A debate on the 'Political vacuum'

[The Black Hand]

After a search on google for 'Political vacuum' it is clear that this is a much over used and little defined term in leftist and anarchist rhetoric. So I am going to suggest a few things for a debate about the political vacuum in the UK;

Always best to start at the beginning - so firstly a definition of political vacuum, and then Genesis of the UK political vacuum.

Factors that maintained the status quo before the growth of the political vacuum.

How these characteristics broke down through time, and their causes; political/economic, social etc.

What are the spaces of the political vacuum.

Dangers of the present political vacuum.

Attempts to fill the political vacuum; such as new workplace and union strategies - attempts to create new forces to 'balance' the labour v. capital axis.

 

[Crispy]

A vacuum only sucks when there's pressure on the other side of the vessel wall.

 

[bluestreak]

i dunno, i think those kind of vacuums are quite cool. not sucky at all.

as for the political vacuum, i'm not sure i'm qualified to start that debate.

 

[London_Calling]

The centre ground in the UK started to shift to the right with the great council property sell orf.

The economically disenfranchised working class suddenly had a few bob and saw the world differently, and themselves.

Political parties recognised there was now a burgeoning centre, and the political debate has been increasing on that ground ever since, imo.

What remains of the old skool Left isn't so much a vacuum as it is an insufficient constituency from which to gain power.

Human nature in action; if you haven't got you want someone else's cos it's only fair Guvnor, and when you do have got you don't want to give it to some grubby, idle oik.

 

[Demosthenes]

Exactly. we've been sufficiently well bribed and distracted to not bother changing the system. And now we get lots of people from other countries to do the work. Can they vote?

Still if we could get rid of welfare and carry on increasing the price of housing relative to earnings, we'd soon arrive at a stage when if you didn't have any capital of your own, you'd be well and truly fucked. And I guess that's what it takes to get people to bother with political change. Useless to hope people will bother with it, just cause it's a good idea, when they've got the easier option of just not bothering.

But on the subject of the political vacuum, - what policies are there substantial support for, that no mainstream party is proposing.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Exactly...

...But on the subject of the political vacuum, - what policies are there substantial support for, that no mainstream party is proposing.

Ending of PFI in the Health Service and Education,
renationalising the railways,
provison of affordable public transport by using subsidies,
increasing taxes to the very rich,
reducing taxes of the very poor,
withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Demosthenes]

Yeah - I mean really it is sort of surprising that Labour doesn't offer these.

But since they don't, in a way we should expect some rival version of the labour party to set up and nick the labour vote by offering these policies. But you don't see this happening, I reckon there is a vacuum, but it's not powerful enough to counter the political inertia.

Actually, I used to have the idea that it would be quite funny to set up a new political party and call it New Labour, - or maybe two, - one called New Labour and one called real Labour. The thing is, since "new labour" is still officially "Labour", they can't really claim to own the name. - But presumably they'd try to, - then there'd be loads of fun in court, saying, -well, fine, if they want to be new labour, can we be labour... " etc.

You could probably split the labour vote down the middle, and ensure the conservatives got in. Which would mean that, so long as loads of anarcho-socialist environmentalist types had infiltrated the conservative party, you'd be laughing.

 

[The Black Hand]

The 'Great moving Rightwards drift' started in the 1950s with (with but not confined to) the anthony Crossland book (recently reprinted with a new intro by Gordon Brown).

In those days it was the 'Affluent worker' studies by Goldthorpe and Lockwood that were some of the evidence against deterministic politics, and for working class 'embourgouisment'... So, the vacuum was thought to exist since at least those times.

 

[treelover]

er, there is very little welfare in the US, but no major uprisings yet as far as i can see,

btw, I think Brown may part re-nationalise the railways as part of his 1st hundred days, though all the rest of his programme will be very right wing indeed.

Still if we could get rid of welfare and carry on increasing the price of housing relative to earnings, we'd soon arrive at a stage when if you didn't have any capital of your own, you'd be well and truly fucked. And I guess that's what it takes to get people to bother with political change. Useless to hope people will bother with it, just cause it's a good idea, when they've got the easier option of just not bothering.

 

[Demosthenes]

er, there is very little welfare in the US, but no major uprisings yet as far as i can see,

Fair point, but on the other hand there's 2 million people in prison, mainly black, and I wouldn't be the first to comment that there's been an unofficial civil war in the states for quite a while. http://digg.com/world_news/The_USA_Is_a_Giant_Prison_1_in_36_Males_In_Jail_or_on_Parole

And an awful lot of the US has generally been quite affluent , - and they only started making the cost of living increase relative to earnings fairly recently, - before that it was the opposite, - things really were getting better, and they've had loads of anti leftwing propaganda, - capitalism's practically a national religion there, and communism would be unconstitutional.

 

[articul8]

The 'Great moving Rightwards drift' started in the 1950s with (with but not confined to) the anthony Crossland book (recently reprinted with a new intro by Gordon Brown).

