Blairism normalized the 1980s defeat rather than overcoming it

Evidence

The truth is what many of us have long suspected: Labour lost this election five years ago, by failing to challenge the Tories’ narrative. Yet this failure wasn’t about the wrong leader, PR strategy or even policies; it is ultimately rooted in Labour’s disconnection from any wider movement, and this is in turn rooted in the wider emergence of capitalist realism. Blairism may have won Labour three elections, but the unfolding of its logic could well lead to the destruction, in the not so far distant future, of the party. As Paul Mason acidly summarises, “Labour no longer knows what it is for, nor how to win power”. With Blairism, Labour knew how to win power, but in acquiring this knowledge, it forgot what it was for. — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 1850 (#expands, via linked claim)

Although Davis’s argument is somewhat weakened by his reliance on the regulation school’s inadequate crisis theory, there seems to me little doubt that he is referring here to a phenomenon of general significance. The Reagan-Thatcher era saw, not the abandonment of Keynesianism, but an important reorientation of fiscal policy, one of whose main features was a redistribution from poor to rich — the British government’s social security ‘reforms’ and drastic cuts in the taxation of those in higher-income brackets, both implemented in the spring of 1988, followed the pattern set by Reaganomics. — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 601 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Labour’s dilemma was compounded by civil-society disorganization since the 1980s — Arthur Borriello and Anton JĂ€ger, The Populist Moment: The Left After the
, 300; Thatcher’s second term and the miners’ defeat concretised British capitalist realism — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished
, 1362; The 1980s felt like left-wing advance to participants, not defeat (+2 more)

Broader Connections