The Tories appear to be in
meltdown, following the meltdown of their Liberal coalition partners.
Rather like Nero fiddling while Rome burned, the Tories are
squabbling while the UK economy goes up in flames; flames which they
and their Liberal partners sparked with their austerian economic
policies. Unable to offer any rational response to the economic
chaos they have created, they instead resort to the age old tactic of
the small-capitalist – divide and rule. Under pressure from their
right-wing, and its provisional wing – UKIP – the Tories have
retreated to that last resort of the scoundrel, Patriotism. In doing
so, they seem to be trying to also lay a trap for Labour, by daring
them to vote against a proposal for an EU referendum. There is an
easy, and progressive response to that dare.
The Tories like UKIP are
stoking up fears over immigration, and appealing to Little Englander
Nationalism over the EU. Neither of those offer anything good for
British workers, or for the dominant sections of British Capital. A
withdrawal from the EU would be catastrophic for the UK economy.
Big, multinational capital, of which British firms are an integral
part, would really like to establish the kind of political
arrangements that flow logically from its needs, and from the reality
of a global economy. They would like to establish a single world
state. But, history shows the problem of achieving that. The US
went through a bloody civil war to establish its centralised federal
state; Europe has gone through wars since the beginning of the 19th
Century, that have essentially been about trying to establish a
single European State. The continuance of national cultures, based
upon the continuance of national economic, political and strategic
interests of various nationally based interest groups, means that
simply getting agreement, even for the voluntary establishment of an
EU state is not straight forward. Nevertheless, big multinational
capital has established a range of global, quasi state bodies, such
as the UN, IMF, World Bank, WTO etc., and the dominant states, within
this imperialist system of states, provide the bodies of armed men,
required to enforce the Rule of Law, required by big multinational
capital for capital accumulation on a global scale.
Within that context, and
understood in the dialectically, contradictory manner by which such
processes unfold, via combined and uneven development, the creation
of the EU has been a relative success, for that dominant section of
capital. It is not going to give it up that easily. The extent to
which the Tories – and other right-wing populist parties and
movements adopt a similar position across Europe – seem to have set
their face against the EU is itself a reflection of the fact I have
emphasised many times over the last few years. The Tories are not
the representatives of Capital, certainly not of its dominant
sections. Their opposition to the EU, like their advocacy of
austerian economic policies, is the ideology of the small
capitalists, the frightened and angry petit-bourgeois, the
reactionary sections of the middle-class, that make up their core
membership and electoral support.
As I've set out recently,
the Tories undoubtedly feel they have to push this line to avoid
losing votes to UKIP. They must know they have lost the next General
Election, and that is reflected by the calls from some frightened
Tories like Nadine Dorries for an electoral pact with Farage. But,
in reality, all they can really hope to do is to try to consolidate
their core. Come the General Election, UKIP's real support will be
shown for what it is, which is probably around 8%. It is only that
high, because in order to try to grab audience share, the BBC have
become more like the voice of UKIP, with Farage's face never missing
on any day of the week from some BBC programme. Remember what
happened in similar circumstances before the 2010 Election. But,
then the media jumped on the bandwagon that was Cleggmania. Clegg
could do no wrong, and everyone clamoured to proclaim that they
agreed with Nick. Once again, it demonstrates the paucity of
political culture in Britain, and why we ought to think seriously
about some kind of Civics qualification that everyone needs to pass
before they are let loose with a ballot. If it was a mistake to
chase after cheap, and very short-lived popularity by associating
with Cleggmania, how much worse a mistake to succumb to Faragephilia.
The chaos in the Tory Party
has been illustrated by the fact that on top of the old crusties like
Lawson and Lamont, who set records themselves in economic dystopia,
and today's adventurists like Gove and Hammond, coming out in favour
of leaving the EU, Cameron faced his party putting down an amendment
to his own Government's legislative programme! An amendment he was
having to tell even his own front bench they didn't need to vote
against!!! But, Cameron's own General Haig's have come up with a
cunning plan. They hoped to persuade their own side not to mutiny,
by putting down a motion calling for an EU referendum in 2017,
thereby daring Labour and the Liberals to vote against it.
