Labour must not leave the field to the Tories as it did in the 1980s
The period from Margaret Thatcher’s victory in 1979 to Labour’s utter rout in 1983 has come under renewed scrutiny. Moderates have sought to use it as a dire warning of what happens when the Bennites are ascendant: political irrelevance and practical impotence to aid the poor and vulnerable.
Bennites have revisited the same period and sought to rehabilitate it: the election defeat was the fault of the right, or that it was not Labour’s policies that were at fault, but instead only the Falklands war saved Thatcher and prevented Michael Foot becoming prime minister.
So could Labour have stopped Thatcher?
There were three occasions when this was theoretically possible. The scenario which excites political historians the most is: ‘What if James Callaghan had gone to the country in October 1978?’ The economic circumstances were favourable. Inflation was falling, incomes were rising, and the balance of payments was back in surplus. The North Sea oil had started to flow, and Britain had repaid the final instalments of the International Monetary Fund loan. The unions were primed and ready to support Labour. Callaghan had even poached the Sun’s political editor to write his election speeches.
As we know, like Gordon Brown 30 years later, Callaghan made the wrong call, and delayed until 1979, by which time the unions had destroyed the government’s credibility with the Winter of Discontent. But had Callaghan gone in October 1978, it is possible, likely even, that Thatcher could have been defeated, and ended up as an IDS-style footnote in the annals of the Conservative party.
The behaviour of the Labour party after 1979 largely sealed its fate in the next election. At the very time the country was crying out for social democracy, with unemployment soaring, businesses closing and the inner cities in flames, Labour decided to self-harm.
There was the sheer nastiness of the Benn-Healey leadership election. It turned really ugly, with Denis Healey being barracked off stage by Tony Benn supporters, and members of parliament being threatened with deselection if they did not back Benn. Healey recorded in his memoir that the contest created the impression of ‘extremism, violence, hatred and division’.
Nearly 30 Labour MPs from the right of the party defected to the new Social Democratic party, tilting Labour to the left. Whatever their frustrations, there is no excuse for them leaving Labour, especially when others on the right proved it was possible to stay and fight.
And then there was the 1983 manifesto. Whatever the rights and wrongs of its contents – withdrawal from Europe (without a referendum), cancellation of Trident and removal of American bases, state control of industries, currency exchange controls, and a vast increase in public spending – it allowed the Conservatives to paint Labour as blood red. One of the famous posters from the time shows the Labour and Communist party manifestos side by side under the strapline ‘Like Your Manifesto, Comrade’.
By the 1983 election, after four years of splits, rancour, and childlike indulgence in fantasy policymaking it was no surprise that Labour lost three million votes. Labour lost seats to the Tories in Birmingham, Norwich, Leicester, Lewisham, Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield. Labour came within 700,000 votes of coming third in national vote share. Benn lost his seat, Thatcher won a majority of 144.
If Labour had had a different leader and manifesto, and if the party had not lost its governing mojo, it is possible, just, that the dark night of Thatcherism could have been avoided. Instead, Labour opted for opposition for the next decade. Neil Kinnock made Herculean efforts, but the march back to credibility was too slow in pace. While Thatcher had gone, Thatcherism continued into the 1990s. Had Labour modernised enough it could have stopped John Major in 1992 and prevented the privatisation of the railways, signed the Social Chapter and set about tackling child poverty earlier. Instead it took four defeats in a row before Labour was able to replace the Tories.
So what are the lessons, if we are to avoid a repeat of history? First, the party belongs to us all. The SDP split was a terrible self-inflicted wound by MPs who owed their political existence to the Labour party. So moderates should stay and fight their corner, no matter how tough it gets. Progress has a place as valid as the Campaign Group. Labour is a coalition of left and right, and, like an eagle, needs both wings to soar.
The second is focus: the Tories can be beaten. Internal elections must not become a distraction from the main job of providing an alternative government. Thatcher’s first term was untroubled by a serious alternative. Labour looked the other way. This year’s contest is in danger of allowing David Cameron and George Osborne to get away with murder.
Third, Labour needs to behave like a serious force in British politics, not a rabble. This means acting as a team in parliament without grandstanding rebellions, avoiding the temptation to offer running commentary to Sky News, and ending the name-calling of ‘Tory’ or ‘nutter’ towards anyone with whom we disagree. Labour does not have a cloak of invisibility. People can see and hear us, and this summer the sight has not been very attractive.
———————————–
Important lessons for the present from the past.
The destructive negativity of three of the candidates trying to manipulate a coalition against one candidate hardly sets us up for post election unity. Don’t the three realise that they have nowhere to go except supporting their leader in order to challenge the Tories? The history of this episode of negative campaigning will be brought back by the Tories to haunt these three prima donnas. Their credibility as leading labour figures looks severely threatened now. Hopefully they may try some repair afterwards, knowing which side of the bread is buttered.
Oh, and accusations of ‘Tory-lite’ and ‘neo-liberal’ are comradely terms of affection?
Corbyn has sat down just too often with Holocaust deniers, homophobes, conspiracy theorists and terrorist apologists, for it to be an accident.
Plus, I believe his policies are impractical and will not win over those Tory voters we need to win us the next General Election. And who will suffer by Labour being out of power? The very people he professes to care about.
Yes the three other candidates, are closer in views, but pints g out they disagree, isn’t a coalition against Corbyn
The far left’s pantomime economics, together with their candidate and his dubious ‘Friends’, tend to make the Conservative Party seem sensible, safe, managerial, contemporary and attractive. This is a remarkable feat, not accomplished since 1983.
All very interesting but what we learn from history is we never learn from history. I am a centrist member of the Labour Party but, I am critical of the Centre Right of the Party, Progress, whatever you want to be called. The changes Tony Blair made to the Party have failed to last. I believe, having read the Selsdon Biographies, the reason for that is that PM Blair never connected with the Party, never worked for the Party at grunt level, and never understood the Party. Secondly, while I understand we live in very difficult economic times it is not enough for Social Democracy just to roll over and appear to go along with Austerity economics. This is why so many members are excited and energised by Jeremy. Because he is different and challenges the status quo. The alternative side of the Party, especially Liz, seem to say “we must reduce the deficit, we must cut services”. If we’re going to offer Tory policies and cannot challenge the Osborne narrative (there are plenty on the right who eloquently describe Osborne’s economics as bad for the country) then the voters will vote for the real thing. We need to harness economic pragmatism with a redefined role for the state to deliver an effective social policy. All Social Democratic Parties are in trouble, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece and France. It’s because we cannot come up with a credible alternative to Austerity so we leave the ground open to Podemos, Syriza and in the UK, Jeremy. If Jeremy becomes Leader then our past, including the leadership of Tony and Gordon will be part of why we are where we are.
“Could Labour have stopped Thatcher?” Great question. But The Progressive gives no answer. As a consequence the question “Can Labour now stop Cameron?” is answered with cliches about our mojo, unity, focus and seriousness.
So, could Labour have stopped Thatcher? She and Reagan were the vanguard troops of neo-liberalism that was replacing the post-war consensus with the Washington consensus. They removed essential controls on the financial sector that sparked a massive boom and political success while letting the manufacturing base rot.
Labour had no desire to end the post-war consensus. Given that the UK was – and is – a bit player in global capitalism, a 1979 Labour government would, by definition have stopped Thatcher… but not Thatcherism / Reaganism/ the Washington consensus.
Not until New Labour was there wide recognition that we had to come to terms with the end of the post-war consensus if Labour wanted to govern.
Roll forward a generation. The 2008 crash heralded the beginning of the end of the Washington consensus. We still live in the era of its demise.
New Labour should be the first to recognise all this. And to recognise that the nature of the coming post-Washington consensus remains generally un-named and inchoate. But some in New Labour fear a break with the Washington consensus since it may seem to let the party appear fiscally irresponsible.
But we have nothing to fear but fear itself, as Roosevelt declared at the demise of the old liberal free market consensus and the birth of the New Deal / post war consensus.
The world is at the beginning of the social democratic consensus. As Tony Blair commented a few days ago, many of the fundamentals of social democracy are not even challenged here in the UK. Elsewhere its vision and practice is being extended (e.g. Obamacare).
For Labour to beat Cameron, it needs the confidence to proclaim social democracy as a new consensus for the world – not only as a series of retail offerings to sections of the UK electorate.
The bitter pill of our finances being constrained by the failure of neoliberalism requires, above all, the sweetener of democratic transformation (e.g. scrap the Lords; votes at 16; devolution with democracy [not just to local elites]; EU and UN reform). After all, we are social DEMOCRATS. Not just social economists.
That’s how we stop Cameron. Will Progress take up the challenge?
Labour has already stopped Cameron, Cameron wrote the Tory 2005 manifesto,much more tight wing than Camerin is now, we won in 2095′ so he had to junk those policies