In extreme social contexts it is possible to be both radical and conservative

November 12, 2012 9:00 am

It is now just over a month since Ed Miliband made his ‘One Nation’ conference speech. When a speech can be instantly recalled by a single phrase, it is usually a good indication of its effectiveness. And there can now be little doubt that it galvanised the party and stimulated thinking.

The speech gave the clearest and most powerful indication yet of the direction Ed is taking the party. It is perhaps best understood in the context of three of his prior interventions.

The ‘Squeezed Middle’ described the problem; that living standards are in decline and have been for some time. Between 2003 and 2008 disposable income fell in every UK region outside of London.

‘Responsible Capitalism’ provided the aspiration, outlining a vision of the fairer, more equal society we wish to build.

Finally, ‘predistribution’ outlined Ed’s political methodology, his process of creating change in a tough economic climate.

Yet until ‘One Nation’, it is fair to say these various strands had not exactly leapt of the page. No longer. With one phrase Ed was able to offer a critique of the existing social order under the Tories, whilst simultaneously offering the hope of a better one under Labour.

It is stolen, as Ed acknowledged at conference, from Benjamin Disraeli, perhaps the Conservative Party’s most celebrated champion of the working class. As an out-of-favour young politician and jobbing author, Disraeli first unveiled this philosophy in his 1845 manifesto-cum-novel Sybil, or the Two Nations.

As the political leader of the Tory ‘Young England’ movement, which argued for a return to the social conservatism and duty of pre-industrial England, Disraeli lambasted the greed and division of the great 19th century industrial cities, such as Manchester, Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent. There could now exist, he protested, within one city two entirely different nations, ‘between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are ignorant of each other’s habits, thoughts and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets’. These two nations were ‘formed by different breeding’, fed by different food, and governed by different laws. They were ‘the rich and the Poor’.

The target of Disraeli’s ire was an equally skewered political economy. Disraeli’s target was the laissez-faire, night watchman state of the ‘Manchester School’ of neoliberal conservatives. Rather than the barren exchange of the cash-nexus, Disraeli stressed the ties that bind; he believed in a moral conception of society beyond the narrow confines of the marketplace. And he highlighted, amongst the condition of the urban poor of industrial England, the social costs of a failing model of capitalism.

Many may feel queasy about pilfering the ideas of a Conservative, even one such as Disraeli. But there is no need to recoil. A proper understanding of Disraeli shows that in extreme social contexts it is possible to be both radical and conservative. As we approach Victorian levels of inequity today, we are living through one such context.

Furthermore, as Cameron – who once postured as heir to Disraeli himself – continues to lose his rear-guard battle against the aggressively libertarian, free-marketeers in his party, there is a real opportunity for Labour to talk the traditionally conservative language of preserving our social fabric. From protecting the NHS, to preventing the sale of public assets such as forests, motorways and museums, this is the terrain that the ‘One Nation’ rhetoric boldly seeks to capture.

But more than this, it also offers a clear and renewed commitment to the party’s historic duty of lifting the life chances of the poor. Inequality matters: too great a distance between the two nations harms social cohesion and undermines our sense of solidarity, impoverishing us all.

Britain under the Tories is divided, particularly now that they have retreated into their traditional ‘divide and rule’ modus operandi. As they pit North v South, public v private and the unemployed v workers, the task of providing unity and offering a story of national renewal falls to Labour. And that is before we even consider potential divisions between Scotland, England and Wales.

Building an authentic story of national renewal in a time of fragmenting identities and where the political challenge – for Labour, bluntly, the South – diverges from the main public policy challenge of rebalancing the economy and spreading wealth more evenly (i.e. to the North) will be extremely difficult.  Particularly given the constraints of our new, more austere focus on predistribution. However, with the new Tech Bacc for vocational education, the British Investment Bank, and the amplified campaign for a Living Wage, we already have some strong signature ‘One Nation’ policies. And as this discussion demonstrates, we are certainly not short of collective ingenuity.

It is up to all of us now to go out and begin building a ‘One Nation’ Britain.

Tristram Hunt is MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central

This piece forms part of Jon Cruddas’s Guest Edit of LabourList

  • AlanGiles

    I rather thought that we would be in for one of “those” weeks!. The “squeezed middle”, and all that jazz. I look forward to articles from Liam Byrne, Jack Straw, James Purnell, David Blunkett and all the other ghastly old waxworks.

