đŸ Archived View for library.inu.red âș file âș anarchist-communist-federation-the-blair-necessities.gm⊠captured on 2023-01-29 at 06:41:02. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
âĄïž Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: The Blair Necessities Author: Anarchist Communist Federation Date: 1997 Language: en Topics: the Labour Party, 1990s, United Kingdom, Organise! Source: Retrieved on May 13, 2013 from https://web.archive.org/web/20130514043416/http://www.afed.org.uk/org/issue47/blair.html Notes: Published in Organise! Issue 47 â Winter 1997/98.
âThrough its well-publicised stands against sleaze and corruption
(Labour) will hope to head off disillusion, even though its reputation
for corruption in particular in municipal councils is notoriousâ
(Organise! 46)
Our comments on the Labour victory have been overtaken by recent events.
Labourâs long-standing reputation for corruption has been highlighted by
the âmoney for influenceâ revelations concerning Formula One and
Sainsburyâs. Labourâs attempts to restore confidence in democracy
through its anti-corruption campaigns and postures have been severely
damaged by these lightning revelations. In fact, these events have
increased the growing cynicism and disillusion with parliamentary
democracy, in particular among the young. Whether these trends translate
into growing apathy, or a reinforcement of direct action and
do-it-yourself organising remains to be seen. What is apparent is the
need for revolutionary anarchists to help this reinforcement come about
through sustained activity and propaganda. Labour has been more
successful in some of the constitutional reforms it promised. It
delivered the goods on Scottish and Welsh devolution, in the short term
heading off any immediate hopes by nationalists for the break-up of the
United Kingdom. It still has the support of much of the media and
sections of the boss class. It has forged what is in effect a National
Government, with the Liberal Democrats as junior partners and Tories
like Heseltine and Mellor incorporated into its committees on the
Millennium âcelebrationsâ and sport. At least in the short term it has
succeeded in marginalising the Tories and increased the chances of
pro-Tory splits. Labour was also very concerned about the threat posed
to the monarchy by an ever-mounting popular hostility. Whilst various
Labour âleftsâ might describe themselves as republicans, Blair and his
immediate clique have fallen over themselves to show how much they
admire the Royal Family as an institution and as individuals. Far from
being an attempt to undermine the monarchy, as various commentators in
the media believed, Blairâs intervention in the aftermath of Princess
Dianaâs death was in fact an attempt to save it. By forcing the Royal
Family to issue a statement and to return to London to meet the crowd of
mourners, Blair was forcing them to streamline and to become more
âaccessibleâ. He knew that only this would save them. His determination
to preserve the monarchy was further underlined by the Golden Wedding
Anniversary celebrations, with the unprecedented visit by the Royals to
No. 10.
The Blair leadership is determined to forge as much ruling class unity
as possible. Alongside the above manoeuvres to include Liberal Democrats
and Tories, it invited Steve Hilton, who thought up the âdemon-eyesâ
campaign, to its last party conference, as well as a gang of former
advisers to Tory ministers. Also attending the conference was the editor
of the Sun, who then devoted five pages in his rag praising Blair. Why
does the Labour government seek this unity? It wishes to firstly put
over the illusion of consensus, to return, in rhetoric only, to the
so-called society of class peace championed by old-style Tories like
Heath and MacMillan, and the old Labour governments of Attlee, Wilson
and Callaghan. Indeed some of the Blair governmentâs tactics are based
on a close study of Wilsonâs tactics whilst in power. Will Hutton in his
book The State Weâre In spelt this out; âAgreement with the Lib Dems is
part of the construction of a wider coalition of interests. Labour has
broken away from its old role as the standard bearer of the organised
working class (Shurely shome mistake?-ed.). The best in the English
liberal tradition- reformist, fair-minded, tolerant, even âstakeholderâ-
is being reawakened. A new political consensus is developing; it extends
from stakeholder, pro-European companies through the liberal professions
to partnership-minded trade unions, incorporates the public sector, and
has near-universal support from the Christian churches and other
religious traditions. This is a new formulation of Middle Englandâ. Will
Hutton is a standard bearer of the need to streamline both Britainâs
political institutions and British capitalism, so that it can be more
competitive in the world market. Secondly, the Blair government knows
that divisions in the boss class have been highly destructive. It knows
that sooner or later social unrest will erupt and it intends to create
as much prior solidarity in the ruling class as possible.
The Labour conference sent out a message to the people it intends to
attack, you and me, the mass of the working class. In a carefully
choreographed speech Blair warned what he planned was: âA compassionate
society, but it is compassion with a hard edge. A strong society cannot
be built on soft choices. It means fundamental reform of our welfare
stateâ. What this means is that the Labour government will attack
welfare benefits and services in a way in which the Tories could only
dream of. First of all single mothers would be attacked, their benefits
scrapped and their compulsory forcing into low paid jobs under
âre-educationâ schemes. State pensions will be the next target after
this, with their complete abolition and compulsory private pensions
replacing them. Similarly unemployment benefit will be scrapped, to be
replaced by a work-for-dole scenario. The National Health Service will
be most likely up for the chop, if Labour think they can get away with
it. But some bourgeois commentators are getting edgy. They are warning
that social unrest may well loom up on the horizon. Andrew Marr, writing
in the Independent (30.9.97) warned; âBut at the point when âtough
choicesâ become tougher lives for people who are already barely coping,
then this government will begin to experience at least some of the
populist anger against the first and second Thatcher administration.
Further, that anger will find political expression. I donât know how, or
where, or who will lead it. But in every advanced society there is a
leftist, oppositionist opinion which finds a way to be heardâ. As we
noted in the last Organise! our class is in a state of retreat and
defeat. This may continue for some time. At the moment there is little
sign of serious resistance. But this situation may not last for ever.
Let us hope Marrâs predictions are proved correct and that British
revolutionary anarchism will prove itself capable of organising itself
and of strongly influencing any future struggles.