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

  • Featured Polling Scotland New Scotland poll shows Labour trailing SNP by 29 points

    New Scotland poll shows Labour trailing SNP by 29 points

    Labour would face an electoral massacre in Scotland if the general election was held tomorrow, according to a new poll. Tracking the voting intention for Westminster seats among the Scottish public, the poll indicates that support for Labour is 19% points lower than it was at the 2010 election – meaning our support has roughly halved. The poll, carried out by Ipsos-MORI for STV, found support stands at: SNP 52%, Labour 23%, Tories 10%, Lib Dems 6%, Greens 6%, UKIP […]

    Read more →
  • News Blair: We should not chase after UKIP on immigration

    Blair: We should not chase after UKIP on immigration

    Tony Blair has warned the Labour Party not to give in to UKIP’s arguments on immigration, saying that the party has a “nasty core of prejudice”. In an interview with Progress, Blair says Labour should be take the line that UKIP are wrong: “Let’s be clear: We don’t think that UKIP’s right, not on immigration and not on Europe – so the first thing you’ve got to be really careful of doing is … saying things that suggest that they’re kind […]

    Read more →
  • News Scotland Murphy makes unity candidate pitch as Unite prepare to endorse Findlay

    Murphy makes unity candidate pitch as Unite prepare to endorse Findlay

    There are two interviews with Scottish Labour leader candidates in this morning’s papers. Jim Murphy launches his campaign by talking to the Daily Record (the same paper Johann Lamont did her resignation interview with last week), while Neil Findlay has a short conversation with the Morning Star. Murphy builds on the statement he made last night (“I’m applying for the job of First Minister”) by claiming he wants “to bring the country back together after the referendum.” He said: “I […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Brand or bland? Are these really my choices?

    Brand or bland? Are these really my choices?

    Russell Brand has a book out and a great publicist. His diagnosis of our current malaise is pretty spot on. His solutions however are woolly headed at best and inconsistent at worst. But Russell Brand is being taken seriously. He’s never off Newsnight nor out of the pages of the Guardian. People are flocking to follow him in their thousands. He is Che Guevara for the scripted reality generation. The established left simply don’t know what to make of this. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment If politicians can’t enact the policies people actually want, the system is broken

    If politicians can’t enact the policies people actually want, the system is broken

    This week, Class released a new poll on the theme of fairness and inequality, which will nicely coincide with the debates at our conference this Saturday. Speaking of which, you should totally book a ticket for that as we’re down to the last few. Anyway, I find our polling particularly interesting (I mean, you’d hope I would) because its aim is to gauge public opinion on long-term issues, rather than responding to a given news story. Class polls provide a […]

    Read more →