1983; The Labour Party suffers an appalling defeat, the blame placed upon the parties shift to the Left and surge in Nationalism in the following leadership election a member of the party’s ‘Soft Left’ becomes leader.
2019; The Labour Party suffers an appalling defeat, the blame placed upon the parties shift to the Left and surge in Nationalism in the following leadership election a member of the party’s ‘Soft Left’ becomes leader…
If you stripped the nuance out of both elections then you get that narrative which is one that the Media, Right of the Labour Party and people who can gain from hierarchical structures would like you to think.
Firstly, this narrative often comes with an additional fantasy from those types of people, the perception that the failure of the Left of the Labour Party will ensure that the Party drives head long to the Right.
Secondly the belief inspired by the perception that there is one long continuous line from Micheal Foot’s loss to Kinnock & Hattersley and then finally to New Labour and Blair is helpful to this idea of Labour having to turn rightwards always. This ignores a lot of factors ranging from the battles between the Soft Left and the Right in the 1980s, the success of the Black Sections, the constant rearguard actions from the Trade Unions and the centralisation of power and responsibility by Peter Mandelson which signal the more fluid and dynamic nature of that decade.
Lastly it’s from this moment in Labour’s history that the Left can learn from and take heed. As we continue from the age of Corbyn to the age of Starmer, we can look back upon the Kinnock Years and see the various pitfalls the Left fell into during that period and learn from them.
If the Labour Left wants to be able to fight the control of the Right, it should embrace democratisation of the party structures and ensure that positions and jobs can’t be used to centralise authority.
For example, the position of Director of Communications allowed Peter Mandelson to accumulate a large base of power due to his ability to be in charge of how the Labour Party was perceived in the press. Using this power Mandelson would ensure that the (perceived) enemies of Kinnock (and himself) were attacked by the press whilst allies of the regime were allowed to continue unimpeded by the press to the same degree.
This can be seen in the 1988 Deputy Leadership Election (that year remembered more for its leadership battle between Benn and Kinnock) in John Prescott who represented the Soft Left’s discontent with the ‘Kinnock Project’ was attacked in the media with Prescott being quoted as saying in 1995 documentary about the period.
“… well the leader feels who’ll rid me of this troublesome priest and they play their part and there’s no doubt we felt very strongly about that, they weren’t only whispering, they were pretty well shouting, what they thought had to be a rubbishing of me … they feared that I might do a lot better than I did.” (Blakeway, D. 1995).
The ability of people within the party to manipulate events to their own whims shouldn’t be possible in a more democratic and transparent party. A Labour Party Left that embraces democracy and avoids centralising power to the leader or to connected offices can ensure that the party is able to continue being a truly democratic party.
Another aspect that the Left should embrace is ‘Modernisation’, a word that is often viewed as now belonging to New Labour and the perception of slick commercials and advertising done by Saatchi & Saatchi. However, elements of the Left and the Soft Left have seen it differently with one of the main figures behind the ‘Modernisation’ of Kinnock’s Labour, Bryan Gould. Bryan Gould saw the idea of Modernising as way to allow a Left Wing Labour Party to be able to battle the Conservative Party and the forces of Monetarism. He also believed it could ensure that the people who decided to vote Conservative could be turned back to Labour.
“And his views on modernisation – accepting, for instance, that most “workers” want lighter taxes rather than more government bureaucracies – are credited by many with awakening the Labour Party from its dreamless post-war sleep.” (Cohen, D. 1996)
Modernisation is not just about updating how you tell the message but being able to update the message for the time. A successful Left Wing Party would be able to cling to the ideas of Democratic Socialism, Freedom and Equality whilst also making sure that message appeals to the widest selection of the public as possible.
Inability to do this would allow the Right to take the concept of Modernisation for themselves, ensuring a Labour Party that doesn’t discard those key concepts, mentioned in favour of diving headlong into the arms of the capital and big business as the eventual outcome of the Kinnock years lead to.
Finally, the Soft Left and Left must unify and support each other if they want to avoid the return of the Right. The failure of figures like Tony Benn and Dennis Skinner to work with prominent individuals on the Soft Left like Robin Cook, Bryan Gould, John Prescott and David Blunkett and the failure of said individuals to do likewise allowed for the splintering of the Left over the course of the 1980s which was exploited by the Right to their benefit. If the Left is to do anything over the upcoming years, it’s to support the Soft Left and to help them to battle the Right and hopefully ensure that the party doesn’t pursue Right Wing Neoliberal ideals again.
If Labour under Keir wants to avoid the failures of Kinnock and the rise of a Blair then it must learn from these mistakes and avoid allowing the Right to be able to control, manipulate or fill in the vacuum that ensues.
Bibliography:
D, Cohen. (1996). THE AFTERLIFE OF BRYAN. Independent.
D,Blakeway. (1995). The Wilderness Years, Episode 4: The Pursuit of Power. BBC.
Image credit: Kinnock and Hattersley – Laurence Steele
Blog 1201 