Why Reuben is Wrong. About Everything
Posted Under: Anti-War,Democracy,Iraq,Labour
Ok, perhaps he’s not wrong about everything, but Reuben wrote an article yesterday with which I have several significant disagreements. My main problem with his assertions stem from this cringe-worthy little paragraph:
In places like Cambridge – where they grabbed a seat last time – they seemed to get the vote of those who treated voting as an exercize [sic] in political self expression, or a parade of their moral conscience, rather than a practical attempt to determine the future. You know, those self indulgent tossers opine, with great moral gravity, “I couldn’t possible vote labour”. With a change of government on the cards – and at a time when politics will really save people of [sic] fuck people – I expect people to really, actually vote for who might form the next government – i.e. Labour or the Tories.
Whilst Reuben is right to say that the Lib Dems, perhaps unfairly, capitalised on an anti-war vote which will be far less pronounced in this election, I believe he is gravely wrong to characterise people who refuse to vote Labour for moral reasons as “self indulgent tossers”. Aside from being patronising, he is missing out on the bigger picture. Firstly, if we ever want the political system to change, and for long-term progressive reform to take place, we cannot afford to blindly follow a system which forces us to choose between the lesser of two evils. Politics should not be about who we don’t want to run the country, but about who we do. It is not, in my view, wrong to vote Labour in all cases. There are some very good Labour MPs and candidates out there who, despite the transgressions of their party, despite the wars, the privatisations and the systematic crackdown on civil liberties, deserve the support of left-wing activists. Nor, in all cases, is tactical voting a bad move. However, by telling people that they must vote Labour simply to keep the Tories out, we blunt a powerful tool for reforming the political system. Moreover, we reinforce the sense of disenfranchisement that is precisely the problem with politics at the moment – a sense of alientation in which people perceive they have very little choice in who runs the country and that their views are not being represented in a so-called representative democracy – a disenchantment which, far more than immigration figures and tabloid scare stories about asylum seekers eating our hamsters, has led to the rise of the BNP. As George Monbiot told me in an interview with The Third Estate last year: “As much as I dislike and am disgusted with the Tories, I think you have to vote for what you think is right. And if you cling onto something bad for fear of something worse, no one will end up with the government they want.”
Secondly, Reuben’s thinking relies on a similar faith to Tony Benn’s, that New Labour is a transient thorn that can be plucked if socialists re-join the party and work for change from within. I respect this view, but in translating this to a call to back Labour in an election regardless of circumstance, I think it only exacerbates the problem. New Labour is not a transient thorn. Its intelligent, educated and very middle class architects made a calculated, and very correct, decision that they can afford a sharp swing to the middle ground because whatever they do, their core support of left-wing voters will back them come what may. As long as they believe they can get away with that, New Labour will remain entrenched and the British working class will find nothing more than a few empty platitudes, whilst internationally it will continue to follow a line that is dangerously neo-conservative confident that as long as they remain moderately better than the Tories domestically, their left-wing supporters, who turned up on every demonstration opposing invasions and ID cards, will continue to put their cross in the right box come election time. Yes, you heard it here first folks, the Iraq war was Reuben’s fault! This is precisely why moral decisions must play a part in deciding who to vote for. This is why cold pragmatism gives everything we have struggled to resist in the last decade an easy ride. It’s not self-righteous to say I can’t, in good conscience, vote Labour. It’s just self-aware. Nor is it a matter of placing my own morality above the good of the many. There are a great many Iraqi orphans who would agree with me. By voting for who I want to run the country, rather than who is most likely to run the country, I am thinking of the bigger picture.
So you see, this is why Reuben is wrong about everything. Also, and this is perhaps the most fundamental point of all, whilst kids up and down the country were running round the playground playing ‘It’, Reuben was playing a game called ‘Had.’ I rest my case…
Reader Comments
Thank you kindly, well said.
And here I was about to write this site off as being full of self-indulgent Labour voting tossers.
Nope, we have a collective editorial policy, so there will be a great many different viewpoints expressed. Personally I’m a member of the Greens.
A very good piece I must say Salman. Mark, looking back I realise I didn’t choose my words particularly carefully and went a bit too frar with the blanket generalisations.
Salman, what I would ask you is this: what is more likely to pull labour back to the left: socialists (a few tens of thousands out of a 50m strong eletorate) witholding their votes every four years or soicalists jkoining labour and arguigng for socialist policies, and appealing to the sensibilities and interest of those who organised workes who still have a huge base in labour?
Its a small point, but we called it Had in my school too. Its a north-west london thing. I think you’re right on the rest though.
On the point about Iraqi orphans, if their had been a mass defection from labur at the last election would the UK have got out of Iraq sooner or later?
well we called it ‘tig’ where i come from, but that doesn’t mean i can’t see the ridiculousness in voting against my beliefs just to maintain the stagnant political position we are in now. bravo, sal.
