Posts
Much has been written on Brexit,
stage 1 of which occurred on 31 January. But a key point has been ignored: the
UK’s departure from the European Union is due to a reactionary revolt by the
British (mainly English) working class. This went against the established
policy of the political elites, bourgeoisie, ruling class – call them what you
want – and will lead to many problems. As such, it represents the first time in
very many decades that the ‘popular will’ of a vote has contradicted capitalist
business interests. However, this is no reason for socialists to be happy.
In the UK parliament, most MPs
were in favour of remaining in the EU. Yet they had to watch their backs and
worry about the people who had elected them: 52% of the UK electorate had voted
for Brexit in the 2016 referendum and, more importantly, 64% of Parliamentary
constituencies had done so. The biggest bloc of ‘Leave’ voters was in England.
To show this was not a one-off decision, English voters rallied to the
Conservatives and their ‘Get Brexit Done!’ slogan in December’s General
Election. A survey showed that more than half of working class votes in Britain
were for the Conservatives or the Brexit Party. As a result, the Conservatives
now have the largest majority in Parliament since 1987.
It was no surprise that the
Brexit issue dominated the General Election, since it has featured in all UK
political discussion for years. Pro-Brexit sentiment grew in the aftermath of
the 2008 financial crisis, when British workers complained about the squeeze on
their living standards. They did not blame capitalism, or even UK government
policies. For many, the culprit was the EU, and especially the migration of
workers from the EU that was seen as putting pressure on jobs, housing and
social services.[1] In 2016,
when Brexiters chanted ‘Take Back Control’, what they meant was control of EU
immigration. This could be done only by leaving the EU.
This factor helped build a
successful political alliance between a large section of the British working class
and other longstanding critics of the EU. The latter were a disparate group.
They included Conservative ideologues, those nostalgic for the days of Empire
and who wanted to see ‘Great Britain’ operating more freely in the world, some
business people who were annoyed at EU market regulations, and even some on the
left who saw the EU as an evil capitalist plot and dreamed of a more
British-inspired (!) set of international relations. These diverse forces only
gained political momentum once the British (English) working class joined them.[2]
The Social Contract
Working class support for Brexit
was a protest. But it was a protest against how they thought the British state
was not doing enough to protect them – against immigration and the pressure on
living standards. So, economic arguments in favour of staying in the EU had
little effect, because they thought that getting out of the EU would encourage
the state to help them. The British working class has long had a loyal
commitment to the British state. As long as that state offered some economic
and social protection, it would not cause too much trouble. It was a kind of
‘social contract’. The immigration question became important in this context
because it helps to identify the national, British-based working class as the
legitimate recipient of state assistance versus the immigrants (or even
refugees) from other countries. In this political outlook, the issue of
inadequate housing, jobs and services delivered by capitalism becomes a moan
about the supply of housing, jobs and services taken by migrants. In earlier
decades, the moan was about blacks and Asians. In the past decade it has been
more about white (East) Europeans who had rights to move to the UK under EU
labour market rules.
By contrast, business opinion in
Britain was consistently against Brexit. However, companies had to be careful
in their public comments because they did not want to annoy half their
customers. It was only in the past year that they warned how Brexit would
disrupt supply chains, put important trading relationships at risk and damage
investment, but this had little effect on popular opinion. The capitalist
enthusiasts for Brexit were few, usually small companies wanting to avoid EU
regulations. They, and others, overlooked an inconvenient point that world
trade is already divided up among major trading blocs, especially in North
America, Europe and Asia. There is no big, free world market to join outside
the EU, and the UK will be stepping out of the deals that the EU has already
negotiated with other countries.
After Brexit Day on 31 January,
at first nothing much will seem to change for the UK. It will be excluded from
EU decision-making, and a number of EU-related outlets for British citizens
will begin to close down, such as employment and education opportunities.
Otherwise, Brits will see most EU-related things going on as normal, probably
up to the end of 2020. Even trade with the EU will not change abruptly before
then.
Nevertheless, the Brits will
still feel able to blame their woes on the EU. The Conservative Government’s
objective is to do what it likes after leaving EU membership, but to still have
trade access to the EU market as it was before. The remaining 27 countries of
the EU cannot agree to this, so there will be many disputes and plenty of room
for EU bashing in the forthcoming negotiations. There also remains a ‘divorce
bill’ to settle, whereby the UK is liable to pay the EU tens of billions after
it cancelled its previous membership commitments.
It is doubtful that the British
working class will turn against the Conservative Government as the dream of a
bright future outside the EU fades away. It may not take long before their
promise of more investment in poor areas of the country is exposed as a fraud,
but that does not mean there will be any progressive resistance. Instead, the
greater likelihood is that the working class will double down on aggressive
nationalism.
