Labour Party Socialism
Is the Labour Party a socialist organization?
In order to effectively answer the title question, this paper will delve into the roots of; firstly socialism then the Labour Party. After the core ideals have been discussed, this paper will highlight the comparisons which are evident between the concept of Socialism and the reality of the Labour Party. There are many forms of socialism, each differ in their ideals ranging from communism on the extreme left of the political spectrum to democratic socialists who can be found just left of centre (Budge et al, 2007). It would be wrong then, to tar all socialists with the same brush as not all are the stereotypical Marxist revolutionaries, indeed some schools of socialist thought have had a heavy …show more content…
influence from Liberals, Chartists, trade unions, feminists and Christianity to name a few (Wickes, 1995). With this in mind, this paper will not attempt to define all forms of socialism, it will offer a traditional view in order to argue that although the Labour Party started their life as a socialist organisation, they can no longer be seen to fully embrace this doctrine, and therefore up until the appointment of the new labour leader cannot be described as such.
Socialism is an ideology, a concept that has been developed with the view (for some) to overthrow capitalism which itself has been growing over the past three centuries (Sell, 2002).
During this period, the definition of socialism has changed along with the changing face of society (Clore, 2008). In order to avoid confusion whilst answering this paper’s title question, a traditional definition is offered thus, socialism …show more content…
is:
“the ownership and control of the means of production by the workers themselves, whether as individuals, cooperatives, collectives, communal groups, or through the state, and an economic and political system that favours this“ (Clore, 2008:1).
As previously stated, definitions of socialism vary, often greatly, however there are to be found within many, some common ground, a shared consensus (Wickes, 1995) in the equality of wealth and opportunity (Budge et al, 2007) According to Kirkup (1909) the founder of infant schools and revolutionary philanthropist Robert Owen (1771-1858) was the founder of early British socialism (Kirkup, 1909). Although it is acknowledged that by that time socialism in France had already become a popular if somewhat eventful movement (Kirkup, 1909). Owen may have been the founder of British socialism, however, “The greatest and most influential name in the history of socialism is unquestionably Karl Marx” (Kirkup, 1909:130). Marx had a view that capitalism enabled the ‘Bourgeoisie’ (capitalists) to exploit the ‘proletariat’ (working class), in that it forced them to sell their labour, their only real resource (Budge et al, 2007). Marx’s teachings’ had an influence on the Labour Party, in so far as to enlighten them to the significance of the class struggle, that is to say that it instilled class consciousness within the party members (Budge et al, 2007). Between 1880 and 1914 many influential commentators including Sidney and Beatrice Webb, were critical of the Liberal system of governance, claiming that it allowed a small group of individuals to be represented by mass political parties (Roberts, 1989). It could be said that there was a growing unrest amongst the working class, socialists and philanthropists, whom were increasingly demanding better political representation and equality for Britain’s predominantly working class population.
The Labour Party came into being during this politically unstable period (Hill, 1970). The party started their life as a political organisation whose foundations were laid by socialists from The Independent Labour Party, The Fabian Society and The Social Democratic Federation. In addition, trade unions were a highly influential component of the newly founded organisation, allowing access to the working class and also offering their organisational expertise (Alderman and Carter, 1994). These British socialist groups came together as a united organisation under the name of The Labour Representation Committee (LRC) in February 1900 (Simkin, 2002a). The LRC’s ultimate objective was to secure possession of the combined ownership of the means of production, exchange and distribution (Wickes, 1995). Led by Kier Hardy, they won seats in the house of commons in the 1900 general election (Simkin, 2002a) before finally changing their name to the Labour Party prior to the 1906 general election. Where they achieved greater success winning 29 seats (Simkin, 2002b). This evidence indicates that the Labour Party started their political life with a socialistic ideology, with socialist MP’s and led by a socialist, the party then were undeniably socialist. However, over a century has passed since the party’s’ first political forays’ and the question now is to establish whether or not the Labour Party are still a socialist organisation.
