Skip to main content

The Politics of New Labour: A Gramscian Analysis

I will be speaking at the launch of this excellent new book by Andrew Pearmain - please join us if you can.

The Politics of New Labour:
A Gramscian Analysis

Andrew Pearmain

Full of excellent research, intellectual promise and visionary concept... an important analysis not merely of the near futile decade of Blairism but of the failure of the wider Labour movement and indeed the entire British left’ – Tribune, 3/5/11

This book is an attempt ‘to think in a Gramscian way’ about the curious political phenomenon of New Labour. It is written partly in retort to those people at the heart of the New Labour project who have cited Gramsci as a source of inspiration for their ideas. Pearmain argues that New Labour makes a far better object than agent of Gramscian analysis. Part I discusses Gramsci’s influence on left thinking in Britain – culminating in the 1980s debates in Marxism Today on Thatcherism and the ‘Forward march of Labour halted’. It shows how arguments loosely based on these debates then fed through into the Labour Party, as its leadership – from Kinnock to Blair and Brown – sought a better understanding of Labour’s defeats and how to adapt to ‘new times’. Part II is a critique of New Labour, arguing that though elements of the Gramscian analysis of Labourism did play some part in its formation, much was lost in translation. In discussing the making of New Labour, and what it took from both right and left (as well as what it chose to leave out), Pearmain shows how Gramsci’s key political concepts offer a compelling explanation of exactly what went wrong with New Labour.

Andrew Pearmain is a political historian based at the University of East Anglia. He was a member of the Communist Party (1975-85), of the Labour Party (1997-2002), of the Green Party (2003-present) and a Norwich City councillor (1999-2003). He is also a consultant and national expert on social care for people with HIV/AIDS.

Norwich Book Launch: 5 pm, 1st June 2011, Room 326/7, Arts Block UEA, with Andrew Pearmain (author), Ian Gibson (ex-MP, Norwich North) and Rupert Read.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post-Growth: A new vision for a fairer and more sustainable Britain

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...