>> >> Inevitably this will change, but who knows when?
>>
>> It changed for Blair because he moved Labour. After Blair it moved back. THat's the
>> issue surely.
Thinking on this comment it's a good one...people in Labour, whether pro or anti Starmer, fixate on how to persuade people to vote Labour which is understandable right now. But as with any product, persuasion helps at the margin but if the product's wrong then people won't buy it.
If you're looking for a conclusion, stop reading now, I think this is just a stream of thought.
It's very seductive for anybody with socialist leanings to hark back to Labour's defence of the oppressed working class, the fight for fairness, equality of opportunity, and so on. Truth is that half of the working class has always voted Conservative anyway - it used to be the agricultural ones in the shires, with the mass organised labour of the the towns and cities in the old industries of coal, steel and manufacturing being the ones who voted Labour. Now that distinction has gone and with it chunks of the red wall, but there are also many fewer "working class" (as in C2DE) people anyway. The red wall in Hartlepool disappeared along with engineering and shipbuilding. Overall, there simply aren't enough working class people to get Labour over the line. Blair saw that.
New Labour actually implemented a lot of socialist policy but Blair recognised that he needed the votes of the expanding middle class. Not just the middle class of old, the bank managers, solicitors, doctors etc. but the salaried lower management and technocrats who would not instinctively see an aggressively socialist message as being for them.
It's not undemocratic or unprincipled to look at the electorate and try to work out what will work for them. Working out how to give as many people as possible what they want (and need) in a socially responsible way while making the economy work, dealing with healthcare needs and eliminating food and housing poverty isn't cheating or betraying the founders of the party. And what they want includes a credible brand. Or even an incredible one, like "Boris".
The working class isn't going to rise up and rescue Labour. Labour needs to appeal to exactly the same type of people as the Conservatives do.
Wilson and Heath were ideological opposites, but they both realised that 90% of what they needed to do was the same, and if they could be relied on to do that then they could get elected and keep a few of their promises.
The Corbynites are convinced that Labour has lost its identity and an aggressively socialist message will restore it and increase its appeal. I think they are wrong.
People actually like socialism, even Conservative voters. My neighbour was ranting recently against socialism, and I asked him which bit of socialism he didn't like - was it social housing (he lives in it), the NHS, or the old age pension? Answer came there none. Don't go on about socialism, just do it.
I would suggest changing the name of Labour, but they'd probably choose Consignia. Labour certainly needs to change what Labour means.
|
