« You were warned | Main | Ha! »
June 15, 2006
From the Student Union Bar
Back in 1994, once I'd come to terms with John Smith's death, I started to pay attention to Blair, especially as it became more and more apparent that he was going to be the next leader of the Labour Party and, in all likelihood, Prime Minister.
At first a lot of his pronouncements lacked substance, but I was prepared to cut the guy some slack as he was new to the job. Yet, as the final years in opposition progressed it seemed that, excluding economic policy, a lot of the ideas being put forward for a Labour government were lacking in substance. In fact I probably bored a lot of people back in the late 1990's by continually referring to many Labour policies as having more than a hint of the Student Union Bar about them.
A brief bit of explanaition for those of you not aquainted with Student Union Bars. First picture a run-down, 60's or 70's concrete structure with shabby interior decor. Now fill it with a large number of young people drinking cheap booze in copious quantities. These students will naturally fall in to seperate groups, including the pissheads, sport freaks, intellectuals and activists, and pseuds.
The pseuds were an interesting bunch, claiming a superiority over all but the true intellectuals, yet claiming a closeness to the common man that they reckoned the real intellectuals and activists lacked. Basically a bunch of prats who had never read Marx or Paine, and who not only missed the satire and comment in Gulliver's Travels, but were unaware of any of Swift's other writings. Generally they would spend evenings smoking Gitanes, drinking cheap beer (not lager) and discussing madcap schemes to reform the House of Lords, restructure the NHS and introduce conherent integrated transport policies to name but three. The one thing all these "bright ideas" had in common is that they were totally unworkable, being based on alcohol-fuelled ignorance and enthusiasm.
Anway, back to the original thread. It appeared that many New Labour policies had more than a hint of the Union Bar about them. But these were mature adults uttering these policies. Surely they'd outgrown the juvenile aspects of student politics, gained experience of the real world and put behind them such ill considered schemes. Apparently not.
While researching a history of the Labour Party, Robert Taylor unearthed a 1982 letter from Tony Blair, then a failed Labour candidate in the Beaonsfield byelection, to Michael Foot. Details regarding the letter can be found in the New Statesman this week. And it shows that far from despising the left of the party, Blair once firmly espoused its principles:
Blair goes on to praise Tony Benn, the leading voice of the left and thorn in Foot's side. "In one sense he is quite right in saying that the right wing of the party is politically bankrupt. Socialism ultimately must appeal to the better minds of the people. You cannot do that if you are tainted overmuch with a pragmatic period in power. The phrases that rouse us, or should rouse us, are bound to seem stale in the mouth of anyone who has been too closely intertwined with the establishment. It may not be fair but it is true."
It also shows how he once believed in the primacy of Parliament:
"No one has an inalienable right, irrespective of their political views or actions, to belong to the Labour Party. We have a constitution and we have firm principles upon which that constitution is founded. Those principles are the achievement of socialism and the achievement of it by the Party through Parliament . . . There should not be a party within a party."
Taylor sums up the letter thusly:
It shows a rather gauche, excitable young man on the brink of what was to be a stellar political career. Critics might also argue that it exposes an empty mind, rather than an open spirit in search of knowledge of socialism and the Labour Party. It shows just how late Blair came to an understanding of politics. There is a strangely adolescent feeling to what he writes, suggesting a man who wants desperately to impress his leader.
The letter brings back not only a nostalgic reminder of that unlamented lost world of Labour, but why so many people found Tony Blair so attractive, electing him their leader in 1994. In 1982, in that remarkable letter, he spelled out a credible vision for the British left. It is his personal tragedy, as well as the tragedy of the Labour Party, that the ambitious idealist was transformed into an authoritarian and hubristic machine that destroyed the ethical values of a Labour movement he once claimed to hold so dear.
I would also add my own summation. The letter reveals a fickle-minded individual who holds to no real political beliefs, a man in awe of power and authority (both perceived and real) and a person who appears prone to Damascene revelations. In writing this letter, Blair reveals why he is wholly unsuited to high political office, yet also explains how such an individual could achieve public popularity. At some point, someone should sit down and write a biography of Blair, with emphasis on his political meanderings and sycophancy, written as a warning to all political parties to beware of the shallow man with the false smile and no beliefs.
Posted by Clive on June 15, 2006 11:09 AM in the category Labour