Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Spring Fund Drive: Keep CounterPunch Afloat
CounterPunch is a lifeboat of sanity in today’s turbulent political seas. Please make a tax-deductible donation and help us continue to fight Trump and his enablers on both sides of the aisle. Every dollar counts!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Third Way to Nowhere

“The emergence of politicians-without-politics, and of PR machine parties without core support has made the electoral system more arbitrary and fickle… Few voters really care either way — and with justification.”

Mike Hume,  4/29/08

May Day, a time for the working class to ponder and celebrate its traditions and accomplishments brought bad news for so-called New Labour in recent British elections. In London’s mayoral election, even long-time incumbent Kenneth “Red Ken” Livingstone was narrowly defeated. It was that kind of day. Livingstone never really warmed up to the rightward drift of Britain’s traditional Labour Party. Years back, Tony Blair tried expelling him from the “Labour caucus” and announced that he would be a “disaster” if elected mayor. Londoners went on to reject Mr. Blair’s advice. Repeatedly.

Ultimately, of course, Britain rejected Mr. Blair and, it would appear, what he and his henchmen have done to the Labour  Party. For, just as in the US  where Bill Clinton, Joe Leiberman, Bob Kerrey and other corporate minions engineered the destruction of the 20th century New Deal party, so too in England, Blair and company savaged Labour. They asserted that there was a “Third Way” between the traditional interests and platforms of Right and Left. By adopting much of the Thatcher-ite rhetoric and tendencies on fiscal policy, privatization, “free” trade, and the rest — New Labour became Thatcher-lite.

Among the Clinton-clone New Democrats, it was assumed that working people and other traditional party constituencies had “nowhere else to go.” Since the base could safely be taken for granted — even insulted and punished — the blow-dried and telegenic candidates were now free to court the opposition vote.

Labour squandered much of its apparently overwhelming political capital through Blair’s “junior-partnership” in the American war of opportunity against Iraq. But, most UK press accounts seem to agree that the May massacre may be largely a result of their failure to protect workers’ economic interests.

The latest galling affront was new prime minister Gordon Brown’s policy making Britain’s income tax less progressive. Recent — 4/6/08 — elimination of the lowest 10 percent tax bracket (or “10p band”) has pushed England’s lowest paid workers into paying at a 20 percent rate. There were various rebates and other flavorings to make the medicine go down but nobody was fooled.
Labour MP Jon Cruddas told Sunday Mirror  readers, “Over the last few years Labour has been losing elections because millions of our core supporters have decided to stay home on election days… Let’s not mess about — our people are abandoning us, we’re sinking fast… The senseless 10p band row hurt us — but it’s only one example of where we’re going wrong. Hitting hard-working people in their pocket is not bright — but the strategists thought it was. You see they needed some cash so they could cut taxes for the so-called middle-class swing voters.”

Does any of this sound familiar?

Cruddas continued, “The New Labour attitude that you can kick the workers from pillar to post because ‘they’ve got nowhere else to go’ has reached its ludicrous conclusion with [this] election… [T]he picture for Labour was bleak. The people we have let down found someone else to vote for after all… There has been a rupture between the political-class and the working-class.”
Cruddas cited the “crumbs of comfort in the fact that Ken Livingstone bucked the trend and kept core Labour support on board. He has never played by Westminster rules. But even for him it wasn’t enough.”

In this new, supposedly post-political Anglo-American world,  what passes for debate is a sorry, debauched, and infantilized shadow-play. If the political class has divorced itself from the working class (and it obviously has) then one might as well enjoy the show. It’s wet t-shirt mud wrestling time.

In this reactionary era, the political has become personal. So the London mayor’s race became about “Ken and Boris.” It was a first name affair. Livingstone’s Tory challenger was one Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. The former editor of The Spectator , a journalist, television personality and Conservative MP, the King’s Scholar at Eaton and Oxford alum was known for  campaign purposes as “Boris.”

The press loved attaching other b-words to Boris’s nom de guerre: “Boyish” for his looks, “Bonking” for his celebrity trysting, “Bumbling” for his careless  outrages. In one infamous article from 2002 Johnson had berated Tony Blair’s trips to Africa — arriving, Boris sneered, as “the tribal warriors … break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief.” He also alleged that the Queen made such trips because of the “regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies.”

Bumbling Boris responded to criticism by saying that he was “sad” that anyone might have taken “offense.” London’s future mayor assured a distracted public: “I despise and loathe racism.” Good enough. Apparently.

