.

Neal Lawson is chair of Compass and the author of "All Consuming" (Penguin, £10.99)

This article appears in this week's New Statesman.

Tags: Thinking the future  Progressive Future  Hung Parliament

7 comments

Jaye's picture

Neal Lawson has a cheek. He is one of the opportunists who helped move Labour to the Right. Thanks to Mr. Lawson and his friends, Labour is the Thatcherite Party Alistair Darling now takes pride in it being.

David Broder's picture

"David Marquand has already reminded NS readers that someone will form a majority or minority government, and that that person will either be David Cameron or Gordon Brown."

Some Mystic Meg he is. How does he know all that already?

Anyway, who cares what David Marquand thinks... of course he supports New Labour, he was in the SDP!

By the way, the correctness of the SWP quote at the start of the article is that it identifies the commonalities between the USA and USSR (both capitalist + imperialist) and suggests a socialist alternative, whereas what Neal Lawson's article does is advocate what is simply a middle course between Labour and Tories.

The lack of intellectual rigour in this piece is a joke. How would a NuLab alliance with Liberals, Greens, Plaid etc. achieve a "more sustainable and equal society through a democratic revolution in our political, economic and social institutions"?

But I am glad to hear that Neal is so frustrated with New Labour. Maybe he shouldn't spend the next six weeks campaigning for them.

bernard2's picture

I HAVE A WEE FEELING MANY WILL ENTER THE POLLING BOOTH TO VOTE CONSERVITIVE THE MEMORYS OF THATCHER WILL COME FLOODING BACK ABD THEY WONT BE ABLE TO DO IT .THATS HOW MAJOR WON IN 1992 AND ITS HOW LABOUR WILL WIN ON MAY 6TH , IVE HAD FRIEDS SAY TO ME WHEN THEY GO TO0 VOTE WILL THEY ACTUALY BE ABLE TO VOTE AGAINST LABOUR , THEY ARE NOT SURE .

Scumbags-SacktheLot's picture

@Babeouf:
...and by your heavy-handed, overly politicised use of the English language I believe the point you are making is: DO NOT VOTE LABOUR. Get someone else in instead. Anyone. Or Britain's finished for good.
Personally I agree. I shall forever henceforth refer to this Labour government as the period of The Great Betrayal.
Up to their necks in sleaze. All they care about really is how much money they can make out of being a politician.
Out! Out! Out!

Babeouf's picture

Scumbags if people believe all there is to politics is voting then they are bound to end up feeling betrayed and being betrayed. They advertise their social passivity and like other chickens end up being plucked. Which ever of the three faces of Capitalist order triumph they will rapidly fade into indistinguishable suits. If the Conservatives triumph they will implement the same cost cutting programs as Labour. But more rapidly.
In office Labour holds the same world view as the Conservatives. Out of office they discover the 'downtrodden masses' most of whom have been trodden on at least once by the last Labour government.

Attrition47's picture

Great Betrayal? That's what Liarbour have been for since the 1918 constitution. Boycott the 'election', demand a democratic electoral system instead.

Babeouf's picture

All those favoring more pro Capitalist pro Imperialist policies should certainly vote Labour. What Labour supporter would want to miss out on the Iran invasion. Black gold, blood and oil: Vote labour. As for the rest this party has joined the Norwegian Blue, its dead. Its membership has halved and will halve again. The state market dichotomy exists only if the state is a neutral entity. But the intervention to transfer resources from the working class to the financial sector shows in fact that this state is a requirement for the reproduction of the Capitalist social relation and consequently its neutrality is ideal its partiality actual.

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets