Starmer will never be able to change capitalism. (Photo by Anthony Devlin/Getty Images)

A number of people are uncertain about whether the new Labour government is socialist or not, including those in the new Labour government. Keir Starmer called himself a socialist during the campaign, while Rachel Reeves refused the title. As for Tony Blair, even as a social democrat he stayed mostly in the closet, trying to keep the markets sweet by behaving as though he wasn’t one. Other Labour leaders have called themselves socialists to curry favour with their rank and file; but it’s generally understood that “socialist” is code for social democrat, and won’t provoke the displeasure of the Masters of the Universe. It’s fine to be a socialist as long as you aren’t actually one.
Social democracy has ended up as a compassionate form of capitalism. The problem with compassionate capitalism, however, as with seat belts or Save the Children, is that it’s hard to find anyone who’s against it. Campaigns for bleeding the workforce dry or shackling them to their benches don’t go down well with the electorate. The father of English liberalism, John Locke, believed that three-year-olds should be put to work in factories, but today this wouldn’t be acceptable, even in Tunbridge Wells. Even Left-wingers would prefer the present system to behave as humanely as possible as long as it is in business. Those ultra-Leftists who abstain from supporting humane reforms because it helps to prop up capitalism were accused by Lenin of being afflicted by an infantile disorder, and most of them would seem to have died out as a result of it. In that sense, the choice between reform and revolution is spurious. In fact, social democracy started life in the late 19th century as a current within the revolutionary socialist movement, agreeing with its aims but arguing that they could be achieved by reformist means.
The other problem with tender-hearted capitalism is that tenderness of heart is bound to be in short supply by the very nature of the system. In the end, human welfare is likely to play second fiddle to the profit motive. And there will be plenty of brutal, barbarous capitalists as well. Social democracy is the faith that capitalism and human well-being can be reconciled; but if it comes to a choice between them, the market generally dictates that you sacrifice well-being to the demands of capital.
The compassionate bit in the phrase “compassionate capitalism” means that this keeps you awake at night. But it doesn’t mean you don’t do it. “We put the welfare of our workers/the safety of our passengers/the satisfaction of our customers first.” No you don’t. That’s a blatant lie. You put your shareholders first and hope that this proves compatible with the welfare, safety and satisfaction of others. Some of the time it does and some of the time it doesn’t. It depends on economic factors which are for the most part beyond your control. Social democracy is plagued by the paradox that to avert the harshest effects of capitalism, it needs that system to thrive. The question is not whether Starmer is a social democrat, but whether capitalism will allow him to be one by generating that magical entity known as growth. In this respect, being a social democrat is not like being a baptist or a vegan.
A quick definition of a socialist, as opposed to a social democrat, is anyone Starmer throws out of the Labour Party. This isn’t to say that socialists and social democrats don’t share some common ground. Both object to a society in which some people carry £16,000 Hermes Birkin crocodile handbags while others grub in garbage bins. The difference is that socialists think such inequalities are as natural to market societies as tattoos are to David Beckham, while social democrats hope they can be ironed out without too much upheaval. In this, they are at one with the Right, though not in their belief in a modest amount of public ownership, their less indulgent attitude to the well-off and their enthusiasm for the public sector.
Another way of putting the point is to say that Right-wingers believe in chronicles, while Left-wingers believe in narratives. A chronicle is a record which places items side by side without grasping them as interrelated (“The Queen died, then the King died”), while a narrative explores causal connections (“The King died because the Queen died”). That there are rich folk and also poor folk is a chronicle; that there are rich people because there are poor people, and vice versa (by and large, broadly speaking), is a narrative. Right-wingers tend to believe that there are beggars and billionaires in the same sense that there are diabetics and non-diabetics, rather than in the sense that there are murderers and murderees.
The social democratic faith that gross inequalities might gradually be eroded is pathetically dewy-eyed. These inequalities have now plunged to abyssal depths, as Marx predicted they would in The Communist Manifesto. So has the gulf between private wealth and public squalor. Some schools have fencing instructors while others have holes in the roof. There are hospitals which serve boeuf bourguignon for lunch and others outside which patients lie for hours in ambulances.
The solution to inequality isn’t that we should all wear navy overalls, receive an exactly equal amount of pay, and report the slightest hint of idiosyncrasy in our neighbours to the authorities. One thinker who rejected this dreary vision was Karl Marx. In his view, it is the commodity form, not socialism, which reduces things to a dead level. Marx was opposed to equality of income because it ignored the concrete differences between individuals, not least their different needs. Equality doesn’t mean that we should all be treated the same, but that everyone’s diverse needs should be equally attended to. Equality isn’t a property people have, like their weight or height or skin colour, but a way of dealing with them in all their unique particularity.
Social democrats tend to believe that things are fundamentally moving in the right direction. There are problems, to be sure, some of them fairly sizeable, but with sufficient determination we can sort them out. There are patches of horror and inhumanity in an otherwise satisfactory social landscape. Socialists wonder if people like this have either taken leave of their senses or simply don’t read the newspapers. It’s not that socialists are nihilists or defeatists; on the contrary, they hold that a transformed world is a realistic proposition. It is just that such change must be achieved against the grain of the world as we have it, which is far from being an auspicious place: the modern era has witnessed some magnificent advances in humanitarian values, but at present they are forced to co-exist with genocide, destitution, the spread of authoritarianism, the rise of the far-Right, the threat of nuclear annihilation and the growing possibility of climate catastrophe.
The true fantasists, then, are not wild-eyed anarchists or harebrained utopianists but those in sober suits for whom radical change is either unnecessary or beyond our capacity, an outlook of which past history is a living disproval. More particularly, it is the dreamers for whom a world groaning in agony can be reformed by a modest wealth tax or a spot of nationalisation. The German philosopher Walter Benjamin observed that revolution is not a runaway train but the application of the emergency brake. The argument that matters now is between those who think that the brake on climate disaster can be thrown while maintaining current property relations, and those who regard this as a potentially lethal form of nostalgia. As Naomi Klein puts it in Doppelganger, the alternative to getting rid of those who put their profits above the survival of humanity is “effectively deciding to let continents where ‘inferior races’ reside burn and drown because… the alternative interrupts the flow of limitless accumulation”. In this crucial clash of views, social democrats would seem to be on the wrong side.
When I was a student, I spent a summer vacation working as a warehouseman at a branch of M&S. There was a large chart on the wall of the canteen, inscribed with graphs in various colours, and I asked a fellow warehouseman, Henry, what it all meant. He explained that the different graphs represented the monthly sales of our store compared to other branches of M&S, and that the point of this was to encourage some amicable competition between these various groups of workers. All those who worked in my branch were aware that, despite this esprit de corps, they could be fired or have their wages slashed at any time, and most of them recognised that the main point of the amicable competition was to create the right psychological climate for pumping more profit out of them. They were expected to identify with a company that they knew was in no sense their own. Henry and I stared in silence at the chart for a while, and then he spoke. “It’s all phoney, isn’t it?”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeDidn’t wait long for him to implement the tactics of his North Korean and Venezuelan friends.
Does facial recognition work when they wear face masks?
In a way I suppose it’s comforting to see that the U.K. state is still capable of mobilising an effective response to, well, anything really. Just needed the right target I suppose.
What good will facial recognition be if the miscreants are wearing balaclavers”
Given that the far-Right is not the problem. Starmer’s proposals won’t solve it.
Expanding facial recognition = worse than ID cards.
Left wing totalitarianism call normal people far right.
Misnomer.
So the solution is….. to push a decades-old policy that has proved to be extremely unpopular with voters since it was first suggested?
Good. This is a major readon why I voted Labour
The first opportunity Smarmer had was always going to usher in more authoritarianism and censorship. ID cards will be coming shortly.
Hopefully. Might help slow the Boats as lack of ID necessity one of the things that makes us more attractive when the People smugglers doing their marketing.
And besides Amazon already know all about you
You are showing us who you are alright. Another tool of the globalists in their push for a surveillance society and economy. Rishi was too. They own the government and opposition.
I’ve read all the comments and don’t get where people are coming from on this one. Starmer was measured and thoughtful in his announcement. There is an outbreak of noxious and misinformed thuggery in several towns, especially in the north-west, and it seems to especially involve several fringe groups who characterise themselves in certain ways. It is, as Starmer said, about straightforward criminal activity.
I don’t like facial recognition camera techniques (or indeed police armed with guns or tasers) but on rare occasions – e.g. a major violent riot, it can be justified, to save lives and property. And it is best that use of such is openly admitted (perhaps as deterrence), than secretly used.
Facial recognition would have been very useful to eliminate the people attending the Southport vigil from the suspicion that some of them were also at the protests.
And facial recognition on people using the trains and buses to travel to Southport is also needed. I believe there is already CCTV at Liverpool Central and Moorfields, so it should be easy to install.
And perhaps stop-and-search people to see if they have any weapons that could be used in noxious and misinformed thuggery.
““The far-Right is showing who they are,” Starmer said at the press conference. “We have to show who we are.””
Well you’re certainly doing that, Keir. Ignoring the threats from virtually every other direction, ones that often involve bombs, machetes, knives, or simply well-organised and defended activists who can do billions worth of economic damage through obstructive protest, but you’re coming to come down like a ton of bricks on a few disorganised idiots and while doing so, tear into the defacto liberties that the rest of us presently enjoy.
I’m not surprised, but I am still disgusted.
Now as you should know the Just Stop Oil protesters been sent to prison, the leader for 5yrs. You happy the same for a yobs who lobbed bricks at the Police earlier this week?
Threatening violence and intimidation with multiple proposed similar actions requires a strong response and vast majority of Brits will be behind him. As it is the piss heads unlikely to turn up if they think they can’t rob a local shop again whilst at it.
I think the British people are far more authoritarian than many people all this forum like to think and also are not best pleased with anyone disrupting their lives I disruptive environment mod protest on the street, people blocking roads whatever
However, the sentence for Roger Hallam has been massively condemned by many people in the left liberal establishment, the Labour Party, celebrities etc. It is likely that the law – which after all was introduced by the previous government because of hugely protests by left wing and environmental activists will be applied in a while widely uneven manner just as the covid restrictions were (BLM kid gloves, anti lockdown protests ruthlessly suppresses).
Most of the protesters after Southport were not on the far right but were gullibly and easily persuaded the attack was by a Muslim immigrant. And even so It doesn’t justify them attacking a mosque. However there is a worrying context to this; many crimes, including murders committed by recent immigrants and asylum seekers been down being downplayed massively or even ignored by the establishment. That’s not the same thing as the police never prosecuting but it is worrying nonetheless.
Yup! That sounds like the reaction of a human rights lawyer!
At the same time he has the police promising to act robustly against these right wing thugs, but appears unworried by gangs rampaging in Southend and weekly mass threats of death and destruction on the streets of London. Hmmm…now what’s the difference between these groups?
Err which groups and weekly examples are you referring to?
Do you get out often or read too much on social media?
Last week, facial recognition technology was racist.
It is hard to keep up.
Where is Starmer going to get the technology from? China? They have the most advanced systems.
I’ve long believed that a ‘multicultural society’ can only really hold together under a government that is authoritarian to a greater or lesser extent (Yugoslavia under Tito, the USSR, the PRC, Zaire under Mbuto, even Singapore).
Anyway, here we are.
Almost 60yrs since the ‘Rivers of Blood’ SL and here we still are. And loving our multi-diverse football and cricket teams et al. You keep hoping.
Even Saddam Hussein who allowed the Christian Community to sell alcohol. Of course when he was gone so were the Christians, their properties fire bombed.
Starmer is a wooden cypher. Rayner is a loud-mouthed slattern without a single useful idea. Reeves is an utter moron promoted way way way above her very limited ability. They want control, silence, obedience and to punish wrong-think.
People voted for this. Let them have a good hard dose of it.
Thank you so much for this rivetingly insightful political analysis. Calling your political opponents morons – do you have the slightest basis for saying that?
“Slattern” – pure old fashioned sexist, not to say misogynist, terminology that can only be used against women. Why do so many people on the Right just do the Left’s job for them? That common would get an 85% disapproval rating from the British public!
And in any case SOME people voted for Labour but actually fewer than did in the previous two general elections!
“Ginger growler” = slattern. You may not like it but she put it out there herself. Perhaps you would prefer “trash” or “common”? Being working class doesn’t mean “common”.
It’s not the ‘far right’ that is behind stabbings and murders.
It’s not ‘far right’ to be appalled by the murder of innocent little girls, the multiple stabbing of a soldier, the beating of police at Manchester airport and more.
It’s not ‘far right’ to be disgusted at two tier policing.
Starmer’s comment about controlling social media is sinister. Will discussion be blocked? I see that The Telegraph, among other ‘papers, is not allowing comments about this.
Starmer is not listening and we are being muzzled.
Merseyside and Sefton are now teeming with Far Right thugs, according to the Official Narrative.
You know… that Merseyside and Sefton.
The one where 14 out of 15 MPs are Labour , there are zero Conservative councillors in Liverpool and Knowsley, and where Farage is more likely to get a milkshake than a vote.
Social media strongly contributed to the riots. Misinformation and a call to attend the demos. Whether a Govt can sufficiently control it I have my doubts, but it clearly is being used for malign purposes
I’ve tried to raise the serious issue of the Covid mRNA vaccines and the damage they are doing to the paper I subscribe to and I get no reply. No one in authority is listening. Only taking to the streets like the left always do with placards will this issue be brought to the publics attention.
“The far-Right is showing who they are,”
Says the creep who took the knee to the black clad fascists of antifa.
Indeed they are – largely drug and drink fuelled idiots easily grifted, and who if they couldn’t latch onto this would have been happy being football hooligans and petty criminals. Pathetic Men, and it’s largely Men, who run with a pack and like to bully.
If the Guardian told you that the moon is made of cheese you’d be kicking up a fuss in Waitrose demanding to know why they don’t stock it. You must try to think for yourself.
I don’t write understand this. I respect unherd as a publication for original thought, but here we have a piece with no mame attached to it, that is just parroting what every other news outlet is saying.
Have they been bullied into publishing this. If so by who and why?
Unfortunately they are prey to the same clickbait monetisation.
Tate and Robinson been using the same to grift whilst helping stoke the violence. Remarkable really folks on the Right don’t see it for exactly what it is – a money making operation on the back of sowing division
This is a tediously predictable slur. I know nothing about this Tate fellow (I think you spend far too much time on tik tok, X etc), but I think it highly unlikely that Tommy Robinson is in it for the money.
Oh you certainly just did that, O’Brien.
Nice.
Speak to the local community affected by the riots and who knew the murdered girls. Seen or heard one who supported what the rioters did?
No of course not. In fact when the PM says something like that it’s you berks who don’t get that the vast majority happy with his intent.
Your comments are becoming increasingly foam-flecked. Take a deep breath and calm down. It might never happen in Surbiton.
Unfortunately.
Setting up a police state to combat the rise of far right. Interesting tactic.
The use of the term ‘far right’ is the crowning dishonesty.
Far right or fascist just mean non far left
Pissed up, easily mis-led idiots being a more accurate description for most of the rioters the other night don’t you think?
How about the police were sent in to start trouble and make arrests to discredit what might otherwise have been a peaceful protest
You’ll be believing in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy next ER.
I think that’s you
I’m sure your great, great grandparents said the same thing about Peterloo.
Were they pissed up.actually? No doubt some might have been.
Far right of what? Does the English Defence League really exist?
Why no Government initiative for every council to provide a public piano and player to play “Imagine” after stabbings, bombing, protest arson and graffiti on, say, war memorials?
Is Farage really wrong? https://youtu.be/qikeU5NGqp4?si=0XaPk7ogfZ6kAq-l
Yes, this is the sort of satire we need. Seriously. Leftists are evil at this point, not just ‘loony’ like we used to think of them.
Keir Starling. White people who notice are now officially ‘Kuluks’ under this vile hate regime. He, like Reeves, look like block robot Daleks. No nuance at all. No ability to talk to the people. They just exist in pre-defined ideological railroads, like automatons.
The Government, and especially Labour, have become the Borg – a set of cybernetic organisms linked in a hive mind called “The Collective” (see Star Trek). And we, of course, are to be assimilated into it. Not wanting to be assimilated is ‘proof’ that we are not worthy.
Dear oh dear another one who needs to get off his laptop/smart phone and get out more. Anyone for lizards with lasers in space?
Meanwhile, on Wednesday in Kirklees
“Twenty eight sexual predators who preyed on vulnerable females in Kirklees have been given jail sentences totalling almost 400 years.
A further two men were sentenced at Leeds Crown Court today (July 31) as part of Kirklees Police’s long running Operation Tourway investigation into non recent sexual abuse.
Ebrahim Pandor and Amjad Hussain were both sentenced for offences committed against a single female victim in Kirklees between the years 2004 and 2012.”
You will not have heard about his as the BBC and MSM chose not to cover it.
Actually in 2secs pulled it up on BBC News. Might have rightly got more publicity if a bunch of drunken yobbos hadn’t been all over the community of murdered children.
Anyway glad all those caught by Tourway now going down for long time. Perhaps Police will catch more if not having to deal with foresaid pissheads?
It has been deliberately buried and you know it
Well if buried not v well. Like I say 2s and you can find it on BBC News. I actually had a look in the Mail too, and couldn’t find it, but appreciate that was just the one edition on the same day.
I think your point may be it wasn’t the lead story. As I say when a bunch of drunken yobs start bricking Police in a community that just had to absorb a dreadful set of murders, it’s going to take up alot of the news.
You should stop watching the BBC. It’s just the greedy people talking to themselves.
Oh dear, you’re having a proper mouth-foaming week aren’t you VJ.
Is some personal abuse about how the PM talks and looks the limit of your intellectual engagement?
Crawl back under your rock, racist filth. Keep on making excuses for child killing racists.
Hmm, as I thought. Not sure you needed to confirm but helpful anyway.
Problem, reaction, solution.