    I think, however, Mr Hunt is a bit desperate to be evoking the spirit of Disraeli. Historian he might be, but I think more recent examples might strike a chord with readers – how about Atleee or Harold Wilson for example?. Oh well, what’s it to be for the week? pseudo-intellectual waffle, becoming Director General of the BBC for a few days?. No ot’s a miserable day – at least “Bargain Hunt” is on at lunchtime.

  • AlanGiles

    I rather thought that we would be in for one of “those” weeks!. The “squeezed middle”, and all that jazz. I look forward to articles from Liam Byrne, Jack Straw, James Purnell, David Blunkett and all the other ghastly old waxworks.

    I think, however, Mr Hunt is a bit desperate to be evoking the spirit of Disraeli. Historian he might be, but I think more recent examples might strike a chord with readers – how about Atleee or Harold Wilson for example?. Oh well, what’s it to be for the week? pseudo-intellectual waffle, becoming Director General of the BBC for a few days?. No ot’s a miserable day – at least “Bargain Hunt” is on at lunchtime.

    • Dave Postles

      Should ‘Bargain Hunt’ be construed as a pun?

  • Dave Postles

    Tory and radical, as TH recognizes, are not mutually exclusive; in the 19th-century context, one needs only mention Oastler (accessibly, Ted Vallance, A Radical History of Britain (London, 2009), pp. 370-1 – no commission). Let’s not get carried away, however. Disraeli’s One Nation and the Tory radicalism of some of his successors, was still a limited concept, to confer entitlements on the ‘respectable’, male, working class, as in the 1867 electoral reform. By a similar token, the One Nation idea of Labour, as currently expounded, appears to have a similarly limited remit. One Nation, IMHO, involves the recognition of the social obligation from the privileged to the less privileged. Belatedly, I’m reading Avner Offer’s, The Challenge of Affluence. Self-control and Well-being in the United States and Britain since 1950 (Oxford, 2006; repr. 2011) which has some interesting context, although I’m not far into it.

  • http://twitter.com/LUCKYCUNARD MICHAEL KENNY

    Nationalise all land except reasonable owner-occupier freeholds. No compo

Latest

  • Comment Reaching new communities

    Reaching new communities

    This article is from Our Labour, Our Communities – a pamphlet of 10 essays by Labour PPCs, published by LabourList in partnership with Lisa Nandy MP. I am proud to be standing as the candidate for my hometown of Hastings & Rye, but I am equally proud to stand as a parliamentary candidate who is also half Chinese and half British. My mother is Chinese Malaysian and came to this country 41 years ago to be a nurse in Hastings and continues to […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Labour could lose out by not making it’s stance on Trident clear

    Cutting Trident will be the price of support in a hung parliament. That’s the news reported from a meeting of the SNP, Plaid Cymru and Green leaders this week. With Labour’s slim lead and the SNP and Green vote threatening to impact on its share, this is a serious issue. Labour’s policy clearly states, ‘Labour has said that we are committed to a minimum, credible independent nuclear deterrent, delivered through a Continuous At-Sea Deterrent. It would require a clear body […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Is Cameron “frit” of TV debates? Let’s try the empty chair threat

    Lord Ashcroft has told him he shouldn’t have done it in 2010. Lynton Crosby has told him not to do it in 2015. It’s no surprise that David Cameron is trying to wriggle out of televised leader debates during the General Election – even though he has said he is willing to take part “in principle”. Time perhaps to dust off one of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite barbs “He’s frit.” Neil Kinnock tried it in 1992 to try to goad John Major into […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    Flexibility makes for good work, strong families and thriving communities

    By Stephen Timms MP and Ian Murray MP The Christmas period reminds us that modern life can be busy, hurried and demanding. The pressures of work, demands of family life and hectic Christmas schedules can prove stretching as we juggle competing demands. Increasingly the need for flexible work is driven by the complex shape of people’s lives; as parents go to work, struggle to make ends meet, perform career roles, take their children to school and activities and try and carve […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    Labour MP questions campaigning roles of publicly funded advisers

    As the start of the long campaign begins today, curbing the amount of money parties can spend between now and May 7th, Labour MP Jon Ashworth has sought to clarify what precautions are being taken to ensure publicly-funded government advisers are not using their time campaigning. Ashworth has sent a letter to senior civil servant Jeremy Heywood, asking him to answer a number of questions about what kind of campaigning activity was permitted and undertaken by special advisers (SpAds) in […]

    Read more →