Discussion: Resisting the politics
of the right – Len Arthur
UK politics are sliding into the gutter. The
Eastleigh by-election result, with UKIP coming second, has made the slide even
more slippery, with the three main parties falling over themselves to be tough
on immigration. Even some socially-minded Tories are getting concerned – such
as Ian
Birrell, writing in the Guardian
a few days ago. As socialists, we mobilise against the fascists and we have to
mobilise against these divisive and inhuman right-wing politics, because
fascism is where this particular slippery slope ends. We also should be clear
that the UKIP demonising rhetoric that today feeds on the fear of immigration,
is at the same time casting those in need of welfare support into the same
divisive mould. At their recent conference, they seriously discussed a proposal
to issue benefits through an electronic card which would not allow purchase of
cigarettes, alcohol or Sky TV. Take a look at these Nazi
posters from the 1930’s; other parts of the same website draw the parallels
with today’s debates.
It is right that we should be concerned at the
appeal of UKIP and we should remind ourselves of their and the BNP’s voting
pattern in Wales. In the 2004 EU elections, UKIP received 96,677 votes and the
BNP 27,135 – a combined total of 13% of the vote. In 2009 EU elections, UKIP
received 87,585 votes and elected one MEP to represent Wales; combining this
vote with that of the BNP’s 37,114 it represented 18% of the total. Given the
collapse of the BNP, many of these votes could transfer to UKIP next year. UKIP
will remain a threat and all of us on the left, including the Labour Party,
should constantly challenge them as an organisation, but – more particularly – the
ideas and politics they represent.
It is important that the Labour party stops
accommodating to the right on immigration and welfare reform, as it lends
legitimacy to UKIP’s politics. This is particularly the case when participating
in the narrative of ‘strivers’ and ‘skivers’ and translating the notion of
‘responsibility’ into sanctions, such as requiring young people to take a job
at the minimum wage; continuing with a version of the ‘bedroom tax’; and
abstaining on the jobseekers back-to-work bill. If the Labour party does not
support the most vulnerable in our society it means we are bereft of a main
party prepared to take up this struggle. We as socialists will have to campaign
inside the party against this drift to the right and also take up the challenge
ourselves in every possible way. As this poster shows, Labour was prepared
to do it in the past and we must now do it again.
In the 1970s, the rise of the National Front was
within the context of a Labour Government that was cutting public spending and
curbing wages – with trade union compliance, through the ‘Social Contract’. The
vacuum created provided space for the far right to pose as representatives of
the working class. The 2004 and 2009 Welsh EU votes took place in a context of
New Labour in power in the UK, and with the differences resulting from the
Welsh Government having only limited impact. If Labour does not break with the
right-wing narrative, it could suffer a similar fate in the coming EU
elections, even though it is not the UK government.
Owen Jones, in his book Chavs, argues that the BNP managed to win support in areas where
the Labour party had appeared to have abandoned tackling issues of deep local
concern such housing and jobs, thus making it easy to blame the problems on
immigration. Undoubtedly, this is part of the story, but does not fully explain
the size of the right-wing vote in Wales or even in Eastleigh, where these
issues are often not so pressing. Scapegoating and the demonization of migrants
and the poor are re-enforced by the right-wing press, appealing to a xenophobic
British or English national identity which thrives when problems are pressing
but people feel powerless, both in terms of alternative ideas or the
possibilities for successfully fighting back. The right-wing twist anecdotal
experiences into a generalised myth – so, for example: the queue I experienced
recently at my local A&E would be seen as caused by the feckless or those
who appear ‘different’.
These stories stick if there is not an alternative
narrative available about who people are and how the NHS, for example, can go
forward. A more sophisticated version was in the Guardian at the end of March, where
David Goodhart provides an persiflage caricature of human rights equality idealism
and proceeds to knock it down by arguing ‘...that we do not have equal obligations (sic) to everyone on the
planet’: a slippery slope to justifying division of people into ‘deserving’ and
‘undeserving’ categories. Well, yes, as a socialist I would argue that our
obligations to the poor, the most vulnerable, and the exploited have to be
prioritised over those of the rich and powerful, if we are to achieve any form
of transformation. However, in the absence of any such qualification, he
provides a cover for the right and, in the case of this article, for a tougher
policy on immigration.
Tackling the right wing threat requires us as
socialists and the Labour party activists to be brave and bold. To offer
alternative answers to the problems the working class experience in terms of
jobs, housing, health, education and welfare but also to tackle directly the
right-wing arguments in terms of evidence; challenging directly their policies
and politics and offering an alternative, respectful and humane narrative about
how supporting the most vulnerable is the right thing to do and how it helps to
make us into a civilised society. It also helps to recognised that there is a
case for an alternative socialist humanist ethic which I tried to outline
recently.