The wisdom of this move
depends upon two things. Firstly, that the rest of the population
are as infatuated with the question of whether Britain is in or out
of the EU, as the Tory Right, and UKIP. They aren't. In opinion
poll after opinion poll Europe comes a poor 6th or 7th
in terms of people's concerns, way behind concern over the economy,
jobs, the NHS and so on. Secondly, it depends on those that say they
want to leave Europe, being absolutely fixed in that opinion. They
aren't. When a full discussion over Europe takes place, and when the
big guns of capital, mobilise to ensure that the message is heard
loud and clear, a majority for staying in Europe will quickly be
generated, and no vote is likely before it is.
In fact, as I've said
before, I think an “In/Out” vote is required, but only if its
clear that a majority of people, desperately demand it. Scotland
joined England, more than 300 years ago, and is only just voting on
whether it wants to continue the relation. By comparison its only 38
years since the British people voted overwhelmingly to get hitched to
Europe. In historical terms, a divorce now would be rather like a
celebrity marriage, and once again say something about the political
culture and maturity of the British, more than it would say about
Europe.
And, its on that basis that
Labour and the Left should respond to the trap that the Tories think
they are setting. Too often Labour has responded to right-wing,
populist attacks on Europe, by themselves competing for the
reactionary, nationalist cloak. Some on the Left like the national socialists of the Communist Party, and of No2EU, etc, have taken that
even further. Listening to their arguments, you would think that
British Governments and the British state were the friends of British
workers, that they did not impose, austerity policies, anti-trade
union laws, privatisation and so on! The response of Labour and the
Left should be to stop falling for the old divide and rule tactic,
stop arguing on the ground of what is in Britain's interest, or even
British workers' interest, and instead argue on the ground that
British workers interests are the same as the interests of every
other worker in Europe, and those interests are best served in the
establishment of a United States of Europe, and the forging of
greater unity of workers across such a United States, with the aim of
creating a Workers Europe.
The Tories say they want to
negotiate changes in Europe. Labour and the Left and the Trades
Unions should agree, but we should stress that the changes we want to
negotiate are not changes from the narrow standpoint of British
national interest, but changes that benefit all workers across
Europe. We want a single European State, with national states
reduced to the level of the states in the US, so that we can have a
truly level playing field across the continent, with common laws on
taxation, benefits, interest rates and so on, in place of the sham of
a single market that exists currently. In order, as a start, in
introducing at least the minimum of even bourgeois democratic
accountability of such a state, we want the Executive of such a state
to be drawn from, and accountable to the European Parliament. And,
in order that such a Parliament should be seen in the serious light
it should, the Labour Party along with other Workers Parties across
Europe, should revitalise the Second International, and establish a
single European Workers Party, just as we should build a single
European Trades Union Movement, and a single European Co-operative
Federation, as separate but united wings of the European Labour
Movement.
Labour and the Left, should
say yes, we will vote in favour of an In/Out Referendum, if and when
the majority of the British people vociferously demand it, and in
such a referendum we will campaign along with the workers and
socialists across Europe for a vote to stay in and fight with our
European comrades, to bring about the kind of democratic and social
changes needed to meet the interests not just of British workers but
of all workers across the Continent. Just as we reject the attempts
of small minded bosses to undermine our unions, and workers
solidarity with their tactic of divide and rule, and appealing to
individual and sectional interest, so we reject that same small boss
mentality, used by the Tories, to undermine the unity and solidarity
of workers across Europe.
2 comments:
I really agree with your article Arthur but I don't really think the current Labour party is capable of adopting this position, which is a shame. I fear they will just twist themselves into knots trying to appease the populist press while kowtowing to the to the transnationals.
Sean,
Good to hear from you again. Its probably not even the case, for the reasons given, that sections of the Left are capable of adopting such a position. Past experience suggests they will adopt a reactionary, nationalist position too. I understand Bob Crowe is looking at dropping TUSC, at least temporarily, for a resuscitating the disastrous No2EU, for the 2014 EU elections, for example.
But, all Marxists can do is set out what they think workers and their organisations, should do, and work in a non-sectarian, non-ultimatumist, way to try to convince them of those ideas. Its why I think all Marxists should be in the LP doing just that.
Having said that, I was quite pleasantly surprised when the other week on Question Time, Harriet Harman responded to a question about the Bangladesh tragedy, by saying the answer was not consumer boycotts, but international workers solidarity, to support the development of strong, free unions in Bangladesh, able to demand and enforce decent Health and Safety laws.
Quite right, now the LP should do the same across Europe!
Post a Comment