In praise of moral outrage: reply to Douglas Alexander
Posted on Monday 3 January, 2011
Filed Under Economics, Labour Left, New Labour
IF I had to state the reasons I signed up to the Labour Party Young Socialists 30 years ago this year, the words ‘moral outrage’ would make for a pretty good two-word summary. The feeling has never entirely left me, and on my reckoning, Labour today could do with more of this commodity rather than less.
Harold Wilson famously declared that the party was a crusade or it was nothing, and let’s just say that in the Blair years, it wasn’t exactly a crusade. Detestation at Britain’s obvious class-based inequalities – once a given on the Labour left, and at least a theoretical postulate for the Labour right – gave way to being intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich.
Loyal Brownite Douglas Alexander, writing in the Guardian this morning, at least grudgingly concedes that ‘moral outrage is a laudable response to manifest unfairness’, which I suppose is progress of sorts. However, he warns, it is not an adequate electoral strategy.
Whoever said it was? I’m not sure who he is trying to finger with that remark. This is curiously softball polemic, mysteriously directed to ‘those on the centre left’ who unfortunately remain nameless. But I am not aware of anyone on the centre left, or even on the hard left, calling for the next manifesto to be confined to ill-defined angry platitudes.
If Alexander is contending that Labour needs a persuasive platform capable of winning a plurality of the electorate, then the article would be devoid of worthwhile content. But from the tone of the piece, it is immediately clear that he is warning against any re-emergence of democratic socialist politics.
All the relevant codewords are inserted in the text, from ‘the lessons of the 1980s’ to a dig at those nostalgics – again unnamed – who ‘believe that the poll tax riots and civil unrest brought down the last Tory government’. This presumably translates into a swipe aimed at a handful of union leaders and Labour backbenchers who are talking in these terms, and the audience that may be tempted to listen to them.
In place of strife, Alexander commends ‘pursuing a tough and sustained course to show we can be trusted with the nation’s finances’. Or, in plain English, a readiness to stress that Labour will make cuts, too.
How deep? Well, immediately before the last election, Alistair Darling stressed his readiness to undertake public spending reductions ‘tougher and deeper’ than those seen in the 1980s. Needless to say, this ‘back to the Thatcherite future’ call was not widely regarded as inspirational, and such a scheme will not be seen as any more appealing, however many times it is repackaged.
It is not clear that widespread austerity will work, even in its own terms. The reduction in economic growth such policies generate may even make reducing the deficit harder, as is already becoming apparent.
Instead of tacitly buying in to the coalition’s small state ideological fervour, Labour should build mass support for an alternative that would put jobs, services and tax justice ahead of the needs of the City. And yes, a little bit of moral outrage would certainly help.
<<Go back
Comments
16 Responses to “In praise of moral outrage: reply to Douglas Alexander”
Leave a Reply
Douglas Alexander is merely a politician, and like all the rest not to be taken seriously. Who cares what these people think about, the views they express. There ARE men who have/do exist who are worthy of one’s time – Thoreau for example. A tiny intro: http://www.tolpuddlemartyr.blogspot.com
Wasn’t Alexander a Brownite not a Blairite? I know a point of the utmost pedantry rather than an important distinction.
Ooops. My bad.
A crusade ? How Islamophobic.
(isn’t there plenty of rather unpleasant moral outrage about, banners saying ‘Tory scum’ and the like ?)
Laban. Where do you get this islamophobic crap from. The Tories are a bit scummy although not all.
“Needless to say, this ‘back to the Thatcherite future’ call was not widely regarded as inspirational, and such a scheme will not be seen as any more appealing, however many times it is repackaged.”
That’s odd, she won three elections!
C’mon, David, do we really need to go into her percentage share of the vote? The total wipe out in Scotland and being reduced to a rump in Wales? The declining share of the vote and the gawp-inducing, brass-necked, blatant gerrymandering of constituency boundaries etc ad nauseum?
“Won three elections” indeed.
*Snorts with scorn and derision*
H. The muppet did win the elections and she is still a favourite with socialists that bought their cooncil hooses and sold them for a good profit. You will probably attend her funeral H along with her other so called opponents. Whit an old witch but she had a bit of god in her! Aye. tear in the eye.
Jimmy – Anyone talking about crusades these days will be accused of being insensitive to Muslim feelings, bringing back to them reminders of the dark days when Christians tried to reconquer formerly Christian lands like Turkey (almost the cradle of Christianity – look at all those letters to the Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians), Palestine, Egypt, North Africa etc, which had been conquered by Muslims over the previous few centuries.
“Instead of tacitly buying in to the coalition’s small state ideological fervour, Labour should build mass support for an alternative that would put jobs, services and tax justice ahead of the needs of the City. And yes, a little bit of moral outrage would certainly help.!”
I agree but there is almost no chance of Ed Milliband taking this course. Given that fact you have to ask yourself what we as Socialists are doing in the LP? Our best chance is campaigning for some kind of electoral reform and growing a new Socialist party. The Labour party is not even in favour of Social Democracy anymore let alone radical egalitarian reform.
A.Socialist. So you are in the Labour Party but are unhappy? LEAVE.
Laban. I would not bother about being insensitive to anyone. Say what you think. People have to face up to the fact they will snuff it.
How could anyone ever be unhappy with The Labour party Jimmy? We all know that everything it ever does is entirely perfect and that it’s leaders are saintly entities who should be protected from all criticism. The only correct response to Labour leader is total unthinking obedience as he leads as all towards the promised land of balancing the Capitalist’s mess on the backs of the working class.
The sad thing is that after of years of shortlists and parachutes, Alexander probably represents the views of the majority of the PLP.
Jimmy, Happy New Year. Do you get paid per comment? Could you put me on to your paymasters as I could do with some extra income right now?
*sigh*
*Please* go away, Glesga. Your auld Mam must be spinning in her grave at the show you’re making of yourself…
LesAbbey. Happy New Year. A few extra bob would come in handy. H. Without me your superior intellect would not shine through. Happy New Year.