During the post war period, the Labour Party have been argued to have become slightly less left wing in their ideals, and could be said to have become a ‘social democratic party’ during this period, offering a more watered down form of socialism (Budge et al, 2009). Although the post war years offer a great amount of political change to analyse, not least the establishment of the welfare state (Lowe, 2005) it could be argued that for the Labour Party, the coming of Tony Blair and ‘New Labour’ offers greater insight into their position on the political scale. During a long period of Conservative government domination and neo liberalism under Thatcher and later Major (1979-1997), the Labour Party attempted to shift back to its traditional left wing ideologies, however, suffered at the hands of the electorate for doing so (Giddens, 1998). This could be said to be a major turning point in Labour’s history, causing a split within the party which led to a break-away group of Labour MPs’ to form the Social Democratic Party (Heath et al, 2001). As a consequence it forced Labour into rethinking their future direction (Giddens, 1998).
In 1994 Tony Blair became party leader, and signalled his intentions to break from traditional Labour ground, relabeling the party ‘New Labour’ and taking it into a distinctly central position on the political spectrum (Heath et al, 2001). Although Blair did not utterly abandon the formerly socialist ideals of the Labour Party, it has been argued that he led Labour into embracing Thatcher’s ideals of a free market, most of her reforms of the trade unions and pledged to adhere to the Conservative’s tax and spending arrangements (for a limited period) (Heath et al, 2001). The shift in Labours direction under the control of Blair, has been argued to have been influenced by Blair’s realisation of the importance of a rapidly expanding global economy (Jones et al, 2007). Although Blair appeared to carry on with Thatcher’s Neo-Liberalist doctrine, Mooney and Law (2007) argue that he (Blair) slightly altered it, making it a more pro social concept than its predecessor, the resultant being ‘Social Neo-Liberalism’ (Mooney and Law, 2007).
Further evidence of the distancing of ‘New’ Labour from old, is apparent as the term ‘socialism’ was banned from use by the party’s leadership and if this was not a clear enough message, he convinced the ‘New Labour’ party to have clause IV of their constitution repealed (Heath et al, 2001). Clause IV stated: ‘ 'To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service ' (White, 1994:1)
Heath et al (2001) claim that the repeal of this clause was, in a way, a triumph over socialism by Thatcher (Heath et al, 2001). ‘New’ Labour appeared to have ditched their traditional left of centre stance despite Blair’s claim that “social-ism” was ‘New’ Labour’s vision for the future (Donnachie and Mooney, 2007).
Labour’s term in office has subsequently ended, in the 2010 general election whereby none of the political parties were able to secure a majority. As a result the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have formed a coalition government. This could be argued to have been caused by the three main parties chasing the same middle England group of voters, as they have converged to a central point on the political spectrum (Budge, 2007). Since electoral defeat, Gordon Brown has resigned his post as Prime Minister (BBC, 2010a), and Ed Miliband has been appointed as leader of the Labour Party (BBC, 2010b).
Ed Miliband, claims to be a socialist (Hope, 2010), whilst distancing himself from the view that everything should be publicly owned, he claims that it is the job of government to bring about social justice and end the unfairness’s within British society (Miliband, 2010 cited in Hope, 2010). Miliband has been party leader just months, therefore it is difficult to analyse his influence over Labour’s future. Furthermore, Labour policies are difficult to evaluate as although Miliband was coordinator of the manifesto for the 2010 campaign (Stratton, 2010) he now is asking for a complete review of Labour policies. This will, according to Miliband, take up to two years (BBC, 2010c), therefore the future direction of the party is impossible to effectively appraise. What is being espoused by the new leadership though, is a shift from the stance that Labour have taken since the premiership of Blair and Brown. A move towards re-establishing Labour as a people’s party, and to take back from the Conservatives the idea of ‘Big society’, adopted by the Lib Con coalition (Miliband, 2010).