Surely before that - what about Ramsay Mac effectively agreeing to front a Tory led National Government and Philip Snowden agreeing to slash unemployment benefit?

 

[The Black Hand]

Surely before that - what about Ramsay Mac effectively agreeing to front a Tory led National Government and Philip Snowden agreeing to slash unemployment benefit?

But that was before the socialist values inherent in the post war political compromise that was the highpoint of 'the social pact'... So I don't think your points are relevant other than as historical titbits - they didn't influence the course of politics. The Labour party always had 'right wing' types in it...

 

[Hocus Eye.]

There never was a 'social pact' if you are suggesting some sort agreement between the Tory and Labour parties. There was a period of so called 'Butskellism' which suggested concessions by the Tories to the Welfare State though but the Tories did undo the nationalisation of British Road Services when they took over from the post war Labour government. The nationalisation of the railways and coal had been accepted by their previous owners who were not making any money and had little to lose.

There was however a 'social compact' sometimes described as the 'social contract' between Callaghan's government of the 70s and the trade unions for a while before the so called 'Winter of Discontent' when the unions realised they had been shafted. The Labour party has always had rightwingers in it before that though and in the 50s the debate about keeping the atom bomb led to much rancour by the left. The 64 Labour government after being elected shifted to the right with Wilson describing his approach as 'pragmatism' - it was a precurser of Blairism really. Through the 70s and 80s the Labour party gave the impression at its National Conference of adopting radical left policies which always faded away during the following General Election campaigns.

The most memorable of these was the 83 election manifesto later described as 'the longest suicide note in history' but really the problem with it was that in the campaign the shadow cabinet members individually and collectively denounced all the policies in it. They also supported the Falklands war leaving the left with nothing to support and not fooling the right.

So it is a case of SNAFU really.

 

[The Black Hand]

There never was a 'social pact' if you are suggesting some sort agreement between the Tory and Labour parties. So it is a case of

I am not suggesting this.

If you want to know my position you will have to wait awhile. Yours is far from the only story about that period, and suffice to say, I find it totally inadequate and misleading for describing the state form, social policy and labour relations, of WW2 and after, politically for the working class.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Sorry to disappoint you Attica. I wasn't attempting to summarise the whole history of the political period after WWII and its effect on power relations between the working class and the ruling class in my three brief paragraphs of comment on a single phrase on a bulletin board. As you say there are many histories.

I was however trying to get the debate you started, moving on, and let's hope it does now.

 

[The Black Hand]

Sorry to disappoint you Attica. I wasn't attempting to summarise the whole history of the political period after WWII and its effect on power relations between the working class and the ruling class in my three brief paragraphs of comment on a single phrase on a bulletin board. As you say there are many histories.

I was however trying to get the debate you started, moving on, and let's hope it does now.

Indeed - well said that man.

 

[The Black Hand]

Did anybody see the list of parties who are standing in the upcoming elections that was printed in the Daily Mirror on monday 23rd April?? There was about 90 - yes 90, small parties, including some from the right and some from the left, many single issue, localist/specific.

Too me, this indicates people do not want to campaign in homogeneous traditional parties, but will be involved in movement/network types of organisation.

 

[JimPage]

As to spaces.......

For a party which defines itself, specifically as working class- and has a clearly working class outlook

For a political party which meets the needs of Muslims- who are vilified by mainstream parties.

To fill the space left by the Tories in their centrist drift- delaing with traditional tory concerns overeurope and immigration

To fill the space left by Labour in their centrist drift- especially in areas where they take their vote for granted

For a genuinely Populist party of the right - led by a Charismatic figure like LePen

 

[The Black Hand]

Jim - its a list about spaces, OK, but I am not sure of the point you were making. It is not clear.

 

[The Black Hand]

This debate has further to go.

 

[david dissadent]

The totaly government of the UK, both the executive and legislative branch is decided by the votes of about 5% of the electorate swinging in about the 60 most marginal seats. That tiny handfull of voters is the target of both labour and the tories. Neither party stands for anything other than getting into power and those few votes are there root too it. The tories are not genuinely right wing economicaly (classical liberals) nor labour left wing in anything other than maybe gay rights, and even that has ceased to be a differentiating issue over the past few years.

 

[becky p]

Ending of PFI in the Health Service and Education,
renationalising the railways,
provison of affordable public transport by using subsidies,
increasing taxes to the very rich,
reducing taxes of the very poor,
withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes. But that's not the whole story is it. Mainstream political parties represent mainstream political opinion. And if lots of people really had very strong views on the issues that you highlight. Then surely those parties would be forced to do what they wanted.
In some ways you could say that it happening. Withdrawing from Iraq has to be at least partly due to public opinion.

Public opinion seems to want Lower Taxes and Better services but be sceptical about any parties offering those magic ingredients.