Speaking up for an English identity should form part of Labour’s new conservative narrative.
.
Two things caught my eye last week: Ed Miliband’s speech on Englishness and a comment piece in The Guardian explaining why the working class vote conservative. Both are connected.
Last Thursday, Miliband put the left on nervy terrain by using the Queen’s diamond jubilee to talk about English identity.
Perhaps not the best occasion, considering this was a celebration of a British, not English, monarch, with all of Britain decked out in union jack flags and stirrings of British pride coming to the surface.
Yet with the fight for Scottish independence now under way, Miliband banked on this being the perfect time to speak up for those south of the border, increasingly calling for their own distinct voice.
As he rightly pointed out:
“This debate about nationhood and identity should not simply be confined to one part of our country.”
He went on to talk about the left’s uneasiness in addressing this issue:
“We in the Labour Party have been too reluctant to talk about England in recent years. We’ve concentrated on shaping a new politics for Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
“We should embrace a positive, outward looking version of English identity. Finally, we should also proudly talk the language of patriotism.”
This shouldn’t be difficult to talk about, but for a number of reasons the left has tied itself in knots trying to (not) deal with it. On identity, it has mistakenly sought to (over)intellectualise, where the right have effortlessly made overtures to the non-quantifiables; human instincts such as loyalty and patriotism.
For too long, the left’s hesitation, its half-hearted commitment, partly borne out of a never-ending battle with Empire guilt and partly down to not wanting to give oxygen to the far right (which we ended up doing anyway), has allowed the right to colonise (so to speak) this issue.
Whether exaggerated or not (in particular, in the early days of New Labour), every time someone felt they were being denied the right to fly the St George’s cross (a story always gleefully picked up by the right wing press), or express their love for being English, simply nudged them further to the right, and into the arms of the less desirables. Usually, but certainly not exclusively, the case for working class Labour voters.
• Ed Miliband: The future of the UK is ‘too important’ to be decided only by Scotland 7 Jun 2012
• Momentum builds for Scotland’s ‘Yes to Independence’ campaign 28 May 2012
Which brings me on to Jonathan Haidt’s column in The Guardian about the way the working class vote. Author of the recently published ‘The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion’, he uses this comment piece to explain why the political right (from all over the world) have managed to cleverly convince blue-collar voters to ally themselves with them even when it appears to be against their own interests.
For Haidt, this represents a victory for the right in its appeal to heart over head. Whilst the left monopolises care, compassion and welfare, the right have gone straight for the gut. For them, politics is all about:
“A moral vision that unifies a nation and calls it to greatness than it is about self-interest or specific policies. In most countries, the right tends to see that more clearly than the left.”
In some respects, the right have (over) simplified politics. There’s no need for detailed explanation when you have symbols and powerful rhetoric, steeped in a sense of morality:
“One reason the left has such difficulty forging a lasting connection with voters is that the right has a built-in advantage – conservatives have a broader moral palate than the liberals (as we call leftists in the US)”
The right are comfortable enough to weigh in on cultural issues, such as identity, with the left playing catch up.
Whilst national identity isn’t as much of an issue on the other side of the Atlantic (proving your patriotism is par for the course for any American politician), it seems to be in constant flux over here. This is no doubt due to historical and cultural reasons more than anything else but that doesn’t mean it’s not a valid concern for some.
Economic uncertainty, spending cuts, downsizing the welfare state, which Labour admits it would have had to do (at some point) itself, mean less tangible issues come to the fore.
People are scared, they feel vulnerable. They want a sense of unified purpose, a feeling of belonging. This is why Ed Miliband has chosen to tackle English identity a full three years before the general election. He knows that the left is more trusted on the NHS and in looking after society’s most needy, but the fact that 4-5 million working class voters have abandoned the party since 1997 proves that this isn’t enough.
A rediscovery of its conservatism – family, order and community – as articulated by one commentator; ‘rescuing conservatism from the conservatives’, according to another:
“Many people harbour deeply conservative views on matters of value, but not on matters of justice – [this] represents both an intellectual challenge, and a political opportunity, for left-wing parties.”
Speaking up for an English identity should form part of Labour’s new conservative narrative. You can do all this whilst also standing up for a strong, nurturing, state. In the words of one writer, time for a “nostalgia of the left, based on community, social solidarity and public service”.
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
77 Responses to “The Left, “Englishness” and voting conservative”
Peter Dow
Not at all. I seek to avoid slaughter such as at Dunblane Primary School massacre and the many other deaths and disasters caused by the reckless incompetent mismanagement of this kingdom. I offer violence only where violence is offered to me.
I am not of the right, far or near. I am a democratic republican socialist. I am a moderate left-winger by world standards.
I oppose dictatorship.
It is not a crusade.
I am not a fanatic.
I call for immunity from the Queen’s law. Republicans should be trusted to establish republican courts to uphold republican laws. We don’t need the Queen’s forces to govern ourselves. Thanks but no thanks.
Anonymous
Right, you’re out to overthrow the GOVERNMENT. Thanks for that. You call for immunity from the LAW, only being subject to internal discipline, like any good far right secret police.
Crusade. Fanatic. Zealot. Far Right.
Anonymous
You want to do a takeover styled almost exactly like the Nazis, funny that. As a Jew, of course I’ll oppose you!
Anyone who is pro-neutrality or not willing to commit violence is part of your little list to purge, I see.
Selohesra
Seriously Botty I think you, me & LB all oppose BNP because we abhor their racism – hence the desire by most reasonable people and yourself to disassociate ourselves from them. However if you look at BNPs other positions – banker bashing, trade barriers to protect British jobs, higher taxes on the rich and business to redistribute to the poor, nationalisation of utilities and other key businesses etc – they would seem to me designed to appeal to the left and the working class. Racism does not equate to right wing ( except in BBC definition where right means anything bad) left and right both have their fair share of racists
wg
@Peter Dow
I understand your reluctance to be ruled by the monarchy – it would seem to be a majority position on the left and your point is consistently argued.
The strange thing is that a large proportion of working class people seem very much for the present arrangement.
I also understand the need to be left alone by unelected judges – I have come to that state of mind myself regarding our subservience to the European Union.
I am also, most probably like you, not in the majority and am not winning the argument at the moment – arguing for our respective positions but in a state of active political withdrawal.
I’m of a different opinion than you on our Monarchy, but I can not fault your logical arguments – I wish you the best of luck with what you believe.
But, it has to be done democratically!