essay: labour in england
What do
Selling England
by the pound
Labour has come close to being destroyed as a national force in cultural dispossession  speaks
England. Jon Cruddas and Jonathan Rutherford believe it has lost
the language and culture it grew out of
I n Dover the port is up for sale and the people are campaigning to
buy it and create a community asset. They don’t want a foreign-
owned port, they want a people’s port that is ‘forever England’.
Football supporters are building community-based organisations by
share purchase – in Liverpool, for example – to save our clubs from
foreign corporate power. In the Forest of Dean, thousands are rallying
in protest at the government’s plans to sell England’s forests which
are England’s ‘green beating heart’. In London, porters at Billingsgate
fish market campaigned to stop the City of London abolishing their
ancient English role and making them redundant. But where is
Labour in the fight for an England which belongs to the English just
as as they belong to the land?  our utilities, nor do we have control of our vital energy market.
Labour is no longer sure who it represents. It champions humanity
in general but no-one in particular. It favours multiculturalism but
suspects the symbols and iconography of Englishness.  For all the
20 Progress February 2011
good Labour did in government, it presided over the leaching away
of the common meanings that bind the English in society. It did not
build a common good which is the basis of an ethical life. It chose
liberal market freedoms for the price of our liberty and our sense
of belonging.  Dispossession lies deep in the history of England since the
The open economy is England’s historic legacy. Trade is in our
national DNA. But the economy has become an engine of inequality,
division and dispossession. A financialised model of capitalism has
redistributed wealth on a massive scale from the country to the
City, from the people to the financial elite, and from the common
ownership of the public sector to private business. We do not own
The overseas supply chains of business located here are the chief
beneficiaries of our economic upswings. A flexible employment
market has stripped workers of rights and security. Our soft-touch
approach on corporate tax has encouraged tax evasion and transfer
pricing as business relocates its profits to tax havens. It is as if we do
not live in a country so much as an economic system that is owned
elsewhere and over which we have no control.
Labour lost England in the 2010 May election and the cause is
about more than just ‘southern discomfort’. Labour shares a political
crisis of social democracy with its sister parties across Europe. But
in England something more fundamental has been lost, and that is a
Labour language and culture which belongs to the society it grew out
of and which enables its immersion in the ordinary everyday life of the
people. It has lost the ability to renew its political hegemony within
the class which gave birth to it. It was its apparent indifference to
‘what really matters’ that incited
such rage and contempt among
Labour is no constituencies which had been
longer sure who traditional bastions of support.
it represents. Across Europe the defeat
of social democracy has been
It champions
accompanied by the rise of
humanity in general cultural movements of the racist
but no-one in right.  The English Defence
League is the new symptom of
particular. It favours our cultural dislocations and
multiculturalism
economic crises. It is powered
but suspects by a resentful hatred for a
metropolitan liberal elite who it
the symbols and believes has heaped humiliation
iconography of upon people and robbed them of
their English identity and culture.
Englishness Its language of belonging and
for much larger politically disenfranchised forces that have been
unleashed by the transformations in capitalism and society.
In 1970, Enoch Powell similarly accused a liberal elite of being
an ‘enemy within’ and abandoning England to immigration and
multiculturalism. It was Powell and his politics of racial difference
who was the prophet of the Thatcher revolution. He gave it a
language. Powell as much as Margaret Thatcher championed market
liberalism and transformed our country. In 1997, New Labour both
accommodated itself to the revolution and blunted its impact. In
England, the effort has come close to destroying it as a national
political force.  globalisation, Labour needs to develop a politics of belonging and
enclosures of common land and the primitive capital accumulation
of the industrial revolution. Karl Polanyi described the historic
double movement of capitalism where capital sought to establish
self-regulating markets through free trade and laissez-faire
principles. Its logic was to commodify land, money and human
labour. In reaction, a counter movement grew up to defend and
conserve individuals, society and nature against commodification.
The Labour party is the product of almost 200 years of this counter
movement. Its history is rooted in the response of people to their
dispossession.   Middlesex University
you think?
Labour must now have a Alison McGovern, Philippe
reckoning with itself. In the Legrain, and Greg Rosen
last decades, it stopped valuing respond to this piece on
settled ways of life. It did not progressonline.org.uk
speak about an identification
and pleasure in local place and Join them and the
belonging. It said nothing about debate there
the desire for home and rootedness,
nor did it defend the continuity of
relationships at work and in neighbourhoods.
It abandoned people to market forces in the name of a spurious
entrepreneurialism. Estranged from people’s lives and communities,
lacking the institutional memory of campaigning and organising, and
denuded of internal democracy, it leavened an increasingly dour politics
with abstract principles and a narrow, unimaginative idea of aspiration.
The ‘neoliberal’ era that Powell began is now coming to an end
with the financial crash of 2008. Labour must confront and turn the
page on what Powell started by seizing and transforming the political
terrain of identity and belonging that he established as his own, and
which has been held by the right ever since. The question Labour
must ask is: what in our differences do we hold in common? Only
by speaking for a common life can it build the political power in
England  to take on Britain’s failing economy, the inadequacies of
British democracy and the disenfranchisement of large swathes of
the population. 
Labour’s future in England is conservative. England’s radical
traditions are rooted in the political struggle for the liberty that
Edmund Burke described as ‘social freedom’.  There is a powerful
strain of rebellious individualism in English socialism which helped
to create a politics of liberty, virtue and democracy and a vast popular
movement of voluntary collectivism, cooperativism and  mutual self-
improvement. English socialism shares antecedents with Toryism
but it differs from it in one significant way. It was a militant defence
of a common life, and of individual labour and creativity against the
unaccountable power of capital and against the usurpation of the
state. Its desire to conserve the integrity of the individual placed it
in conflict with the class structure of property rights and power.
Capitalism unbound was the enemy of the people and of individual
self-realisation. The struggle for liberty was a struggle for democracy,
not for paternalism and an organic society where each knew his place.
In this post-crash era, in the wake of corporate-driven
a reform of capital that draws on the traditions of a common life.
It must, in a literal sense, go out to the people and once again find
its place as an organising force in the life of our country, from the
cities to the market towns and the villages. England is being sold by
the pound and in places like Dover, the Forest of Dean, Liverpool
and Billingsgate Market people from all walks of life are organising
together to reclaim it for the common good.
Jon Cruddas is MP for Dagenham and Rainham and
Jonathan Rutherford is professor of cultural studies at
Progress February 2011 21