One Nation: Blue Labour is driving Miliband onto Romney's path

At this year's Labour Party conference Mr Ed Miliband finally began laying the foundations for future policy. The 'One Nation' Labour he presented has however been the cause of some concern. The worries arise from suggestions that One Nation Labour is just a rehash of the 'Blue Labour' ideas that came under fire last year (Seymour, 2012).

The defenders of Blue Labour promoted the movement as a response to the 'managerial, arrogant and ultimately doomed' micro-management approach of New Labour (Glasman, 2011). As the alternative to the perceived 'culture of complaint, and an expectation of state beneficence' the group offered 'stronger institutions', 'tradition' and 'solidarity'. The 'Blue Labour thinker' Jonathan Rutherford warned against embracing liberal individual choice, encouraging instead the sentiments of the 'more conservative culture... which values identity and belonging in the local and the familiar', that he felt holds sway in much of the country (Wintour, 2011).

Under its surface though, is conservatism - the domineering power of establishments, institutions and authorities - as a way to assert control. It is the championing of an effective means of gaining power over rational discourse and debate. But it goes further than just electioneering. Blue Labour is a concept that plays with the politics of identity to achieve its ends, adopting traditions and subjectivities to manage a group identity. But doing so spells danger - this isn't the language of multi-cultural tolerance, but of corporatist regimentation.

The Blue Labour direction proved controversial when policies began to be put forward, with particular criticism given to its views on immigration - rhetoric of 'white working class' and 'immigrants' drawing dangerously close to the far-right (Rooksby, 2011). Amongst the suggestions were the Labour Party embracing the EDL, limiting immigration to just a few skilled migrants and renegotiating the UK out of the free movement of labour (Painter, 2011).

Such identity-based ideologies are narrow and divisive - but worse, by preying upon these frustrations to rally support rather than offering solutions, more problems are created that make real long-term solutions more difficult to achieve. Not least amongst these, is that by limiting the free movement of workers, their power in the face of capital is further reduced.

However, Labour Party leader Mr Ed Miliband backed it when it was called Blue Labour and is now pushing it as One Nation, 'where patriotism, loyalty, dedication to the common cause courses through the veins'. Why would the Labour Party leader turn to such desperate and demonstrably dangerous options? Here is an excerpt from Mr Miliband's speech from the 2010 party conference:

"Every day out of power, ... another day when we cannot change our country for the better."

It is the same motivation that drove Governor Mitt Romney to pander to the most conservative elements of the Republican Party. All of this rhetoric serves as a means of putting together a voting base; seeking a majority on the back of what are perceived to be sufficiently large 'categories' of people. There is no idealism to it. No activism. Just a ferocious determination to win - by whatever means are effective or sufficient. And didn't that just work out well for the GOP?

References

Richard Seymour's 'Miliband's "one nation", Cameron's "all in this together" – spot the difference'; in The Guardian; 5 October 2012.

Maurice Glasman's 'My Blue Labour vision can defeat the coalition'; in The Observer; 24 April 2011.

Patrick Wintour's 'Ed Miliband endorses "Blue Labour" thinking'; in The Guardian; 17 May 2011.

Ed Rooksby's 'Don't underestimate toxic Blue Labour'; in The Guardian; 21 May 2011.

Anthony Painter's 'Blue Labour's immigration stance is toxic'; in The Guardian; 19 July 2011.

'Ed Miliband: Labour leader's 2010 conference speech in full'; on the BBC; 28 September 2010.