The lack of concrete policy objectives from the Labour Party means a definitive political ideology cannot be attained at this point. But what can be stated is that the Labour Party were founded by socialists to become a socialist party, however over the past century have evolved into a more mainstream centralised party. This has happened not always because their views have changed dramatically, but because Labour found their left wing stance to be unpopular, thus faced difficulties in gaining the support of the electorate. Labour headed in a more centralised direction under Blair seemingly abandoning socialist visions. The globalisation of the economy has forced Labour to review its socialist stance. The Labour Party then are not a socialist organisation, yet do still to some degree offer more socialistic approaches to policy and still believe themselves to be the most representative party for the working classes. Whether Miliband’s espoused move to the left is due to a return of the Labour Party’s traditional political ideology, or because Miliband recognises an opportunity to offer something a little different in order to set the party apart from the overcrowded middle ground remains to be seen.
Word Count 2117
Bibliography
Alderman, K. and Carter, N. (1994) ‘The Labour Party and the Trade Unions:
Loosening the Ties’ http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/321.full.pdf (accessed on 15.01.2011)
BBC (2010a) ‘Gordon Brown resigns as UK prime minister’ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8675913.stm (accessed on 16.01.2011)
BBC (2010b) ‘Ed Miliband is elected leader of the Labour Party’ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412031 (accessed on 17.01.2011)
BBC (2010c) ‘Ed Miliband launches Labour Party policy review’ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11852860 (accessed on 16.01.2011)
Budge, I. Mckay, D. Bartle, J. and Newton, K. (2007) ‘The new British politics’ 4th ed Essex: Parson Education Limited
Clore, D. (2008) ‘Socialism and Capitalism: Endless confusion has resulted from the redefinition of the terms “socialism” and “capitalism”’ http://www.nolanchart.com/article4246.html (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Donnachie, I.
and Mooney, G. (2007) ‘From Owenite Socialism to Blairite Social-ism: Utopia and Dystopia in Robert Owen and New Labour. Critique:’ Journal of Socialist Theory, Vol 35, No 2, pp. 275–291.
Giddens, A. (1998) ‘The third way: the renewal of social democracy’ Cambridge: Polity Press
Heath, A, F., Jowell, R. and Curtis, J. (2001) ‘The rise of New Labour: party policies and voter choices’ New York: Oxford University Press
Hill, C, P. (1970) ‘British economic and social history 1700-1964 3rd edition’ London: Edward Arnold (publishers) Ltd
Hope, C. (2010) ‘Ed Miliband says he is a socialist but failed to join marchers because he was doing something else’ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8163333/Ed-Miliband-says-he-is-a-socialist-but-failed-to-join-marchers-because-he-was-doing-something-else.html (accessed on 14.01.2011)
Jones, B., Kavanagh, D., Moran, M. And Norton, P. (2007) ‘Politics UK: 6th ed’ Essex: Pearson Education Limited
Kirkup, T. (1909) ‘A history of socialism’ London: Adam and Charles Black Publishers
Miliband, E. (2010) ‘speech to the Fabian Society’ http://www2.labour.org.uk/ed-milibands-speech-to-the-fabian-society (accessed on
17.01.2011)
Roberts, J, M. (1989) ‘Europe 1880-1945’ 2nd ed New York: Longman Inc
Sell, H. (2002) ‘Socialism in the 21st century’ http://www.socialism.org.uk/socialism21/ch6.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Simkin, J. (2002)a ‘The Independent Labour Party’ http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Pilp.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Simkin,J. (2002)b ‘The Labour Party’ http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Plabour.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Stratton, A. (2010) ‘Ed Miliband 's manifesto: Australia to Venezuela and back to London’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/13/ed-miliband-manifesto-labour (accessed on 14.01.2010)
White, M. (1994) ‘Blair defines the new Labour’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/1994/oct/05/labour.uk (accessed on 17.01.2011)
Wickes, M. (1995) in Gladstone, D. (ed) ‘British Social Welfare: Past Present and Future’ London: UCL Press
In order to effectively answer the title question, this paper will delve into the roots of; firstly socialism then the Labour Party. After the core ideals have been discussed, this paper will highlight the comparisons which are evident between the concept of Socialism and the reality of the Labour Party. There are many forms of socialism, each differ in their ideals ranging from communism on the extreme left of the political spectrum to democratic socialists who can be found just left of centre (Budge et al, 2007). It would be wrong then, to tar all socialists with the same brush as not all are the stereotypical Marxist revolutionaries, indeed some schools of socialist thought have had a heavy …show more content…
influence from Liberals, Chartists, trade unions, feminists and Christianity to name a few (Wickes, 1995). With this in mind, this paper will not attempt to define all forms of socialism, it will offer a traditional view in order to argue that although the Labour Party started their life as a socialist organisation, they can no longer be seen to fully embrace this doctrine, and therefore up until the appointment of the new labour leader cannot be described as such.
