HERE IS no doubt omy is in a profound crisis. It is also clear that the ruling class is uncertain and divided over its future strate. gies. On the one hand projects like the European Union are a necessary part of economic restructuring. On the other, they open up divisions of interest and class rule.
In Britain, the pathetic ideo. logical battle between Blair's Nation' Tories only further reveals the paucity of ideas and the crisis of social Identity and leadership.
The more astute spokespeople for the ruling class understand that the restructuring of the economy and society is nec. essary, but can also see how dangerous the process may be for the interests they serve.
This predicament is best ex. plained by the ongoing collapse of the post-war settlement.
After the Second World War, mass production was complemented by more intensive state intervention into the economy. This combination of mass production and mass consumption produced both a profitable capitalist economy and a rela. tively stable society.
In Britain, the state employed Keynesian policies of economic State regulation was assisted by nationalisation. The post-war boom helped create social cohesion and political consensus.
Behind this was a new set of social alliances. The ruling class united around certain social in. Itiatives to head off any threat from organised labour.
The development of the wel. fare statn was a key aspect of this process. Consumer society was asso mooren Sections of the labour bureaucracy were incorporated into the new national project as junior partners. Other sections of the working class were integrated through limited concessions.
Both Labour and Conserva. tive politicians could agree that we had never had it so good. A new peral consensus come nated.
But this form of social organi. sation could not last.
Its dual role of social and economic stability foundered on international economic turmoil. This was seen when the US economy hit crisis and the Bretton Woods system of exchange convertibility collapsed.
The internal workings of the post-war system began to break down. Profits fell and intlation Blair's aim is not simply to shift Labour further to the right, but to break Labour from labourism itsef rose. Bureaucracy grew and production suffered a crisis of confi. dence.
As a result capital began to move from manufacturing pro. duction to money and finance. Forms of intervention shifted from large scale state investment to control of the money supply and inflation.
T Thatcherim. Hor his is the context of monetarist message was combined with an onslaught against the labour force. Economic and class interests were united.
But Thatcher's project had Its we Are wow drawbacks. It falled to grapple ing place, in particular the European dynamic.
Ultimately Thatcher had to go. But the source of the problems lies with the peculiarity of the British Conservative Party and its links to the empire, paternalism and to the feudal Paste The British economy remains trapped in Its imperial priorities, ones which have less and less relevance. To break from this creates a severe crisis.
The Labour Party is equally a product of the Empire. It too is peculiarly British, founded not on a socialist ideology, but on a well organised and developed labour movement.
Tony Blair's advisers appreciate the break from the past that is necessary. In this respect Blair's project goes much furCher than that of past Labour leaders. His aim is not simply to shift Labour further to the right, but to break Labour from labourism itself.
he sets of ideas and cradh tions that make up British labourism have deep roots. In 1945 It fitted the purposes of capital to incorporate it much more closely into the running of the economy and society.
And out of this process the working class made a number of Important gains -most notably around the welfare state and the unionisation of the work. Sorce These have been severely attacked over the last decade. As the post-war order collapses, labourism's social role is being undermined.
But Blair does not intend to restore the welfare rights robbed by the fories, Yuite the opposite. He is busy developing new ways to keep up the attacks.
And the Labour Party is his chosen vehicle. The attack on Clause Four is a clear Indication of his intentions to develop the process further to break the Labour Party from its trade union base and re-cast it in the context of the bosses' Europe.
But this will open up serious union leaders. Whatever their politics, they have a certain base to defend in the labour They can wait for a Labour government, but they cannot stand by torever watching as Blair destroys the workforce and union which pays their wages.
To attack these layers, particularly in the context of a radicalising social situation, could well prove to be Blair's undoing.
Jonathan Joseph