God, don't you miss the Tony Benns?
Tony Benn, picture by...Is morality in politics dead?
The discussion over immigration in the first leader’s debate made me want to be sick. It seemed to me that all three leaders had as good as accepted tabloid accusations and negativity over the subject, and it boiled down to simply an argument over who had the best way of reducing immigration. It was disgusting, it was racist, and it as good as lacked any form of morality. It begged the question, what about the immigrants? What about the people outside our borders (but still human, you should understand) who are just trying to – like all of us – make a life for themselves?
I’m not saying open the floodgates, I’m not suggesting a full on embrace of idealistic solutions, but perhaps a tentative question of whether Gordon Brown, leading the Labour Party (probably to defeat) has abandoned idealism altogether. It is interesting to consider that, despite common claims of Labour’s shift to the right, it is not an ideological shift, simply an abandonment of idealism and a pursuit of pragmatism.
This prompts the question, if Labour are viewed as rightwing, is rightwing ideology completely lacking idealism? No, but then, as many forget, Labour are not rightwing. They’ve introduced a whole stream of leftwing policies – the minimum wage and nationalisation of museums to name a few; no, Labour’s ‘mistakes’ for left-wingers have almost always been pragmatically minded (however immoral).
Take the Iraq war, no-one thinks Blair is really a cold blooded human being who sat grinning to himself as soldiers and Iraqis alike suffered and died at his hands, do they? Of course not, and I don’t believe that Blair thought what he was doing was moral or right for a second, but it was a tactical effort to align with the USA - the world superpower. Similarly, I don’t think that Gordon Brown wanted to talk about immigration with such negativity, but look at his audience. The whole debate was, for me, hugely alienating.
If the audience was really a microcosm of the population then I’m severely depressed. Not a single one seemed to harbour any interest outside their own immediate life, there was hardly any talk of values or aspirations; merely a set of dry and indistinguishable rhetoric about policy which seemed to have no philosophy behind it.
One of the best things I have ever learnt about Politics, and the thing I vow to always remember, was said by a family friend who was giving a lecture at UCL. An adamant lefty, someone asked him if he didn’t see that his propositions were all a bit too philosophical, not pragmatic or realistic enough. He looked at them, quite genuinely confused, and said ‘Well no, because Politics starts from Philosophy. Politics stems from ideas, and values, and what you think is right. And your political beliefs should never stray from that.’
It may seem obvious, but at the time it was so enlightening, so refreshing. The current political climate is all about compromise and pragmatism and realism; now these are hugely important aspects of a political career and should not be undermined by those who advocate ideological approaches to everything. Change is not made in a democratic country by radical reforms, because people are scared of change too big, it has to edge it’s way in, filter down through education and small reforms.
But god, don’t you miss the Tony Benn’s? Those politicians who fight and fight for what they believe in, and of course they are forced to compromise and accept defeat sometimes, but they never stop in the pursuit of their goal, they never stop letting people know what they are fighting for.
I think that Gordon Brown is a good man, I believe that he genuinely is trying to do good and wants to make the world a better place, call me what you will but I really do. But he is in a position where 40% of press is owned by Murdoch, where ideological politics has the stigma of failure attached to it, and he is wedged uncomfortably between moral values and a pragmatic approach, with no real balance or direction.
Lucy
Comments
I think we need to fully disassociate intelligence from "goodness" or else we have to rename "goodness" as real intelligence.
Sometimes I meet a young person, a university student or a college student and hey may be young but they command respect, despite their youth.
Two great statesmen, sorely missed.
And even THATCH, in retrospect, had a certain political integrity. I hated what she stood for but you knew where you were with her, unlike the weasels of NuLab today. (The tories of today are utterly beneath contempt)
And while I cannot sum up much enthusiasm for the Lib Dems, they are probably the best of the current bunch.
That's how Kinnock became leader. He was signalling his ability to betray his closest allies in the most important moment to the right wing media and business.
I must say I have not heard anything that blew my mind more in a long time. Or which I thought was more untrue. I, for one, think much worse of Blair. And I imagine him gloating when he watched those limited scenes we were allowed to see of Hell Breaking Lose over Baghdad. I won't go into any more vivid descriptions of what I imagine he felt, out of reasons of decency. And, you can take my word for it, that every single Iraqi, whose life he took part in destroying, would agree with me.
However, what you or I may personally think of Tony Blair is beside the point. The point is that you will not have another Tony Benn until you hold those who represent you accountable for their deeds. The Tony Benn's of this world are born from a struggle for accountability.
You are exonerating Blair on grounds of realpolitik. Even if you define politics as the art of the possible, don't tell me his only option was to be the most passionate and eloquent advocate of such manslaughter and destruction.
Politics is always personal. You understand that best when you are on the receiving end of what you call "pragmatism". But it is personal when you are making the decisions as well. It's always personal because it involves human beings.
And, anyway, what did this so called pragmatism bring Britain except the demise of its reputation?