Sunday, 6 May 2012

The Wrong Men for the Job

London was there for the taking by Labour.  That's twice Labour has thrown away power by allowing tightly-knit groups of politically motivated men to manipulate the choice of Labour champions in crucially important contests for social democracy in England.

 First they couldn't summon the will to rid themselves of Brown as an inappropriate Leader (inappropriate Chancellor of the Exchequer did the more damage to us all but that's another matter) and he lost them the UK election.  Now they've failed to gain London (Livingstone's previous term in office was not a Labour term but a last fling for other left forces) because another inappropriate candidate imposed himself.  The comrades in Europe must be aghast (social democracy being what it is, the ultimate internationalist movement).  All their hopes for re-taking widespread positions of authority and influence in a post modern political elitey way  now rest on Hollande,  and future co-operation and reinforcing support is compromised.

Of the two losses -  the UK and London -  it is London that is the greater.  Power, like culture, goes where the money is.  London ( devolved in the same manner as were Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland  but with many of the powers suppressed by the Blair administration when Livingstone took it in 2000)  could recover those powers over some forms of  taxation, health, education, infrastructural investment,  relations  with other devolved regions both within and outside the UK.

New Labour - the UK's local  social democratic elites  - intended devolution to be the permanent denial of power to the centre right ( the Conservatives here); they must  bitterly regret the regionalisation and other mechanisms  they put in place to safeguard themselves against democracy that have now fallen to the centre right.  Pity they failed to safeguard themselves against putting up wrong'uns and throwing away the loyalty, conviction and hard work of social democracy's supporters.


dearieme said...

New Labour, under Tony Blair, did the country far more harm than even Clem Attlee did.

But then many of them were ex-Communists, which old Clem never was. His patriotism was never in doubt.

Weekend Yachtsman said...

Reading this post, one would almost think that you believe New Labour to be a good thing.

I suppose I must have missed the sarcasm alert.

But then, all those people really did vote for an incompetent
newt-fancying old Marxist, so I guess anything's possible.

hatfield girl said...

Should I put out a credo Yacht?

I believe in an independent nation state, on good terms with its neighbours, governed freely by its own rules and institutions, under market capitalism and with a commitment to assisting others in gaining this status but without enforcing others' cultura lvalues.

I believe in a freshly federated United Kingdom of the British Isles; in democratically and directly elected leaders from head of state to village councillors; elected senior police officers and elected judges. And in a citizens' militia, internet free at the point of use, lifelong access to education of choice, public health provision, sportsfields, gyms and pools for all, public access to countryside, and the greatest works of art and science, Amen.

(I'm very fond of continental Europe being at peace and with open internal borders too).

Nick Drew said...


Cut Out And Keep

(needless to say, wv = edureada)

Elby the Beserk said...


I like your Credo. Nor is it too much to ask. If I might add a little coda, with an Italian flavour

"I believe in Roberto Mancini".


hatfield girl said...

Well you ARE an edureada ND.

(The credo could be longer but, like the very best Credos, fulfllling these beliefs generates all the intermediate steps. Not really a Party-disciplined line though; more like an 'if I ruled the world'-view.

Nomad said...

HG - I am sure Harry Secombe would have approved...