Uniting to
fight the Tories is uniting to fight the right
We shall not pay for the bankers’ crisis –
remember that? Well, if we are not careful not only will we pay, as a result of
force majeure, but we will even slip away from the idea that an alternative is
possible. Effective resistance is sustained by linking action with the idea
that an alternative is justified. Already, there are signs of accepting that we
will have to pay for the crisis in the end. The Tories and Liberals we know
about but with Labour trimming to the right on a range of issues; with the
difficulties of linking local decisions at an all- Wales and local government
level with an alternative politics, the dam is beginning to break over us in
manifold ways: even left commentators are starting to suggest that welfare
spending in a problem – such as John
Harris in the Guardian – across to the acceptance that it is now OK to
appoint a fascist to run a British
football team: we are perhaps in a situation of ‘pessimism of the intellect,
optimism of the will’ . Chris Hedges has recently posted
a piece which describes how the process of intellectual incorporation in
the face of power and its consequences worked in the case of the Iraq war.
The right tends not to bother with consistency of
argument as they are consistent in acting for their class. Our problem is that
to sustain the ‘optimism of the will’ the consistency of our arguments is
important - and will be taken apart if they are not - but consistency of action
in opposition is very difficult. Take migration, where the Tories’ lack of
integrity is clear. Very quietly, whilst feeding ‘moral panic’ on migration
within the EU, Theresa May announced
a relaxation of immigration controls that benefit business. Cameron was also in
India signing a free
trade agreement to allow corporations to use cheap contract labour in the
UK outside of their much heralded ‘cap’ on migration; while at same time the
Tories were appealing to the dangers of EU cheap labour. Contrary to this theme
of posing as the workers’ friend, the Tory government is carrying out a wide-ranging
package of legal changes that weaken labour laws – which may now even include
the minimum wage. Such contradiction never bothers the right – only winning in
the interests of the rich. And in this case, winning is forcing down
wages and conditions in order to drive up the rate of profit. The Tories
talk about the need of care and professionalism in the NHS and education but
their complete lack of care is shown by the cuts in welfare recently
disgustingly exemplified by IDS’ claim that he could live on £53 per week!
It is important to expose these lies – but we also
have to act. United action as a working class is the key, spelt out in a recent
special edition of Red Pepper on migration. The working
class in the UK and across the EU is being forced back on every conceivable
front. In the UK it is not just welfare
cuts but real wage cuts across the public sector, as inflation bites into
capped wage increases. Youth unemployment hovers around 23%; real unemployment
is around 6.3 million according
to the TUC; even those who find another job, discover it is at worse pay and
condition levels; public service standards are being threatened by cuts and
profit-seeking privatisation; most young people under 35 are now renting as
they have been excluded from the housing market; and so the list could go on.
So, it is critical to join up the resistance to
these attacks. For example: arguing in the workplace to strengthen workers’
rights, to stop any undercutting of the living wage; for all workers to be
employees from day one; to stop agency work; to improve enforcement; to re-establish
recognition and the bargaining rights of trade unions. In the community, we
must bring together those who are threatened, both in and out of work, to
campaign against cuts in welfare and public services, as well as to support
trade union action. The Labour party should be supporting, and indeed leading,
this resistance, by their actions from Parliament down to community councils
and local branches. This is why opposing Tory action in Parliament is critical;
any inconsistency in action and argument undermines the local struggle. Similarly,
the Welsh Government and local councillors need to provide a lead – building on
our conference resolution – frustrating the Tory government’s attacks and
challenging with alternative policies. So, for example, in Wales we could
consider ways of allowing asylum seekers to work. Local councillors should
support and help to organise community campaigns and use powers not to penalise
and to challenge, such as defining bedrooms as studies and refusing to evict.
This is a bit of a list but the point is that we
should be seeking every possible way to unite a working class fightback in
terms of action and argument. We face a common assault from the Tories and
other right-wing organisations in the interests of maximising the rate of
profit as they try to ensure we pay for their system’s crisis.
Fighting
the right – some resources
Number arguments
Red Pepper
Mythbuster – immigration
TUC
Touchstone blog – migration realities
Guardian
– welfare fraud
Independent
– putting the arguments together with humour
Compass
– principles, vision and language
Politics of the right & UKIP
Independent – UKIP
New
Statesman – UKIP
Socialist
Worker (old) - Race, class and Marxism
Fighting Back
See above
No comments:
Post a Comment