{"id":3032,"date":"2019-12-11T13:02:08","date_gmt":"2019-12-11T13:02:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/?p=3032"},"modified":"2019-12-11T13:03:39","modified_gmt":"2019-12-11T13:03:39","slug":"in-defence-of-blue-labour","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/?p=3032","title":{"rendered":"In defence of Blue Labour"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Jon Bloomfield\u2019s article in the Political Quarterly<\/em> on \u2018Progressive politics in a changing world\u2019<\/a> claims to explain the “fallacies of Blue Labour”. Here\u2019s a response to it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bloomfield begins his story by\nletting the reader know where to place Blue Labour on the axis of good and\nevil. Authoritarian nationalism is rising across the world and its toxins have\nspread into British politics. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Without\nirony he points his finger at Blue Labour trade unionist Paul Embery who he\ninfers is anti-semitic because he tweeted the words  \u201crootless, cosmopolitan<\/a>\u201d. Embery writes for Unherd<\/a> which Bloomfield describes as a \u2018Conservative\nwebsite\u2019. Embery, he says is, \u2018lauded\u2019 by Blue Labour intellectuals, one of\nwhom is Adrian Pabst. And Pabst retweeted Douglas Murray\u2019s support of Embery,\nand Bloomfield calls Murray \u2018anti-Muslim\u2019. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In two\ntweets Bloomfield establishes his political thesis. Blue Labour and the hardcore\nright are linked by \u201caccelerating common perspectives\u201d. What these are he does\nnot say. He then without evidence accuses the \u201cnewly enobled Maurice Glasman\u201d of\nhaving given prominence within Labour to the nationalist right. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Any quick online\nresearch of Blue Labour\u2019s founding years would demonstrate that it evolved out\nof Labour political tradition. Nationalism played no part in shaping Blue\nLabour\u2019s political philosophy which owes to Aristotle, community organising, Catholic\nSocial teaching and ethical socialism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Blue\nLabour\u2019s commitment to the democratic practice of the common good, which brings\ntogether estranged interests, is diametrically opposite to the intransigent \u2018them\u2019\nagainst \u2018us\u2019 of a populism that stokes hostility between migrants and natives\nwhatever the ethnicity of either. Its approach to political economy is completely\ncounter to the often libertarian, free market economics of continental populist\nparties. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Defending\nBlue Labour and class<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The\nintellectual paucity of his analysis does not stop Bloomfield passing judgment\non its \u2018flaws\u2019, the first of which he says is class. He doesn\u2019t reference\nanything that Blue Labour has written on the subject. He passes no view on the\nactually existing cultural class conflict dividing the country, nor on its\ncauses. There is plenty to draw on, for example the work of Thomas Piketty<\/a>. He engages with none of the arguments or evidence\nabout the geographical distribution of capital and class across the UK, or what\nhe terms the \u201crapidly evolving nature of the working class\u201d and what this\nmeans. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Blue Labour\nand the economy<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Bloomfield\u2019s\nsecond Blue Labour flaw is the economy and the way in which its writers ignore,\ndisregard or diminish the realities of a globalising world. He appears to\nsuggest that Blue Labour advocates a \u201cstand-alone economic strategy within one\ncountry\u201d. His superficial argument is a travesty of the kind of economics\ndeveloped over the last ten years. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From 2009 onward, Blue Labour argued for putting institutions at the heart\nof a new political economy in order to mediate the power of capital and to\nlimit the commodification of society. Establishing vocational education was necessary\nfor revitalising productivity and giving back dignity and status to work and\nworkers. Putting workers on boards is a means to redress the power of management\nwithin firms. Developing regional banking is a means of recapitalising the\nregions starved of investment.  Promoting\ntrade unionism will increase labours share of national income and reduce\ninequality. He appears entirely ignorant of it all. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Blue\nLabour and sex and family<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Bloomfield\u2019s\nthird Blue Labour flaw is its attitude toward sex and family. He claims Blue\nLabour asserts that there is an essential unchanging bedrock of common sense\nand patriotic values at the core of the working class. Nobody in Blue Labour argues\nthis kind of ahistorical, un-sociological romanticism. Bloomfield then cites the\n2011 census that shows the rapid rise in people cohabiting and the numbers of\nlone parent households. He attributes this to trends towards greater variety of\nfamily forms, people living together outside marriage, more divorce, separation\nand single parent households. Is Bloomfield saying these trends are unalloyed\nsocial goods? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today one\nin nine<\/a> children in England now suffer a mental illness. Those most at risk<\/a> are children in the poorest fifth\nof families. Up to 1 in 5 in display symptoms of mental illness, in comparison\nto 1 in 20 children in the richest homes. This inequality is getting worse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Undermined family life?<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

