Over at PoliticalBetting.com, the regular Lib Dem contributor “Tabman” made this thoughtful comment (no.76 on the page):
“an article today by Will Hutton illustrates the importance of Liberalism in British Politics. Hutton is trying to argue that Blair’s major success is transforming Old Labour into Liberal Labour, and that Cameron is trying (without any particular policy commitments to back it up, admittedly) to do the same with his Liberal Conservatives.
Yet it is obvious that neither Labour or the Conservatives really understand what Liberalism is about, and their attempts to borrow Liberal clothes to dress up their own sectional interests and instincts for authoritarianism into something more electorally palatable give us the bastardised failures in policy we see so regularly.
To be fair, the Liberal Democrats have not yet made enough steps down the road to reclaiming Liberalism either, but if any of the three major parties are to perform this task, it will only be the Liberal Democrats – the other parties carry too much authoritarian baggage. If nothing else (and there is a lot else), the need for a truly Liberal alternative is as strong as ever and the Lib Dems fulfill this need.”
It is a strange claim for Hutton, that Blair made Labour liberal. Blair himself doesn’t seem to think so, as his departure speech described how he’d squared the circles of different political poles. One was “you were either liberal, or you were conservative”.
I get the impression that one of Blair’s transformations in office has been to lose faith or affection for the word ‘liberal’. You can see it in his contempt of civil libertarianism, but more broadly in his assault on “the permissive society” being responsible for a lack of respect.
(I suspect he didn’t know what “the permissive society” phrase actually means in the context of British history, and thus didn’t intend to suggest legalisation of homosexuality, abortion and suicide were the root cause of hoodies).
The biggest failure of Hutton’s analysis of ‘liberal Labour’, however, is in his characterisation of Blairism’s relationship with privitisation. He’s right that Blair triumphed over bad old socialism, in which Mother State always knew best. But it’s been replaced with a strange vision of Father Business always knowing best. Labour went from statism to privitisation-mania, without any intervening period of pragmatism.
One day, perhaps, we’ll see a government that believes in universal welfare provision first, and looks to prescribe the methods necessary based on evidence, not doctrine.
On his main, fuzzy, point, Hutton is probably right, though. The word ‘liberal’, as allegedly reclaimed by Cameron, is still alive in British politics – but I think it’s despite Blair’s illiberal Labour, not thanks to it.
10 Comments
The impression I got from reading that article was that Hutton has chosen to define liberal Labour in economic terms, while defining liberal Conservativism in social terms. What he seems to miss is that at the same time Labour is becoming less socially liberal and the Tories are becoming less economically liberal (or, at least, less neo-liberal). In short, there’s been no fundamental shift at all.
One of the defining features of the C20th is the attempt by both socialists and conservatives to co-opt the term “liberal”, while condemning their liberal opponents as just a faction of the other camp.
Thus, Simon Jenkin’s attack last week described the Lib Dems as “a political subsidiary of another party, New Labour”, whlle the Tories have painted us as “more left-wing than Labour”.
It is patent nonsense, of course. I tend to agree with Lord Acton: “At all times sincere friends of freedom have been rare.” We are most definitely NOT all liberals now, but we’d all like to pretend we are!
It has to be a parody, surely? If New Labour has any hallmark it is its fundamental illiberalism based on the belief that temporary security takes precedence over civil liberties.
Richard, thanks for your kind words and for writing this article – it saves me having to exercise the old grey cells on a blog piece!
Of course Will Hutton has form on this issue, as I noted back last September in a LR piece that prompted quite a bit of comment (for a change!). I like Will Hutton, but I think he has to re-examine his own beliefs, or, at least, his allegiances. For to me, he’s really a good old fashioned Liberal, but clings to the belief that he’s Labour.
Surely, they are “little grey cells”, Tabbers!
And I think your conclusions have much merit… Will Hutton has form….
4
hope you change your mind!
This Liberal Conservatism is of great consternation to many conservatives and in consequence these activists are not able to support David Cameron.
The drift to this by the conservatives had its roots in a speech in the West Country to try and capture the Liberal Democrat Stronghold, particularly in Cornwall where the political map is yellow.
This Liberal Conservatism by the Conservatives had its roots in a speech in the West Country- a Liberal Democrat Stronghold.
Dave Cameron wished to target Cornwall especially as the Political Map was Yellow Totally.
Dave Cameron is much more a Falangist than a liberal.
Hutton has a guilt complex that he has sold-out his base principles to gain some power, but at least he is honest enough to admit it. Shame though that he arrogantly clings to his delusion that he can make them converts to ‘his’ cause.
Jenkins, on the other hand, wishes he was in the position to feel guilty and is frustrated instead that he never will get close to being an insider.
As for the ‘true friends of freedom’, these are the people who can’t, won’t or don’t need to put a price on it, which is indeed rare. I pity those who, for whatever reason, don’t want to.