“I’ll make capitalism work for the people,” promised the new Leader of the Labour Party Ed Miliband in his bid to become leader (Observer, 29 August). He explained:
“Britain’s big question of the next decade is whether we head towards an increasingly US-style capitalism – more unequal, more brutish, more unjust – or whether we can build a different model – a capitalism that works for people and not the other way round.”
Apparently, “in 2008, a consensus existed that we should understand the lessons of the financial crisis, not just about regulation, but about the kind of capitalism we needed to build”.
The Labour Party has always tried to make capitalism work for the people but, every time that it has been in office, it has failed miserably. What is new is that previously Labour leaders rarely admitted that this was what they were trying to do. They said they were trying to gradually reform capitalism out of existence, not building a new kind of capitalism.
Still, an open recognition of what they are trying to do can only help clarify things. It is, however, indicative of how far Labour has changed that Ed Miliband was the candidate supported by the Left in the party and the unions. Even they have bought into the idea that there is no alternative to capitalism, only a choice about what sort of capitalism, and dropped the anti-capitalist rhetoric.
The reason Labour fail to make capitalism work for the people is that this is an impossible mission. Capitalism just cannot be made to work in the interest of all. It is a profit-making system that can only work as such, in the interest of those who live off profits and to the detriment of those who live off wages and salaries.
Instead of Labour gradually changing capitalism into something else, the experience of running capitalism changed the Labour Party – to the extent that today you are labelled a left-winger if you just mention the word “capitalism”, even to support it.
“Britain’s big question of the next decade is whether we head towards an increasingly US-style capitalism – more unequal, more brutish, more unjust – or whether we can build a different model – a capitalism that works for people and not the other way round.”
Apparently, “in 2008, a consensus existed that we should understand the lessons of the financial crisis, not just about regulation, but about the kind of capitalism we needed to build”.
The Labour Party has always tried to make capitalism work for the people but, every time that it has been in office, it has failed miserably. What is new is that previously Labour leaders rarely admitted that this was what they were trying to do. They said they were trying to gradually reform capitalism out of existence, not building a new kind of capitalism.
Still, an open recognition of what they are trying to do can only help clarify things. It is, however, indicative of how far Labour has changed that Ed Miliband was the candidate supported by the Left in the party and the unions. Even they have bought into the idea that there is no alternative to capitalism, only a choice about what sort of capitalism, and dropped the anti-capitalist rhetoric.
The reason Labour fail to make capitalism work for the people is that this is an impossible mission. Capitalism just cannot be made to work in the interest of all. It is a profit-making system that can only work as such, in the interest of those who live off profits and to the detriment of those who live off wages and salaries.
Instead of Labour gradually changing capitalism into something else, the experience of running capitalism changed the Labour Party – to the extent that today you are labelled a left-winger if you just mention the word “capitalism”, even to support it.
Cheer up, we could do much worse then Red Ed. This blog seems always about what's going wrong, but sometimes things work out better then was expected.
ReplyDeleteHow naive can you be? If Labour wins the next election and their new Leader becomes PM it'll only be a few years before the left, inside and outside the Labour Party, will be chanting "Ed, Ed, Ed, Out, Out, Out". Not because he's bad or incompetant or a traitor but because any government that takes on responsibility for running capitalism has to run it in the interests of the profit-takers not the profit-producers. Learn the lessons of history!
ReplyDelete_______________________________
ReplyDeleteOur Economy is in Shamble
The consequences, the Great Depression and history tells us, will necessarily be a Formidable Chaos:
Social and political turmoils, and military adventures.
Neither supranational bodies nor governments can propose a plausible solution.
It is our responsability to create a meaningful increment of jobs, revenues and investments:
We urgently need the only plausible solution that is offered to us:
An Innovative Credit Free, Free Market Economy.
It is your duty to insure your security and economic survival, no one else will do that for you!
History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.
_______________________________
Credit Free Economy
More Jobs, No Debt, No Fear.
Prosperous, Fair and Stable.
http://post-crash.com
_______________________________