 For those\nchildren most affected, the social bonds that once tied their families into\nsociety have been either weakened or have disappeared. Children absorb the stress and\ninsecurity. This is the experience of many in low income families where 48 per\ncent of children between nought to five years old do not live with both their\nbirth parents. This proportion of children rises to 65 per cent<\/a> by the time they are sixteen. In\ncomparison only 16 per cent of nought to five year olds in middle and upper\nincome families do not live with both their birth parents. This proportion rises\nto 39 per cent by the time they are sixteen. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Has the social\ndestruction of the liberal market settlement of the last forty years undermined\nfamily life and damaged childrens\u2019 mental health? Is marriage which\nstatistically leads to more secure partnerships over the longer term and is\nmuch more common amongst the wealthy than the poor a social justice issue? These\nare questions to be debated, but Bloomfield dismisses them as simply \u201cturning\nthe clock back\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Blue\nLabour, race and migration<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

His final Blue\nLabour flaw is race and migration. Blue Labour he says is taking a political\ntrend into \u201cvery dangerous territory\u201d. But he doesn\u2019t say what he means but\nlets the reader think the worst. He then picks two right wing thinkers Roger\nScruton and Douglas Murray, neither Blue Labour, and wrongly and malignly\naccuses them of belonging to the white nationalist right, inferring that they\nbelieve British citizenship is defined by ethnicity. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neither\ntake this view. Where have either argued it? Bloomfield doesn\u2019t say, but this\ndoes not stop him accusing those he defines as fellow travellers of Blue Labour\nheading in the same direction. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bloomfield\nthen accuses Blue Labour individuals who support the Full Brexit manifesto\nwhich calls for a \u201cgenuinely internationalist and democratic politics of\nnational sovereignty\u201d of playing into the hands of the hard right. According to\nBloomfield any talk of national sovereignty encourages the dangers of\nnationalism. But national sovereignty is essential for our constitutional\ndemocracy and the social order. It is the source in time and place of the\nagency that constitutes our nation based political system. What is Bloomfield talking\nabout? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fundamental problem with Bloomfield\u2019s essay is that he doesn\u2019t actually understand what Blue Labour is and so is unable to construct a critique of it. Instead he relies on slandering individuals by association and insinuation, name calling, and passing inaccurate, uniformed and dogmatic opinions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a debate to be had about Blue Labour and its political ideas. It doesn\u2019t start here.<\/p>\n<\/span>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jon Bloomfield\u2019s article in the Political Quarterly on \u2018Progressive politics in a changing world\u2019 claims to explain the “fallacies of Blue Labour”. Here\u2019s a response to it. Bloomfield begins his story by letting the reader know where to place Blue Labour on the axis of good and evil. Authoritarian nationalism is rising across the world […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":183,"featured_media":3036,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1395,1396,1403],"tags":[2105],"coauthors":[2161],"class_list":["post-3032","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-comment","category-uk","category-inequality","tag-blue-labour"],"amp_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/In-defence-of-Blue-Labour-wilfred-wong-dSJnOX_SaPg-unsplash-scaled.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3032","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/183"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3032"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3032\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/3036"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3032"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3032"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3032"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcoauthors&post=3032"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}