In this week’s New Statesman: Eton Mess

Cameron’s clique and the rebirth of the British ruling class. PLUS: Nigel Farage writes the diary.

Eton Eternal: Jason Cowley interviews the Eton headmaster

From the Archbishop of Canterbury and the head of No 10’s policy unit to top stage actors and the PM – Etonians have resurged into in public life. In our cover story this week, Jason Cowley meets Tony Little, the school’s headmaster. Is Eton guilty of creating “a peculiar form of conformity” in the upper corridors of power? Jason Cowley asks Tony Little. The headmaster replies:

“ ‘There or thereabouts’. I think this is one of those little moments in history that won’t be repeated. I’m pleased that it’s not just the Conservative Prime Minister, but the Archbishop of Canterbury and actors [Eddie Redmayne, Damian Lewis, Dominic West], who have a rather different take on the world. And that reflects the Eton I live in. The exciting thing about being in a place like this is having bright, young, aspirational people who see the world in very different ways. That is the optimistic view. Whether it holds up to scrutiny is rather more complicated.”

While debunking misconceptions about this centuries-old school for boys – such as the high percentage of “Russian plutocrats’ ” children in attendance and the notion that all Eton students “come from castles” – Little also addresses the British education system’s role in “flatlining” social mobility and assesses the reforms by the Education Secretary, Michael Gove:

“The good bit is rattling the cage and rattling it mightily. We now have these pinpricks of light, of some outstanding practice . . . the Teach First scheme . . . is the single best initiative that has happened in my professional lifetime.

“[However,] I see no joined-up plan. Nationally, I’m talking about . . . Huge amount of reform, maybe too much. I think most of the people I work with can’t see the big picture we are aiming for. People can see merit in the individual things that are going on, but we don’t yet see the whole picture . . .”

Plus, Danny Dorling, professor of human geography at the University of Sheffield, explains how social mobility got stuck.

ELSEWHERE IN THE MAGAZINE:

 

Nigel Farage: The Diary

Storming South Shields, dodging photographers and a new Nigel on the Eurosceptic scene. The Ukip leader, Nigel Farage, recalls a less-than-ordinary week, from the local elections and television appearances to gutting fish and Brussels

[On Thursday evening, I take] the train to London to film This Week with Andrew Neil, with a live studio audience and his dog, Mollie. The atmosphere among the programme’s acolytes is fantastic, almost cultish. I have since been told their audience figures stretched well beyond a million so I hope it is a format they use again. A few drinks after the show, and it is time to head to my hotel and await the results from South Shields. By around 1.30am the count has finished and Ukip is looking at a staggering 24.2 per cent. Not enough to steal the seat but a breathtaking vote share, in the light of such a short campaign where 60 per cent of votes cast happened via postal ballot. It’s a situation that needs to change, castrating the chance to campaign and communicate with the public and protecting the party in power. I am intending to sleep, but as the early results start coming in from Lincolnshire I know that something incredible is burgeoning. I finally turn my phone off at three.

The week ends with an unexpected political lift: “Bank holiday over and it’s back to Brussels. Tuesday continues the weekend theme of Nigels, as Mr Lawson speaks out against British membership of the EU. The world is slowly becoming a far less lonely place.”

Laurie Penny: Letter from Reykjavik

After the financial crash of 2008, Iceland refused to bail out its banks and overthrew its government. Five years on, has its flirtation with an alternative to austerity ended? Laurie Penny visits on election day. Laurie Penny writes:

Iceland is a little human crucible bubbling away in the middle of the north Atlantic, and an experiment in how to build and run a modern democracy. For most of the past 30 years, it embraced aggressive free-market capitalism. Then its banks failed, its population lost faith in conventional politics, and it began to be an experiment in something else entirely. Desperate people across the eurozone cling to the fairy tale of Iceland as a plucky country holding out against austerity – but Icelanders see things differently.

Rafael Behr: The Politics Column

Everyone’s talking about Nigel, but it’s Nick who has shaken up Westminster for good, says Rafael Behr in the Politics Column this week. He argues that there is a stark choice facing British politics, expressed in the form of a rivalry between two party leaders with distinct styles and incompatible creeds. Those leaders are, of course, Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg:

Labour and the Tories have fought each other to a standstill. We already know the contours of every stone they throw. David Cameron is the haughty toff who cuts public services for pleasure. Ed Miliband is the gormless wonk without the strength to grip the axe. Their repetitive skirmishes win no defectors from the opposite tribe.

Read the politics column online now.

 

IN THE CRITICS:

 

Jesse Norman on Edmund Burke

In the Critics section of this week’s New Statesman, John Gray reviews Edmund Burke: Philosopher, Politician, Prophet by Jesse Norman MP. Burke, John Gray argues, is “the thinker who more than any other exemplifies the contradictions of conservatism”. The principal contradiction in Burke’s conservatism is between his hostility to “political rationalism” – the notion that society can be remade in the image of abstract ideals – and his commitment to a species of providentialism, according to which the steady advance of liberty is evidence of a divine author at work. Margaret Thatcher, Gray goes on, saw the political settlement she achieved “as a chapter in a Burkean grand narrative of liberty. Unsurprisingly, this settlement has now collapsed.”

 

Brian Eno: The Critics Interview

The NS pop critic, Kate Mossman, talks to the musician, producer and all-round creative force Brian Eno. “The art world bothers Eno,” Mossman writes. Eno tells her: “The art world has got into the habit of believing that its prices reflect its importance.” Eno himself has sometimes been on the receiving end of the kind of snobbery that reigns in the art world, mostly for his production work with mega-selling bands such as Coldplay and U2. “People don’t think my production is cool,” he says. “[But] I like working with both those bands because they are at the centre of something I’m usually at the edges of . . . Snobbery is an English disease.”