Socialism is an ideology, a concept that has been developed with the view (for some) to overthrow capitalism which itself has been growing over the past three centuries (Sell, 2002).
During this period, the definition of socialism has changed along with the changing face of society (Clore, 2008). In order to avoid confusion whilst answering this paper’s title question, a traditional definition is offered thus, socialism …show more content…
is:
“the ownership and control of the means of production by the workers themselves, whether as individuals, cooperatives, collectives, communal groups, or through the state, and an economic and political system that favours this“ (Clore, 2008:1).
As previously stated, definitions of socialism vary, often greatly, however there are to be found within many, some common ground, a shared consensus (Wickes, 1995) in the equality of wealth and opportunity (Budge et al, 2007) According to Kirkup (1909) the founder of infant schools and revolutionary philanthropist Robert Owen (1771-1858) was the founder of early British socialism (Kirkup, 1909). Although it is acknowledged that by that time socialism in France had already become a popular if somewhat eventful movement (Kirkup, 1909). Owen may have been the founder of British socialism, however, “The greatest and most influential name in the history of socialism is unquestionably Karl Marx” (Kirkup, 1909:130). Marx had a view that capitalism enabled the ‘Bourgeoisie’ (capitalists) to exploit the ‘proletariat’ (working class), in that it forced them to sell their labour, their only real resource (Budge et al, 2007). Marx’s teachings’ had an influence on the Labour Party, in so far as to enlighten them to the significance of the class struggle, that is to say that it instilled class consciousness within the party members (Budge et al, 2007). Between 1880 and 1914 many influential commentators including Sidney and Beatrice Webb, were critical of the Liberal system of governance, claiming that it allowed a small group of individuals to be represented by mass political parties (Roberts, 1989). It could be said that there was a growing unrest amongst the working class, socialists and philanthropists, whom were increasingly demanding better political representation and equality for Britain’s predominantly working class population.
The Labour Party came into being during this politically unstable period (Hill, 1970). The party started their life as a political organisation whose foundations were laid by socialists from The Independent Labour Party, The Fabian Society and The Social Democratic Federation. In addition, trade unions were a highly influential component of the newly founded organisation, allowing access to the working class and also offering their organisational expertise (Alderman and Carter, 1994). These British socialist groups came together as a united organisation under the name of The Labour Representation Committee (LRC) in February 1900 (Simkin, 2002a). The LRC’s ultimate objective was to secure possession of the combined ownership of the means of production, exchange and distribution (Wickes, 1995). Led by Kier Hardy, they won seats in the house of commons in the 1900 general election (Simkin, 2002a) before finally changing their name to the Labour Party prior to the 1906 general election. Where they achieved greater success winning 29 seats (Simkin, 2002b). This evidence indicates that the Labour Party started their political life with a socialistic ideology, with socialist MP’s and led by a socialist, the party then were undeniably socialist. However, over a century has passed since the party’s’ first political forays’ and the question now is to establish whether or not the Labour Party are still a socialist organisation.
