GeofCox<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodonapp.uk/@jose8" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@<span>jose8</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://zirk.us/@ChrisMayLA6" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@<span>ChrisMayLA6</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mstdn.social/@junesim63" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@<span>junesim63</span></a></span> </p><p>"is this labour party any different to the birth of <a href="https://climatejustice.social/tags/newlabour" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>newlabour</span></a> "</p><p>I think it is. I was an active UK Labour party member in the 90s and a supporter of the New Labour project. There are 2 big things people (especially the current Labour leadership) have forgotten.</p><p>The first is context. Political feelings in the 90s were dominated by the collapse of the planned economy models in Eastern Europe. For most of us, New Labour was not centrally about moving to the right or defeating the left - it was about moving away from Morrisonian nationalisation towards anti-capitalist but market-oriented solutions like social enterprise: if market economies really out-performed planned economies, then make the market work 'for the many, not the few'. The context now is precisely the opposite: events like the 2008 crash have shown that capitalism doesn't work, the rise of China (by conventional economic standards) has shown that government intervention actually works rather better than 'free markets', and moreover our increasing understanding of impending climate-ecological breakdown makes controlling capitalism essential.</p><p>The second thing is that the first Blair government actually was radical (as one of its leading figures, Claire Short, recently argued - <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/10/keir-starmer-labour-1997-victory-tax-climate-crisis" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://www.</span><span class="ellipsis">theguardian.com/commentisfree/</span><span class="invisible">2023/oct/10/keir-starmer-labour-1997-victory-tax-climate-crisis</span></a> ). The minimum wage, Robin Cook's 'ethical foreign policy', devolution, Sure Start, etc... It was only later that Labour lost its radicalism (I left the party and active UK politics over the Iraq war).</p><p>I feel both left and right in the UK now misunderstand what really happened in Labour in the 90s. It was not a move to the right, it was a radical modernisation in response to a changing world. When Labour in government gradually did move to the right, it continued to win a couple of elections, but with a fast declining vote and - crucially - fast declining turnout - that has never really recovered.</p>