As I said, I respect the view of socialists joining Labour and arguing for socialist policies. I don’t feel that it is the right place, for me personally, to organise politically, but I wish all those who do so the best of luck. My problem with your reasoning comes in your willingness to translate this perfectly defensible view into a call to vote Labour come what may. Spending the four years between elections trying to change the party from within is a perfectly laudable goal. But come election time, we are voting for a manifesto, and we should base our decision on who to vote for on that manifesto and on past performance, not the potential for change in the next decade. Even if I were to join Labour and try to make the next manifesto a better one, I would still reserve my right to vote for another party at the coming election that I feel better represents my views.
“Even if I were to join Labour and try to make the next manifesto a better one, I would still reserve my right to vote for another party at the coming election that I feel better represents my views.”
Well then you would have no credibility within the organisation, they would be morally entitled to throw you out. Unless of course you chose to devieve your political colleagues as to your voting intentions.
AVM the question is whether the stagnant political position we are is, today, mosdst feasibly changed through elections. Needless to say I would support electoral reform so that it could be. But right now it is extra-eletoral activism that really can chang things, and that isn’t simply a gesture.
“Well then you would have no credibility within the organisation, they would be morally entitled to throw you out. Unless of course you chose to devieve your political colleagues as to your voting intentions.”
I wouldn’t be the first socialist Labour has expelled then. Besides which – and I realise you have issues with the secret ballot – my vote is between me and the returning officer. I have no legal or moral obligation to reveal it to anyone. I would hardly call that a deception.
Voting is a pulic political action – it is an intervention in the future of society at large. If you voluntarily join a politiccal organisation I believe that you are potentially morally obliged to let them know about public political actions taken by yourself in which they have a stake.
That’s your choice, it’s not mine. In any case, I’m a member of the Greens and am happy to publicly announce I will be voting Green.
Reuben “Salman, what I would ask you is this: what is more likely to pull labour back to the left: socialists (a few tens of thousands out of a 50m strong eletorate) witholding their votes every four years or soicalists jkoining labour and arguigng for socialist policies,”
I think if people simply ‘with hold’ their vote it wont make much difference to whether Labour moves, left or right. Just as whether I vote for the government minister in my constituency is hardly going to be seen as a vindication of leftist politics.
Surely the thing that has allowed Labour to move so far to the right is simply that they have not had to take the left seriously enough to engage with our ideas. A few pseudo leftist soundbites during the election campaign don’t butter any parsnips as far as I’m concerned.
New Labour will only feel compelled to move to the left if there is a strong movement that they cannot ignore. That could be inside Labour in theory – but it wont be as the left inside labour is insignificant to everyone except itself.
It could also come from outside Labour – which at least has the advantage that the members of left of labour organisations will never have contributed one penny piece to the party of war, privatisation and eroders of civil liberties.
Labour’s influence in the ‘movement’ has been to move it to the right, or blunt its edges, and the sooner the links between it and left are severed the better as far as I’m concerned. As it happens I also believe that a strong left outside of Labour is far more likely to influence New Labour policy than a few shy and retiring types fighting a losing battle in an organisation that shares none of their beliefs.
I called it had as well. Does that mean I’m now obliged to join the Labour Party?
You all make reasonable points.
I strongly agree with Jim’s last sentence, but I also feel that politics is a series of inherently moral choices, and from a moral standpoint, I could never with clear conscience vote for the Labour Party. That’s not to patronise those that would, and I respect some of the policies of this government. The Good Friday Agreement is the most shining example that springs to mind and I supported the minimum wage although I feel it is far too low – but I guess that’s evolution not revolution for you.
I don’t dispute a certain requirement for political expediency in a world where no two persons will ever agree entirely on the role and policies of government. I for example will vote Green or Liberal at this election, I haven’t decided. I am far closer to the Greens out of the two but if I see the Liberals have a chance to take my constituency I will seriously consider voting for them, since they’ll advocate many things I believe in if not all of them. However, I think it’s unlikely I’ll ever vote Labour in my lifetime.
Labour and the Tories’ political boats have been spitting distance for years, one of the comiserations of their probable win is that frankly, it can’t get that much worse, and at least we won’t have ID cards.
I don’t think socialism can ever reclaim the Labour Party for the simple reason that even with a powerful and well organised campaign to bring it back to the libertarian left, there will still be more New Labourites joining the party and making policy than there ever will be socialists. I knew a guy in Manchester who was neo-conservative and neo-Victorian in his political views (he wants to bring back workhouses) who wants to become a local councillor and he joined…yup you guessed it, Labour. The liberal left I have spoken to in recent years have been either disengaged with political participation or contemptuous of the Labour Party. A niched and unscientific perspective yes, but from where I’m sitting I simply can’t see the Labour Party ever becoming genuinely progressive again, even with a well co-ordinated and organised push for it.
A vote for another significant leftist party on the other hand, such as the Greens or (and yes I know they stopped being even slightly leftist a while ago) the Liberals, might, it just might make Labour shit themselves enough to either move left again and try to pick up those votes, or give either of those parties enough momentum to displace Labour and give our country the genuine democratic representation that it’s frankly never had. A minority electing the Tories or Labour to huge majorities without exception for over 30 years is depressing to say the least. We need something fresh and new, a British Obama would be pretty good, I’m not seeing him or her knocking about mind.