During the post war period, the Labour Party have been argued to have become slightly less left wing in their ideals, and could be said to have become a ‘social democratic party’ during this period, offering a more watered down form of socialism (Budge et al, 2009). Although the post war years offer a great amount of political change to analyse, not least the establishment of the welfare state (Lowe, 2005) it could be argued that for the Labour Party, the coming of Tony Blair and ‘New Labour’ offers greater insight into their position on the political scale. During a long period of Conservative government domination and neo liberalism under Thatcher and later Major (1979-1997), the Labour Party attempted to shift back to its traditional left wing ideologies, however, suffered at the hands of the electorate for doing so (Giddens, 1998). This could be said to be a major turning point in Labour’s history, causing a split within the party which led to a break-away group of Labour MPs’ to form the Social Democratic Party (Heath et al, 2001). As a consequence it forced Labour into rethinking their future direction (Giddens, 1998).
In 1994 Tony Blair became party leader, and signalled his intentions to break from traditional Labour ground, relabeling the party ‘New Labour’ and taking it into a distinctly central position on the political spectrum (Heath et al, 2001). Although Blair did not utterly abandon the formerly socialist ideals of the Labour Party, it has been argued that he led Labour into embracing Thatcher’s ideals of a free market, most of her reforms of the trade unions and pledged to adhere to the Conservative’s tax and spending arrangements (for a limited period) (Heath et al, 2001). The shift in Labours direction under the control of Blair, has been argued to have been influenced by Blair’s realisation of the importance of a rapidly expanding global economy (Jones et al, 2007). Although Blair appeared to carry on with Thatcher’s Neo-Liberalist doctrine, Mooney and Law (2007) argue that he (Blair) slightly altered it, making it a more pro social concept than its predecessor, the resultant being ‘Social Neo-Liberalism’ (Mooney and Law, 2007).
Further evidence of the distancing of ‘New’ Labour from old, is apparent as the term ‘socialism’ was banned from use by the party’s leadership and if this was not a clear enough message, he convinced the ‘New Labour’ party to have clause IV of their constitution repealed (Heath et al, 2001). Clause IV stated: ‘ 'To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service ' (White, 1994:1)
Heath et al (2001) claim that the repeal of this clause was, in a way, a triumph over socialism by Thatcher (Heath et al, 2001). ‘New’ Labour appeared to have ditched their traditional left of centre stance despite Blair’s claim that “social-ism” was ‘New’ Labour’s vision for the future (Donnachie and Mooney, 2007).
Labour’s term in office has subsequently ended, in the 2010 general election whereby none of the political parties were able to secure a majority. As a result the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have formed a coalition government. This could be argued to have been caused by the three main parties chasing the same middle England group of voters, as they have converged to a central point on the political spectrum (Budge, 2007). Since electoral defeat, Gordon Brown has resigned his post as Prime Minister (BBC, 2010a), and Ed Miliband has been appointed as leader of the Labour Party (BBC, 2010b).
Ed Miliband, claims to be a socialist (Hope, 2010), whilst distancing himself from the view that everything should be publicly owned, he claims that it is the job of government to bring about social justice and end the unfairness’s within British society (Miliband, 2010 cited in Hope, 2010). Miliband has been party leader just months, therefore it is difficult to analyse his influence over Labour’s future. Furthermore, Labour policies are difficult to evaluate as although Miliband was coordinator of the manifesto for the 2010 campaign (Stratton, 2010) he now is asking for a complete review of Labour policies. This will, according to Miliband, take up to two years (BBC, 2010c), therefore the future direction of the party is impossible to effectively appraise. What is being espoused by the new leadership though, is a shift from the stance that Labour have taken since the premiership of Blair and Brown. A move towards re-establishing Labour as a people’s party, and to take back from the Conservatives the idea of ‘Big society’, adopted by the Lib Con coalition (Miliband, 2010).