Tony Norfield, 3 February 2020
Note: * This is the English version of an article published on 2 February in the Spanish language journal Ideas de Izquierda, together with an article by Michael Roberts, here.
Note: * This is the English version of an article published on 2 February in the Spanish language journal Ideas de Izquierda, together with an article by Michael Roberts, here.
9 comments:
Tony,
I agree with the last sentence of your comment, here.
"the UK’s departure from the European Union is due to a reactionary revolt by the British (mainly English) working class. This went against the established policy of the political elites, bourgeoisie, ruling class – call them what you want – and will lead to many problems. As such, it represents the first time in very many decades that the ‘popular will’ of a vote has contradicted capitalist business interests. However, this is no reason for socialists to be happy."
I also agree with your assessment that Brexit is reactionary. I would even agree with your assessment that, in so far as a section of the working-class voted for it, it is a reactionary section of the working-class. However, I disagree that what the vote represents is a revolt by the working-class - even as you rightly say, mainly the English. The reality is that Brexit was pushed through by a Tory Party that for years now, since Thatcher, has increasingly become the voice of the reactionary petite bourgeoisie, i.e. of that 5 million or so small capitalists and their families (which makes up around 15 million voters in total, and forms the core vote both for the Tories and for Brexit and suppor for other reactionary policies). It is those interests that the Tory Party represents, and it is that class fraction that makes up the dominant force within the Tory party itself.
The interests of that class fraction is quite clearly distinct from the interests of the dominant section of the ruling class itself, i.e. the 0.01% that own the controlling share of share capital, bonds and other forms of fictitious capital. That is why the state, in the main, reflecting the interests of that dominant section of capital has resisted the Brexit agenda pursued by the Tories, using the courts, the civil service bureaucracy and so on.
All of the surveys show that it was not the working-class that voted for brexit, but the Tory voting small capitalists and their periphery - indeed much like in the US it was the same social layers that voted for Trump. Around 75% of Labour's 2017 voters voted against Brexit, whilst around he same proportion of Tory voters voted for it.
Its undoubtedly true that a section of backward workers in Britain did also vote for Brexit, just as in the past they have voted for UKIP, the BNP, and the same layers voted for Mosely in the 1930's. But, these layers represent a minority, not a majority. They represent essentially declassed elements, and for example, are mostly made up of ex-workers, people who have retired, who were often never involved in the organised labour movement and so on. Much is made of the vote for Brexit vote in mining areas, but it has to be remembered that not everyone in those areas were miners, or people who supported the miners. There were also many scabs in those areas, particularly in the Nottinghamshire area. There are many going back to the 1980's who supported Thatcher and her anti-union policies and policy to sell off council houses etc. Moreover, it has always been the case that many workers who voted Labour, did so even whilst holding reactionary views on a range of issues including immigration, homosexuality and so on. Part of the problem is that Labour, so long as these voters voted for them, never sought to challenge those reactionary views for fear of losing their votes.
The good news is that these old reactionary layers of the working-class, concentrated in decaying and declining towns, only represent a minority of the working-class, and its majority, comprising younger, better educated, more progressively minded workers not only form a majority, but will by simple demographics represent an increasing majority of the working-class. Its to them that socialists and the Labour party needs to address itself.
It is still a debate whether Brexit was a working class or middle class revolt. It probably depends on how one defines working class. Certainly the composition of the working class has changed markedly in the last 50 years, so now the majority of people in the C1 group are what could be described as petit bourgeois.
I think if you accept that Brexit was a working class revolt you would have to accept that most of the C1 group were working class.
The only way you can deny Brexit was supported by a majority of the working class is to put the C1 group in the middle class. So Nurses, supervisors, junior managers, teachers etc would have to be included in the Middle classes.
In the here and now I personally regard the C1 group as mainly a petit bourgeois, anti proletarian grouping.
If we have to divide this up along class lines this means that for me Brexit was primarily a revolt by the Middle Classes.
However I am not sure I would divide it along those lines. For a start I am not sure I accept that Brexit was an economic phenomenon. I see it more as a cultural revolt. For example whichever way you slice the data the elderly were more likely to vote for Brexit and the Tories. These elderly voters don’t need to worry about wage suppression or not having a house. Their main concern is too many funny looking dark skinned people walking around their streets. These people remember Britain before it joined the EU and remember it being oh so much better, steak and chips rather than kebabs with chilli sauce.
So it’s a cultural revolt by English white people who have been fed a diet of tabloid gutter press bile and BBC state propaganda for decades. I would put Brexit down to the mouthpieces of the ruling elite and their incredibly productive campaign to grab hearts and minds. If the ruling elite didn’t want Brexit we still have them to thank for it!
Whether this sickening British culture can spread to the rest of Europe is a pressing question. More dangerous than the coronavirus if you ask me.
"The only way you can deny Brexit was supported by a majority of the working class is to put the C1 group in the middle class. So Nurses, supervisors, junior managers, teachers etc would have to be included in the Middle classes."
I consider C1's as working-class. The majority of this group did not vote for Brexit, certainly a large proportion of the younger members of this group (below 50) voted against Brexit. Its also amongst this same group that Labour has drawn most of its support.
The petite-bourgeois is composed of that 5 million small business people and their families and periphery, which comprises around 15 million voters in total. It is the small business people that run their own window cleaning businesses (a surprising number of whom are Tory councillors, for example) gardening businesses, market stall holders, back street garage owners, in short the typical white van man, or Del Boy Trotter. The same social group's ideas extend up into the medium sized private businesses, like JCB, where the culture and mentality is a carry over from their origins.
The only section of the working-class that voted for Brexit is a minority, and most of that is actually of ex-workers, i.e. of retired workers, that still live in the world of the British Empire and Two Way Family Favourites on Sunday morning radio, who still think that Britannia rules the waves, and have carried with them all the bigotry that goes with it.
"I consider C1's as working-class."
Well then your argument does not hold water. The only way Danny Dorling (an academic statistician by trade) could make the argument that Brexit was a Middle Class revolt was to include the C1's in the Middle Class, at least he had the honesty to admit this.
And pinning your hopes on the indebted student population is wishful thinking. By the time they get to 25 they will be so desperate to pay down their debts that will gladly knife their Grandma to get a high paying job.
"The petite-bourgeois is composed of that 5 million small business people and their families and periphery"
I disagree, the C1 group are chock full of the petite-bourgeois. In other words those whose:
"politico-economic ideological stance in times of socioeconomic stability is determined by reflecting that of a haute ("high") bourgeoisie, with which the petite bourgeoisie seeks to identify itself and whose bourgeois morality it strives to imitate."
In merry old Englad that outlook is a national disease!
"Well then your argument does not hold water. The only way Danny Dorling (an academic statistician by trade) could make the argument that Brexit was a Middle Class revolt was to include the C1's in the Middle Class, at least he had the honesty to admit this."
Quite the contrary. The C1's are workers. They sell their labour-power. They also voted in a significant majority against Brexit. It wasn't these working-class voters that voted for Brexit, but the petite-bourgeoisie, the class of small capitalists, comprising the 5 million small businesses, their owners and families. The only section of the working-class that voted in any significant number for Brexit were the ex workers, the pensioners, the declassed elements. In other words brexit was a revolt of the non-working class elements of society.
""politico-economic ideological stance in times of socioeconomic stability is determined by reflecting that of a haute ("high") bourgeoisie, with which the petite bourgeoisie seeks to identify itself and whose bourgeois morality it strives to imitate.""
Yet, its among that group the biggest increase in support for Labour and Labour membership was to be found. And, of course, we've seen in the past that it was amongst those groups of workers that the most left-wing unions were to be found such as ASTMS under Jenkins, AUEW-TASS under Gill and so on. It was from those groups that we had support for the IWC, for the Lucas Plan and so on.
Its not these groups of workers that are looking back to the age of Empire, but those declassed elements, and the small private capitalists, and not surprisingly, because whatever the relatively small variations in incomes between workers, they all face the same common conditions, the same relationship to the means of production.
"And pinning your hopes on the indebted student population is wishful thinking. By the time they get to 25 they will be so desperate to pay down their debts that will gladly knife their Grandma to get a high paying job."
I don't recall say anything about pinning hopes on students indebted or otherwise. I pointed out that it is the younger part of the population - below 50 - that has seen the larges degree of support for Labour, and which also is where there is the largest opposition to Brexit. Whether those students get a high paying job or not is irrelevant. From a Marxist perspective the level of your wages is irrelevant to determining whether you are working-class or not. And, in fact, one good consequence of Brexit may be that as the Pound tanks, and interest rates rise, it will burst the bubbles in UK property and financial markets, which may then put those students in a much better position in relation to buying houses and pensions. It will be those elderly voters that backed Brexit, who will see their house price, and their ISA's fall in value.
Reply to Boffy and to SteveH:
The ABCDE divisions to distinguish social class are full of problems, but they are basically all we have in terms of data that analyse votes. They are based on the National Readership Society’s methodology, and this had an advertising objective. For example, it saw C1s (supervisory, admin, professional, etc) as being a different audience than C2s (skilled manual workers), even though the latter might have higher incomes, etc, than the former, which would also include nurses and teachers, whose jobs are mostly not well paid.
One can also argue about who really belongs in each group. With the disintegration of the labour market in the past decade or so, many more people are ‘self-employed’, but I think it wrong to label many of these as petit bourgeois, whatever their political outlook. Also, as a YouGov comment notes, some people in the ABC1 group may consider themselves working class, though they are labelled middle class, while some in the C2DE group may consider themselves middle class not working class. Another irony of the ABCDE data is that only 45% of the UK population, including the unemployed, is C2DE, or working class!
My argument centred on how the allegiance of a large section of the British (mainly English) working class to Brexit was the factor that made Brexit possible, adding to those in other social groups who were pro-Brexit and tipping the balance to 52-48. In the latest General Election, the ABCDE data show that just over 50% of the C2DEs (labelled ‘working class’ in this classification) voted for the Conservatives or the Brexit Party.
If there are quibbles about my argument that the British working class has reactionary politics and is not open to socialism, just consider how, and where in the country, support for Corbyn’s Labour Party collapsed when it was offering the most radical programme of ‘state socialism’ seen since 1945. Or ponder why Ed Milband’s Labour Party, back in 2015, issued a ‘Controls on Immigration – I’m voting Labour’ coffee mug. Who was he trying to appeal to? Labour Party members were against Brexit, but a majority of (former) Labour-voting constituencies were pro-Brexit – surveys indicate 60% of Labour and 70% of Conservative constituencies in 2016. I would still put Brexit down to a working class revolt, although, obviously, it did not account for all the Leave votes.
Tony Norfield, 5 February 2020
I really have no idea where Boffy is getting his figures but here are a few significant stats:
Only the AB social groups, in other words the elite, professionals and higher managers had a remain majority.
C1 voted 51% leave, 62% of C2 voted leave and 64% of DE voted leave.
63% of social renters and 70% of those without qualifications went for Leave.
So the only way you get a Middle Class majority for leave is if you include C1’s in the Middle Class. If you want to ask the question, where did the leave vote come from? To claim it came from the Middle Class is to include C1 in the Middle Class.
And if we then say that the leave vote came from the Middle class (by including c1’s) we also have to conclude that the remain vote came from the Middle Class too, but even more so!
To sum up, if we include c1’s in the middle class we can say that the majority of Leave votes came from a ‘middle class’ of ABC1 voters.
“Quite the contrary. The C1's are workers.”
In that case Brexit was overwhelmingly a working class phenomenon.
But as I said before I see it as a cultural revolt.
“we've seen in the past that it was amongst those groups of workers that the most left-wing unions were to be found “
It is also this group that provide the Tory party with an almost permanent majority, if we rightly include Blairism under the umbrella of Toryism.
“From a Marxist perspective the level of your wages is irrelevant to determining whether you are working-class or not. “
What the Marxist perspective says is utterly irrelevant from the political perspective, it is what people actually subjectively think that matters. Marx himself made this point when he described Germany as an overwhelmingly petty bourgeois nation. Engels went further and advised that the ‘Labour aristocracy’ be closely watched and not allowed to lead the movement.
As a major U.S. ally and an important member of the Western camp, how big a wave will this stone stir up worldwide? After all, the United States regards Huawei as a "significant security threat" and not only bans itself, but also tries to persuade its allies to resist together.
The British decision was made after a long period of incubation, and it still runs counter to American suggestions and pressure.
Some industry observers believe that the UK's green light is beneficial from the perspective of the full popularity of next-generation mobile data services.
Victor: the US was in a better position to exclude Huawei, having done many restrictions already on it and other Chinese companies, so these have played relatively little role in the US market. In the UK, Huawei is a big supplier of 4G infrastructure and is seen as the best, and cheapest, supplier of (a lot of) 5G stuff. Despite the UK going against US wishes for a full ban, it has nevertheless limited Huawei to around 30% of the 5G set up, and explicitly not anywhere near the '5 Eyes' spying network with the US.
There are Tory MPs opposed to any deal with Huawei, but I don't see them as having much impact. UK security services have looked at the evidence and made clear that there is no problem, or at least only a limited one. As I noted in my blog article on Huawei (April 2019), the Europeans in general are more conscious of spying done by the US! The UK, in any case, is going to be careful about not pissing China off too much in a post-Brexit world
Post a Comment