 

Plus:

  • Sarah Churchwell is decidedly unimpressed by Z, Therese Anne Fowler’s novel based on the life of Zelda Fitzgerald
  • The former Conservative chancellor of the exchequer Norman Lamont reviews A Dangerous Delusion: Why the West Is Wrong About Nuclear Iran by Peter Oborne and David Morrison
  • Sophie Elmhirst reviews John Crace’s biography of Harry Redknapp, Harry’s Games
  • Nick Spencer, the research director at the think tank Theos, reviews The Serpent’s Promise: the Bible Retold as Science by Steve Jones
  • Daniel Swift reviews an edition of Kurt Vonnegut’s letters edited by Dan Wakefield
  • Ryan Gilbey reviews Our Children, the new film by the director Joachim Lafosse
  • The architect Amanda Levete explains why “resistance is the fuel in the process of design” and why “cities are never perfect”.
  • And much more.

Read our full “In the Critics” blog post here.

Purchase a copy of this week's New Statesman in newsstands today, or online at: subscribe.newstatesman.com

Getty
Show Hide image

How should Labour's disgruntled moderates behave?

The price for loyalty looks like being long-term opposition. Sometimes exiting can be brave.

When Albert O. Hirschman was writing Exit, Voice, Loyalty: Responses to decline in Firms, Organizations, and States he wasn’t thinking of the British Labour Party.  That doesn’t mean, though, that one of the world’s seminal applications of economics to politics can’t help us clarify the options open to the 80 to 90 per cent of Labour MPs who, after another week of utter chaos, are in total despair at what’s happening under Jeremy Corbyn.

According to Hirschman, people in their situation have essentially three choices – all of which stand some chance, although there are no guarantees, of turning things around sooner or later.

The first option is simply to get the hell out: exit, after all, can send a pretty powerful, market-style signal to those at the top that things are going wrong and that something has to change.

The second option is to speak up and shout out: if the leadership’s not listening then complaining loudly might mean they get the message.

The third option is to sit tight and shut up, believing that if the boat isn’t rocked it will somehow eventually make it safely to port.

Most Labour MPs have so far plumped for the third course of action.  They’ve battened down the hatches and are waiting for the storm to pass.  In some ways, that makes sense.  For one thing, Labour’s rules and Corbyn’s famous ‘mandate’ make him difficult to dislodge, and anyone seen to move against him risks deselection by angry activists.

For another, there will be a reckoning – a general election defeat so bad that it will be difficult even for diehards to deny there’s a problem: maybe Labour has to do ‘déjà vu all over again’ and lose like it did in 1983 in order to come to its senses. The problem, however, is that this scenario could still see it stuck in opposition for at least a decade. And that’s presuming that the left hasn’t so effectively consolidated its grip on the party that it can’t get out from under.

That’s presumably why a handful of Labour MPs have gone for option two – voice.  Michael Dugher, John Woodcock, Kevan Jones, Wes Streeting and, of course, John Mann have made it pretty clear they think the whole thing’s a mess and that something – ideally Jeremy Corbyn and those around him – has to give.  They’re joined by others – most recently Stephen Kinnock, who’s talked about the party having to take ‘remedial action’ if its performance in local elections turns out to be as woeful as some are suggesting.  And then of course there are potential leadership challengers making none-too-coded keynote speeches and public appearances (both virtual and real), as well as a whole host of back and frontbenchers prepared to criticise Corbyn and those around him, but only off the record.

So far, however, we’ve seen no-one prepared to take the exit option – or at least to go the whole hog. Admittedly, some, like Emma Reynolds, Chuka Umunna, Dan Jarvis, Yvette Cooper, and Rachel Reeves, have gone halfway by pointedly refusing to serve in Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet.  But nobody has so far declared their intention to leave politics altogether or to quit the party, either to become an independent or to try to set up something else.

The latter is easily dismissed as a pipe-dream, especially in the light of what happened when Labour moderates tried to do it with the SDP in the eighties.  But maybe it’s time to think again.  After all, in order to refuse even to contemplate it you have to believe that the pendulum will naturally swing back to Labour at a time when, all over Europe, the centre-left looks like being left behind by the march of time and when, in the UK, there seems precious little chance of a now shrunken, predominantly public-sector union movement urging the party back to the centre ground in the same way that its more powerful predecessors did back in the fifties and the late-eighties and nineties. 

Maybe it’s also worth wondering whether those Labour MPs who left for the SDP could and should have done things differently.  Instead of simply jumping ship in relatively small numbers and then staying in parliament, something much bolder and much more dramatic is needed.  What if over one hundred current Labour MPs simultaneously declared they were setting up ‘Real Labour’?  What if they simultaneously resigned from the Commons and then simultaneously fought scores of by-elections under that banner?

To many, even to ask the question is to answer it. The obstacles – political, procedural, and financial – are formidable and forbidding.  The risks are huge and the pay-off massively uncertain.  Indeed, the whole idea can be swiftly written off as a thought-experiment explicitly designed to demonstrate that nothing like it will ever come to pass.

On the other hand, Labour MPs, whether we use Hirschman’s three-way schema or not, are fast running out of options.  The price for loyalty looks like being long-term opposition.  Voice can only do so much when those you’re complaining about seem – in both senses of the word – immovable.  Exit, of course, can easily be made to seem like the coward’s way out. Sometimes, however, it really is the bravest and the best thing to do.

Tim Bale is professor of politics at QMUL. His latest book, Five Year Mission, chronicles Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour party.