The lack of concrete policy objectives from the Labour Party means a definitive political ideology cannot be attained at this point. But what can be stated is that the Labour Party were founded by socialists to become a socialist party, however over the past century have evolved into a more mainstream centralised party. This has happened not always because their views have changed dramatically, but because Labour found their left wing stance to be unpopular, thus faced difficulties in gaining the support of the electorate. Labour headed in a more centralised direction under Blair seemingly abandoning socialist visions. The globalisation of the economy has forced Labour to review its socialist stance. The Labour Party then are not a socialist organisation, yet do still to some degree offer more socialistic approaches to policy and still believe themselves to be the most representative party for the working classes. Whether Miliband’s espoused move to the left is due to a return of the Labour Party’s traditional political ideology, or because Miliband recognises an opportunity to offer something a little different in order to set the party apart from the overcrowded middle ground remains to be seen.
Word Count 2117
Bibliography
Alderman, K. and Carter, N. (1994) ‘The Labour Party and the Trade Unions:
Loosening the Ties’ http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/321.full.pdf (accessed on 15.01.2011)
BBC (2010a) ‘Gordon Brown resigns as UK prime minister’ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8675913.stm (accessed on 16.01.2011)
BBC (2010b) ‘Ed Miliband is elected leader of the Labour Party’ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11412031 (accessed on 17.01.2011)
BBC (2010c) ‘Ed Miliband launches Labour Party policy review’ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11852860 (accessed on 16.01.2011)
Budge, I. Mckay, D. Bartle, J. and Newton, K. (2007) ‘The new British politics’ 4th ed Essex: Parson Education Limited
Clore, D. (2008) ‘Socialism and Capitalism: Endless confusion has resulted from the redefinition of the terms “socialism” and “capitalism”’ http://www.nolanchart.com/article4246.html (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Donnachie, I.
and Mooney, G. (2007) ‘From Owenite Socialism to Blairite Social-ism: Utopia and Dystopia in Robert Owen and New Labour. Critique:’ Journal of Socialist Theory, Vol 35, No 2, pp. 275–291.
Giddens, A. (1998) ‘The third way: the renewal of social democracy’ Cambridge: Polity Press
Heath, A, F., Jowell, R. and Curtis, J. (2001) ‘The rise of New Labour: party policies and voter choices’ New York: Oxford University Press
Hill, C, P. (1970) ‘British economic and social history 1700-1964 3rd edition’ London: Edward Arnold (publishers) Ltd
Hope, C. (2010) ‘Ed Miliband says he is a socialist but failed to join marchers because he was doing something else’ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8163333/Ed-Miliband-says-he-is-a-socialist-but-failed-to-join-marchers-because-he-was-doing-something-else.html (accessed on 14.01.2011)
Jones, B., Kavanagh, D., Moran, M. And Norton, P. (2007) ‘Politics UK: 6th ed’ Essex: Pearson Education Limited
Kirkup, T. (1909) ‘A history of socialism’ London: Adam and Charles Black Publishers
Miliband, E. (2010) ‘speech to the Fabian Society’ http://www2.labour.org.uk/ed-milibands-speech-to-the-fabian-society (accessed on
17.01.2011)
Roberts, J, M. (1989) ‘Europe 1880-1945’ 2nd ed New York: Longman Inc
Sell, H. (2002) ‘Socialism in the 21st century’ http://www.socialism.org.uk/socialism21/ch6.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Simkin, J. (2002)a ‘The Independent Labour Party’ http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Pilp.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Simkin,J. (2002)b ‘The Labour Party’ http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Plabour.htm (accessed on 12.01.2011)
Stratton, A. (2010) ‘Ed Miliband 's manifesto: Australia to Venezuela and back to London’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/13/ed-miliband-manifesto-labour (accessed on 14.01.2010)
White, M. (1994) ‘Blair defines the new Labour’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/1994/oct/05/labour.uk (accessed on 17.01.2011)
Wickes, M. (1995) in Gladstone, D. (ed) ‘British Social Welfare: Past Present and Future’ London: UCL Press