THE LAST DITCH

Appearance and reality have rarely diverged so far in British politics as of late. The Labour Party of Blears and Prescott could easily have portrayed itself as the trade union stooge of old. The people were the same. The policies differed only in a shocking new authoritarianism designed to triangulate Conservative voters from the traditional party of Laura Norder. Yet the party chose to present itself as something new and has been accepted as such.

The New Labour "project" has been such an unqualified political success the the Conservative leadership feels there is no choice but to copy it. Yet it has never been more than a "rebranding" exercise, conceived largely by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. No-one who knows anything of either of them, could conceive of Blair as the intellectual leader in that.

Brown was always the senior partner. Blair’s empty-headed charm pleased the cameras, but the ideas behind the Project were Brown’s. Brown is a political obsessive. From the campaigning newspaper he founded with his brother, through his PhD on the History of the Scottish Labour Party, through his career in student politics to his only "honest job" as a political researcher for Scottish TV, he appears never to have thought of anything else. There was nothing "New Labour" about him when he edited and contributed to the Red Paper on Scotland 30 years ago, in which he trumpeted the historical inevitability of the victory of Socialism.

Brown’s own
contribution condemned “the gross inequalities which disfigure Scottish
life”, and argued that the times cried out for “a new commitment to
socialist ideals”. He urged “a coherent strategy” of reforms designed
“to cancel the logic of capitalism” and to lead “us out of one social
order into another”. This would involve “a phased extension of public
control under workers’ self-management and the prioritising of social
needs by the communities themselves”. He called for “a planned economy”
and for “workers’ power”, identifying himself with “Scotland’s
socialist pioneers, Hardie, Smillie, Maxton, Maclean, Gallacher,
Wheatley and others”—a pantheon that included both revolutionary and
reformist socialists. What was needed was “a positive commitment to
creating a socialist society”.9

(Source: International Journal of Socialism)

A man should be allowed his errors in youth. Though there was much that was psychologically revealing in Brown’s career in student politics (not least his monumentally-vain demand for an official holiday for students when he stepped down as Rector of Edinburgh University) it would be unfair to judge him from those days. But the Red Paper was the first work of his maturity.

Apart from understanding the need to "sell" ideas in a democracy, it is hard to see how Brown has developed politically since those days. Leftists may feel that in shedding the Marxist jargon, wearing a suit and changing his presentation Brown has betrayed his younger self. It seems more likely that he has developed a more sophisticated style in order to win the power he has craved since his youth. Despite all the talk of "prudence" and his taking the credit for a solid period of economic growth driven by globalisation, his record as Chancellor is very "Old Labour"

According to the OECD UK taxation has
increased from a 39.3% share of GDP in 1997 to 42.4% in 2006, going to a higher
level than Germany.[18] This increase has mainly been
attributed to active government policy, and not simply to the growing economy.

(Source: Answers.com) 

By their fruits, ye shall know them. For all the New Labour branding, Brown has taxed and spent like every Labour Chancellor before him, just as one might have expected the editor of the Red Paper to do. There has been a boom in public sector employment. This, during a period of strong economic growth when the private sector might have been expected to grow strongly. The jobs New Labour boasts of having created are largely non-jobs funded by the taxpayer. Or, as Wat Tyler has pointed out in relation to public sector pensions, as yet unfunded. If pension liabilities to the employees on the burgeoning state payroll are counted (as they should be) as debts, the National Debt is three times what the Government claims. So much for "prudence". The party’s claimed success in reducing unemployment has, a recent study has shown (as anyone from areas of high non-employment already knew from everyday observation) been "a work of fiction."

Brown has been a bog-standard Labour Chancellor. He is a shrewd politician and has associated himself consistently (and falsely) with the concept of "Prudence." From the opinion polls since he became Prime Minister, it seems that the voters have fallen for it. How long before the scales fall from their eyes?

7 responses to “Is Gordon Brown a post-Communist?”

  1. Dave Petterson Avatar

    Not long at all really. Brown’s face is not as pleasing as Blairs nor does he appeal to the voters as well. His lies and spin won’t be forgiven as much as they need to be. If he had the dosh he would have went for an early election before people got to know him.
    Interesting bit of background.

    Like

  2. jameshigham Avatar

    Both parties are clearly bereft of leadership currently.

    Like

  3. Lord Nazh© Avatar

    I’d say he’s more of a neo-socialist instead of communist; but that’s just semantics really.

    Like

  4. Welshcakes Limoncello Avatar

    I don’t understand high finance so cannot comment on his success, or otherwise, as Chancellor. But I doubt whether a Tory would have done better, remembering how terrified I was when interest rates soared on “Black Monday” [or was it a Thursday? – Can’t remember now]. For ordinary people who do not have the money to speculate on the stock market but are just trying to pay their mortgages those hours were truly frightening. At least we had nothing like that when GB was Chancellor.
    He is a man who has suffered: he has one eye; he lost a daughter and has a son who suffers from a chronic illness and I gather the long-term prognosis is not good. Surely this makes him understand people a bit better than Blair did? I think at least we should give him a chance.

    Like

  5. jameshigham Avatar

    Tom, Blogpower is trying to decide some vital issues before Monday but only 7 or 33 members have commented. if you can access your site, could you see spare a little time making your point of view known on the issues currently being discussed ? James

    Like

  6. Crushed By Ingsoc Avatar

    As James says, the alternatives aren’t very inspiring.
    A few months ago I’d have bet for sure on a Tory victory next time.
    But Cameron seems to have blown it.
    He’s too see through

    Like

  7. Daniel Angell Avatar
    Daniel Angell

    I believe Britain has changed for the better since ’97. Interest rates are steady and employment is up, as well as better pay for public sector workers. However, Brown is not “old labour” as such. privatisation is still very much a risk, taxation on the super rich isn’t high enough and the Thatcher style free market is still rampant. If brown wants to impress Labour voters he must correct 80’s tory policies, not deem them irreversable

    Like

Leave a reply to Dave Petterson Cancel reply

Tom is a retired international lawyer. He was a partner in a City of London law firm and spent almost twenty years abroad serving clients from all over the world.

Returning to London on retirement in 2011, he was dismayed to discover how much liberty had been lost in the UK while he was away.

He’s a classical liberal (libertarian, if you must) who, like his illustrious namesake, considers that

“…government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”

Latest comments
  1. Lord T's avatar
  2. tom.paine's avatar
  3. Lord T's avatar
  4. tom.paine's avatar
  5. Lord T's avatar