FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Legacy of Tony Benn

by BINOY KAMPMARK

Their scanning us for hidden socialism, you know.

— Tony Benn to Nigel Nelson on going through a metal detector, The Daily Mirror, Mar 15, 2014

It was a title inspired by P. G. Wodehouse and coined by the novelist Malcolm Bradbury.  This was the late Tony Benn as satire, Benn as the hugely visible, orated political presence that guaranteed his status as myth that no governor can ever have.  The business of governing, after all, is bound to get your reputation dirtied at some point.

The sharp and somewhat unforgiving former Lord Chancellor Denis Healey, Benn’s greatest, and perhaps bitterest rival, showed how titanic struggles over the Left in Britain did, at one point, matter.  Here, we had two men of striking inclinations – both of the socialist movement, but both intent on finding different ways into the corridors of power.  Their disagreements were the templates of internal divergences within the British Labour movement.

Healey considered Benn a poseur, a pretender keen to cultivate and confect a left-wing identity from an inseparable aristocratic past.  Along with Michael Foot, they were less interested in winning than wading in a toxic pool of ideology.  Healey would admit that Benn’s views would “soften” but Benn could never prove to his satisfaction that he was “working class”. In Healey’s eyes, Benn always remained the quixotic 2nd Viscount Stansgate.  Ever heavy does tradition weigh on aspirations.

Benn had made it clear that he was not interested in polls, in the ticker of fickle electoral opinion and focus groups.  “I did not enter the Labour Party 47 years ago to have our manifesto written by Dr. Mori, Dr. Gallup and Mr. Harris,” he would say in 1988.  It might well be said that oppositional politics was always going to be both his strength and Achilles heel, ever the dissenter even as policy was being made in Cabinet.  In his appraisal of those getting to No 10, he could only say that, to get there, you needed to climb “on a little ladder called ‘the status quo’.  And when you are there, the status quo looks very good.”

Others have ventured stabs at the heroic failings of Benn.  Tom Doran in The Independent (Mar 15) did not have much time for the label of Benn as the “conscience of the left”. Much of this is based on the fact that canonisation of the right’s key “totemic” figure – Margaret Thatcher – was understandable – she did change Britain, if not kill much of it.   Having bashed herself into the mould of history, she did deserve some form of recognition.  As for Benn, the question for Doran is what was actually achieved by this sainted conscience.

Doran is searching for a fight, because he evidently would like to see the Left run up the runs, get the points and steal the political show.  For a generation and more, it has been conservatives and reactionaries who have done most of the running and much of the winning.  If it wasn’t conservatives, it was conservatives in progressive clothing.  Benn certainly illustrates the fundamental dilemma of a left politics that proposes but does not dispose.  This, invariably, is the problem of any stance that requires fashioning and practical application.  “Tony Benn,” Doran insists, “is the very embodiment of this doomed, circular romanticism.”

Benn’s time in government – for he did not spend his time sunning himself on the backbenches in idle reflection – is characterised by some policies that might surprise the hagiographical brigade.

He was the instrumental figure behind the doomed British Leyland Motor Corporation in 1968, a creature of Benn’s Industrial Reorganisation Committee from Prime Minister Wilson’s period.  The plan then was to merge the profitable Leyland Motor Corporation with the failing British Motor Holdings. The venture collapsed in 1975, a creature of creative obsolescence.

He was also a stickler for bold Britain, at stages taking a line that would make modern Conservative Eurosceptics and UKIP cheer leaders proud. In a letter to Bristol constituents in December 1974, he suggested that, “Britain’s continuing membership of the Community would mean the end of Britain as a completely self-governing nation.”

For all that chequered disposition, he did have a truck load of beliefs, fighting the bellicose, opposing engagements such as Suez, the Falklands and the Gulf, and keen to take to the soapbox for worker rights.  For many in the political arena, that quality is either indispensable or bound to railroad your credentials. If Benn was symbolic of the Left’s role in Britain, it was the fact that he did, even as the drive for modernisation became de rigueur, explain that some things are beyond modernisation, Blair-proof, if you will.

As far back as 1976, Benn would highlight a vital dissonance within Labour party politics before those attending the Labour Party Conference.  “We are paying a heavy price for 20 years in which, as a party, we have played down our criticism of capitalism and soft-peddled our advocacy of socialism.”  When Labour became “New” in its aspirations, the cupboard was also being emptied of other ties.  Tony Blair’s price in winning was never high enough.

Benn was hardly oblivious to the unsteady landscape of politics.  Each station of a long political career will see a range of transformations, a shedding of skin.  “What is the final corruption in politics? Earlier, it was to get into cabinet, before that, to be popular, but later on, the final corruption is this kindly, harmless old gentleman.”  Like a creature you could imagine creeping out from a Wilde play, he was himself a creature of social, if not socialist, satire.  “I am not a reluctant peer but a persistent commoner.”

His departure is another exit of those with convictions who might sway a room or a session.  Political managerialism is defined by an absence of ideology and a total lack of conviction. Benn, however flawed, defied and repudiated it. Power corrupts, yet some shall govern.  In so doing, Benn posed the vital question of our times.  “To whom are you accountable?  How do we get rid of you?”  Without the means of cleaning up parliament with a steady broom, the degenerates shall thrive.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
Wayne Clark
A Reset Button for Political America
Chris Welzenbach
“The Death Ship:” An Allegory for Today’s World
Uri Avnery
Being There
Peter Lee
The Deep State and the Sex Tape: Martin Luther King, J. Edgar Hoover, and Thurgood Marshall
Patrick Hiller
Guns Against Grizzlies at Schools or Peace Education as Resistance?
Randy Shields
The Devil’s Real Estate Dictionary
Ron Jacobs
Singing the Body Electric Across Time
Ann Garrison
Fifty-five Years After Lumumba’s Assassination, Congolese See No Relief
Christopher Brauchli
Swing Low Alabama
Dr. Juan Gómez-Quiñones
La Realidad: the Realities of Anti-Mexicanism
Jon Hochschartner
The Five Least Animal-Friendly Senate Democrats
Pauline Murphy
Fighting Fascism: the Irish at the Battle of Cordoba
Susan Block
#GoBonobos in 2017: Happy Year of the Cock!
Louis Proyect
Is Our Future That of “Sense8” or “Mr. Robot”?
Charles R. Larson
Review: Robert Coover’s “Huck out West”
David Yearsley
Manchester-by-the-Sea and the Present Catastrophe
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail