On extra-parliamentary action

What can parliamentary politics achieve? Not much, says Paul Mason:

Elected politicians have little power; Wall Street and a network of hedge funds, billionaires and media owners have the real power, and the art of being in politics is to recognise this as a fact of life and achieve what you can without disrupting the system.

On the other hand, though, Danny Finkelstein attacked John McDonnell yesterday for being “contemptuous” of the idea that we can achieve socialism through parliament alone.

Here, I side mostly with Mason and McDonnell against Finkelstein. In many of the main social changes of my lifetime, parliament has played a relatively minor role. For example:

 - Brexit. Most MPs wanted us to remain in the EU. We got out because Cameron called the referendum in part because of pressure from Ukip, and Leave won because of the work of people who weren’t MPs. If you want an example of effective extra-parliamentary political action, you should look at Farage more than any leftist.

 - Gay rights. Isle of Wight MP Andrew Turner recently resigned after making homophobic remarks. When I was a young man, however, an election campaign was based successfully upon homophobia. This huge change, from gays being stigmatized and homophobes accepted, to the exact opposite was achieved mostly without parliamentary intervention but by changes in social attitudes. Yes parliament legalized homosexuality in 1967, but that alone did not remove anti-gay sentiment.

 - The decline in crime. This is unlikely to be mainly due to government policy, simply because (pdf) crime has dropped in many countries with different policies. Instead, socio-technical changes are more responsible. Stuff is harder to steal, and young people play computer games rather than hang around on street corners.   

 - Greater gender equality. As Jeremy Greenwood has shown, this is due more to technical change than legislation. The greater availability of contraception not only gave women control over their fertility but also helped destigmatize pre-marital sex. And household technologies freed women up to enter the labour force.

Now, I’m not saying that parliament is irrelevant. It did play some role in the changes I’ve mentioned. The Equal Pay Act helped increase gender equality, for example, and the repeal of section 28 helped destigmatize homosexuality. Both, however, followed extra-parliamentary campaigns. And of course, increased inequality since the 1970s is due at least in part to parliamentary politics such as anti-union legislation and lower top tax rates. Remember, though, that those policies were themselves the product of extra-parliamentary action by right-wing think-tanks aimed at changing ideology.

Nor do I want to side wholly with Mason against Finkelstein. I fear that in attributing power to hedge funds and media bosses, Paul under-rates the importance of emergence and endogenous ideology. And I agree with Danny that placard-waving is often ineffective and that permanent revolution is “preposterous.”  

 Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that parliamentary politics alone does not bring lasting social change. It might be necessary for such change – we’ll not get a citizens basic income without it but this too requires an extra-parliamentary campaign first – but it’s not sufficient. A stronger parliamentary Labour party is much to be desired. But this alone is not enough to achieve the sort of changes we on the left want.  

Comments

[Oakchair]

On one of your points you are mistaken.
In the 70's and 80's governments across the world began banning lead in gasoline, paint, toys as a crackdown on pollution. That is what caused the world wide fall in crime likewise the rise in crime that came before was due to rampant lead pollution.
Lead effectively causes brain damage resulting in poor impulse and emotion control along with a host of ailments.
Kevin Drum talks about it all the time and you can read more by googling his name and some variance of crime, violence, and lead.

[Britonomist]

"Wall Street and a network of hedge funds, billionaires and media owners"

... all of whom were against Brexit.

[Boursin]

Rupert Murdoch was against Brexit?!

[rogerh]

Could governments at some time in the past have achieved things? Possibly but consider how the Bridgewater Canal got built. Supported by Manchester traders and the land owning Duke of Bridgewater it still needed an act of parliament which the good Duke got through in under 12 months. Governments don't achieve things, in 1759 I doubt most of Parliament knew or cared where Manchester was, but government can keep out the way.

Roll forward 200 years and there is little or no use for the lumpen proletariat. Therein lies the problem, big corporates want, hire and benefit from the cream of the education crop. Governments are left to fund the social care of the rest. Developed economies are too expensive for anything else.

The Bell Curve always had a dividing line between the employable and unemployable, that line has shifted considerably to the right hand side. Add an inefficient education system, a distorted social and housing mix and big corporations who can do their work anywhere on the planet and governments like the UK have a problem. More to the point middle class taxpayers have a problem.

In bald terms, if you want 40,000 brightish employees you have to breed 100,000 and find work and housing and social support for the other 60,000. Big corporates don't want that problem. One smart way around the problem is to let some poor country do the breeding and we import the brightest and best - immigration. That is not flavour of the month.

Looking to the future, I reckon sorting the inefficiencies created by sink estate and trailer park culture need to be cleared up. This impacts on housing policy, national culture and education and social mobility. That bunch of problems make Brexit look like a cake walk.

[James]

I think you underplay the role of parliament, although it's role isn't always direct.

I would consider that there are a number of initiatives that began or were certainly advanced by MPs and led rather than followed social trends.

Barbara Castle and her stance on drink driving is an example that comes to mind. Abolition of the death penalty is another. Sometimes MPs overrule the electorate on some issues - both a strength and a weakness of representative democracy.

[reason]

Chris,
have you never heard of lead or Kevin Drum?