London Independent columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown notes that, during this time Johnson “delivered apologies like pizzas to the various groups he gratuitously offended.”

The campaign of personal sniping and (by American standards) dexterous word play has yielded London a mayor who supported attacking both Iraq and the Kyoto treaty. He opposes Red Ken’s “congestion tax” on big cars in the capitol, and anti-discrimination laws. Instead he supposedly favors “good manners.”

Alibhai-Brown warned on April 21 that “Londoners would be mad to vote for Boris.” She bemoaned the looming election as a flawed exercise: It “shames democracy itself. We lurch between democratic duty and an enervating loss of will.”

US voters face an even more grotesquely trifling set of candidates in a similar context of party structures largely emptied of traditional purpose and meaning.  The leading Democratic presidential contender  dedicates himself to removing the political from politics. He pretends to oppose another  New Democrat who pretends to have opposed NAFTA, and premature death from lack of insurance.

Bad show.

Bollocks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

RICHARD RHAMES is a dirt-farmer in Biddeford, Maine (just north of the Kennebunkport town line). He can be reached at: rrhames@xpressamerica.net

May 23, 2018
Nick Pemberton
Maduro’s Win: A Bright Spot in Dark Times
Ben Debney
A Faustian Bargain with the Climate Crisis
Deepak Tripathi
A Bloody Hot Summer in Gaza: Parallels With Sharpeville, Soweto and Jallianwala Bagh
Farhang Jahanpour
Pompeo’s Outrageous Speech on Iran
Josh White
Strange Recollections of Old Labour
CJ Hopkins
The Simulation of Democracy
stclair
In Our Age of State Crimes
Dave Lindorff
The Trump White House is a Chaotic Clown Car Filled with Bozos Who Think They’re Brilliant
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Domination of West Virginia
Ty Salandy
The British Royal Wedding, Empire and Colonialism
Laura Flanders
Life or Death to the FCC?
Gary Leupp
Dawn of an Era of Mutual Indignation?
Katalina Khoury
The Notion of Patriarchal White Supremacy Vs. Womanhood
Nicole Rosmarino
The Grassroots Environmental Activist of the Year: Christine Canaly
Caoimhghin Ó Croidheáin
“Michael Inside:” The Prison System in Ireland 
May 22, 2018
Stanley L. Cohen
Broken Dreams and Lost Lives: Israel, Gaza and the Hamas Card
Kathy Kelly
Scourging Yemen
Andrew Levine
November’s “Revolution” Will Not Be Televised
Ted Rall
#MeToo is a Cultural Workaround to a Legal Failure
Gary Leupp
Question for Discussion: Is Russia an Adversary Nation?
Binoy Kampmark
Unsettling the Summits: John Bolton’s Libya Solution
Doug Johnson
As Andrea Horwath Surges, Undecided Voters Threaten to Upend Doug Ford’s Hopes in Canada’s Most Populated Province
Kenneth Surin
Malaysia’s Surprising Election Results
Dana Cook
Canada’s ‘Superwoman’: Margot Kidder
Dean Baker
The Trade Deficit With China: Up Sharply, for Those Who Care
John Feffer
Playing Trump for Peace How the Korean Peninsula Could Become a Bright Spot in a World Gone Mad
Peter Gelderloos
Decades in Prison for Protesting Trump?
Thomas Knapp
Yes, Virginia, There is a Deep State
Andrew Stewart
What the Providence Teachers’ Union Needs for a Win
Jimmy Centeno
Mexico’s First Presidential Debate: All against One
May 21, 2018
Ron Jacobs
Gina Haspell: She’s Certainly Qualified for the Job
Uri Avnery
The Day of Shame
Amitai Ben-Abba
Israel’s New Ideology of Genocide
Patrick Cockburn
Israel is at the Height of Its Power, But the Palestinians are Still There
Frank Stricker
Can We Finally Stop Worrying About Unemployment?
Binoy Kampmark
Royal Wedding Madness
Roy Morrison
Middle East War Clouds Gather
Edward Curtin
Gina Haspel and Pinocchio From Rome
Juana Carrasco Martin
The United States is a Country Addicted to Violence
Dean Baker
Wealth Inequality: It’s Not Clear What It Means
Robert Dodge
At the Brink of Nuclear War, Who Will Lead?
Vern Loomis
If I’m Lying, I’m Dying
Valerie Reynoso
How LBJ initiated the Military Coup in the Dominican Republic
Weekend Edition
May 18, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
The Donald, Vlad, and Bibi
Robert Fisk
How Long Will We Pretend Palestinians Aren’t People?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail