Terrific thread this. I think there are two long-running causes: the first is that the party's intellectual left has never recovered from being totally defeated - and being demonstrably wrong, at least at the time - about the big arguments that divided the party in the 1980s. - ThreadSky

stephenkb.bsky.social • 22 hours ago

Terrific thread this. I think there are two long-running causes: the first is that the party's intellectual left has never recovered from being totally defeated - and being demonstrably wrong, at least at the time - about the big arguments that divided the party in the 1980s.

Reposted from Marie Le Conte

ooooh I have a theory on that - I think a crucial difference between the centre left and centre right is that the former has more of a sense of where it stands ideologically and historically, eg away from wherever the Labour party is at that point in time, whereas the latter only ever tethers...

Comments

goatgo.bsky.social•20 hours ago

At this point wouldn't "no tax increases and moderate social conservatism" just put you into the Labour party?

retrograder25.bsky.social•20 hours ago

Perhaps that internal Tory divide in 1980s was more of a cultural & generational one than ideological. Much stemmed from whether or not particular figures had WW2 military service, officer class, inevitably. That often shaped Europhile attitudes. Demonising of 'Heathites' within was potent weapon.

stephenkb.bsky.social•22 hours ago

What did it mean to be on the Tory left in the early 1980s? It meant to favour conciliation with the trades unions over conflict, high inflation over high unemployment, scepticism over 'selling the family silver'. By 1990 to argue against those was to have argued against stunning success*.

theramblingelf.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Being to the left of Blair's Labour would have been a bold play for any Tory!

theramblingelf.bsky.social•21 hours ago

That could be another factor at play. Once the left of the Torys allowed that space to be filled by the man who won 3 elections for Labour, they'd really had their hands chopped off.

stephenkb.bsky.social•22 hours ago

*There's a fascinating footnote that there is an open-and-shut case that at least some of the UK's problems do have their causes in 'decisions made by Margaret Thatcher from 1979 to 1990', but openly admitting this is still a barrier to entry in internal Conservative debates.

stephenkb.bsky.social•22 hours ago

In any case, that case was not obvious, indeed it looked rather silly, in 1990. The social costs that the wets had warned against had been demonstrated to be worth the candle. The Labour party was shattered, the Liberal & Social Democrats looked like they might die.

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

To be 'on the left' of the Thatcher Cabinet in 1980 meant to hold a bunch of views that had been completely punched out by events. To be on the left of the 1990 Cabinet, you had either had the good fortune to be in posts that meant you avoided those debates (Douglas Hurd, and uh...nobody else)...

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

...or frankly at that point it was already about tone not content. As Norman Lamont put it, the divide was about whether you wanted to have 'Thatcherism forever, a sort of permanent revolution' (as quoted in this marvellous documentary) or not:

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

If you've read Marie's marvellous thread, what does that remind you of? It's this bit!

davidlambert.bsky.social•21 hours ago

'Wets' is another example of the right being good at giving demeaning labels to their opponents in the centre (see also 'RINOs'), and those opponents being far too reasonable / nice / weak to come up with something pithy and damning in response

mthrjo.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Oddly enough my most Tory friend, who is a management consultant and on the whole pretty Thatcherite, gets absolutely furious on the subject of utility companies and would nationalise them tomorrow if given chance. But he also has no intention of running for office...

antbreach.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Yes. It's taboo to discuss the lasting damage Thatcher left us all on Europe and local finance, presumably because these were areas where she was wrong and the Tory wets were correct to publicly oppose her

antbreach.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Interesting to think what would happen if Tory thinking on Europe and local finance became less constipated. Would make their economic and public services arguments so much less painful and could provide some nice dividing lines with Reform

tpgroberts.bsky.social•21 hours ago

The Tories' problem is that they understand that, from their perspective anyway, Thatcherism worked, what, how, and why it worked are almost secondary to it working.

joeans.bsky.social•20 hours ago

A point steadfastly ignored by the same sort of person that will insist Labour shouldn't govern because Brown 'sold the gold', no less.

andyinafield.bsky.social•22 hours ago

Fish can't see water.

paulframe85.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Funnily enough, events often saved her worst decisions (the 1981 defence review) from coming into full effect.

jameselder.bsky.social•21 hours ago

A few years ago I read ‘The Blunders of our Governments’ by Anthony King and Ivor Crewe. It’s seemingly very well regarded but I wasn’t overly impressed - not least because they gave Right To Buy as an example of a wholly successful policy!

fornbirkibeinn.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It's a very good window into the worldview of permanent secretaries, with all the comfortable assumptions that implies.

mariosrichards.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Does get hard to parse people who *make all.some/ substantive criticisms* of Thatcher's decisions but simply label them things that *Major/subsequent figures* did instead of Thatcher.

mariosrichards.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It makes my head hurt - and I think in practice the problem with "post-liberals" is that they complain but don't actually advocate for substantial shifts (bring back unions, end right to buy, return to powerful regional insitutions).

simonwells.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Also worth highlighting the role of US politics in influence over the Tories of the time. In the 80s, there was clear harmonisation between Reaganism and Thatcherism. MAGA politics for various reasons (esp dislike of Trump, lack of a Christian voter base) often looks plain weird in the UK.

adrianmcmenamin.bsky.social•21 hours ago

I’m not sure I buy this. No Tories wanted conciliation with unions. The left/right split was over monetarism/monetary targeting. Left were correct and monetarism had to be abandoned but success on all other fronts (don’t forget Falklands) meant Thatcher triumphant.

adrianmcmenamin.bsky.social•21 hours ago

I suppose the other split was arguably on privatisation and yes the right won that and privatisation seen as great Tory success and so cautious left defeated. But I still think they ‘won’ the key intellectual battle but were destroyed in the political one.

adrianmcmenamin.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Generally forgotten what a fiasco monetarism was and how catastrophic $2.40 exchange rate it delivered was for U.K. goods manufacturing and exports. Certainly living with consequences still.

caroline-too.bsky.social•18 hours ago

Not sure 🤔 I’ve never been a Tory, but the sensible Tories I’ve met have tended to centre themselves around economic pragmatism. Now the Right appears to focus on some reimagined story of morally damaged greatness that could be recreated… 🤪

redandriveting.bsky.social•14 hours ago

There are similarities between that fallout and the internal debates over Brexit, where the Eurosceptics were vindicated by Brexit winning majority support among voters and significantly boosting Tory support in 2017 & 2019.

redandriveting.bsky.social•14 hours ago

Of course that resulted in an unstable governing coalition that dramatically fell apart. But no Tory wets are brave enough to say "it was better when we only won support of the richest 35-40% of society and governed like a traditional centre-right party"

youngvulgarian.marieleconte.com•22 hours ago

ty! and would def read a longer view on this - my grasp of pre-"getting into opposition in 97" Tories is maybe not the best (need to watch Tory! Tory! Tory! again), but would be interesting to try and pinpoint when that shift actually began

athanklesstask.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It's interesting to view this in context of "Big Society" Cameron, where 90% of the traditional RW of the party momentarily went very quiet as they had migrated from simple MP or mere minister to party strategists.

Your IDS, Howard & carried on as usual while front of house Cameron sold "New Tory".

athanklesstask.bsky.social•21 hours ago

But the backbenchers selected all conformed to that late 90's / early 2000's horrorshow who themselves had been motivated by Thatcherism as an ideology over traditional Conservative belief.

TradCons slowly moved to The Lords or fringes unable to influence policy of intransigent Nu-Thatcherites.

athanklesstask.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Your Bullingdon club, Eton boys, cut their teeth as journalists / commentators / lobbyists temporarily to keep the asylum / immigrant narrative afloat at papers whose owners had embraced Thatcher - then were granted safe seats & spots at the high table because of their existing connections.

athanklesstask.bsky.social•21 hours ago

In effect the "centre right" of Tories has had decades of reinforcing self selection while their historic centre left old conservatives moved to The Lords. This was exacerbated by post Brexit & 2019 where the entire party were selected by ideological devotion to a single objective.

athanklesstask.bsky.social•21 hours ago

I think you'd be hard pushed to look at the 140 or so Tory's today and find any of them that would identify with Cameron, or even Thatcher, but could instead look at what IDS / Hague & Howard were barking about after 97 & feel a lot more similarities in play with them & UKIP / English Democrats etc.

areamancm.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Very good read on the “wets” perspective is Dancing With Dogma by Ian Gilmour

fornbirkibeinn.bsky.social•21 hours ago

From the outside, it feels like a third strand is that the Tory party is not a membership-led organisation - party democracy is a minor add-on, not central to the machinery in the way it is for Labour.*

So you don't have a tradition of all sides campaigning internally, and back when the change

fornbirkibeinn.bsky.social•21 hours ago

happened the people campaigning were the party right, because they wanted to change the party's modus operandi. The wets didn't and they don't have an intellectual model for how to become campaigners.

fornbirkibeinn.bsky.social•21 hours ago

*Labour is an absurdly flawed democracy, but all the process shithousery happens precisely because democratic decision-making is culturally important for Labour - it wouldn't happen if those with power could just dictate outcomes without a figleaf of process.

simonl6.bsky.social•21 hours ago

But some of it is about being *nasty*. A badge of honour on the left and the right but an insult in the centre. The 50s, 60s and 70s Tory centre was Anglican - their children were not.

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Hmm, I would just dispute that self-described centrists are not nasty, and while some of those people are just radicalised and in denial, I can't 'no true Scotsman' all of them.

simonl6.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Sure, but they never wear a badge in the Tory Party (e.g. Pickles soft tones, Clarke suede shoes). Keith Joseph broke with centre Tories because of his schooling (according to Stuart Hampshire at prep school). Powell, the same.

merap.bsky.social•20 hours ago

People who are ideologically where the Tory left used to be simply have no reason to be in todays Conservative Party because todays Labour exists

stephenkb.bsky.social•20 hours ago

No, this is a silly comment. If you are ideologically on where the Tory left used to be you don't think that hiking a minimum wage that is already among the highest in the OECD is a good idea, that nationalising the railways and further reducing competition on them is positive, etc etc.

stephenkb.bsky.social•20 hours ago

The current Labour government is a traditionally Labour one of the old Labour right, it is authoritarian, fiscally orthodox, it shares many of the same blind spots and problems as the first Wilson government and will probably end the same way. Thus far it has played out a lot like it.

cameronhodgkinson.bsky.social•17 hours ago

There is another dimension to the modern Tory left which is class. A lot of the reason why the Tory Wets never left and joined the social democrats in early 80s was because the tories were the upper class party. I am not so sure that barrier exists any more

theangelofhistory.bsky.social•16 hours ago

That’s fair. Rory Stewart has said he’s a conservative but he’s not right wing.

rich-bryant.uk•20 hours ago

didn't the first Wilson government form EFTA and benefit from a 60's boom?

The second one, not so much

davidnewble.bsky.social•20 hours ago

It *also* passed the 1968 amendment to the British Nationality Act as it was running scared from Powell - plus ca change...

nathanwylabour.bsky.social•20 hours ago

Sadly I agree with you about the government's shortcomings. So it's a shame that what was once the party's 'modernising' wing is so hopelessly lost - ideologically and intellectually - at the moment.

cjayanetti.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Certainly there's been no substantial recovery of a Thatcher-sceptic wing of the parliamentary party. But given that so much of the party's recent plunge into radicalism is around social issues and/or Brexit, how much of an alignment was/is there between economic 'wets' and social liberalism?

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It's not about the alignment, it's about the overall ecosystem and its incentives. The shift from 'I disagree with you on policy x' to 'I am defeated and must speak in code' rules everything.

mrdavidwhitley.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It's possibly instructive that I just tried to think of the current MP with the biggest One Nation Tory vibes and instinctively leapt towards 'Sir Ed Davey'.

mrbrownetc.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Trouble with "who are the Thatcher critics? " is her torch is a. everything and b. carried ever rightwards. In theory therefore, b. should make it easier, but then a. kicks in.

theangelofhistory.bsky.social•21 hours ago

I agree with you but I think it’s an open question not answered in yours & LeConte’s threads as to why, in terms of where the Tory right chose to dig their new trenches, they chose identitarianism/right wing nationalism/Powellism.

theangelofhistory.bsky.social•21 hours ago

(As in have a go at answering why the right chose this direction)

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Short answer: I think it's basically the same reason that countries and institutions go down this direction whenever they have a catastrophic failure, it's always easy to blame the other. (I will do a long answer in my long, self-regarding thread)

path-dependent.bsky.social•19 hours ago

It was interesting that much of Johnson's rhetoric on the economy was 'big' government - his levelling up language sounded almost post war Keynesian.

Rhetoric is the important word there though, and I don't think the party took it any more seriously than anyone else.

cjayanetti.bsky.social•21 hours ago

so, Peter Tapsell (perhaps too maverick to be representative) was an economic wet but socially more conservative and fiercely anti-EU. or to take a more recent example from outside parliament, David Skelton is critical of neoliberalism, tends towards the right-wing in culture wars, and Eurosceptic

goonern5.bsky.social•17 hours ago

At first I misread your post as being about the Arsenal’s demise and dreadful result yesterday.

amhoward.bsky.social•21 hours ago

It also explains where the Republicans are right now.

rafferty-bs.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Isn't the combination of primaries and gerrymandering of House seats the main issue with Republicans?

It's leaves many seats in which centrists Republicans can be removed by more extreme candidates. Then the extremists still get elected.

stephenkb.bsky.social•21 hours ago

Yeah, I think actually the two issues just aren't really comparable. The problem for moderate Republicans is that the battleground, which they've created, is slanted against them structurally. Whereas 'not being an ethnonationalist and being pro-Ukraine' are not hard arguments to make!

owenwmichael.bsky.social•20 hours ago

The other specific big issue for the moderate Republicans is I think the abolition of pork - before then, the line could be "yes, I'm prepared to work with Democrats, that's how I get stuff for the state/district". Now, what exactly is the point of electing one?

owenwmichael.bsky.social•20 hours ago

Again, no counterpart to any of that in the UK.

amhoward.bsky.social•20 hours ago

It was this I was thinking about - the continual dragging away from the centre.
https://bsky.app/profile/youngvulgarian.marieleconte.com/post/3litkpqesys2c

amhoward.bsky.social•20 hours ago

But I also think Rafferty’s point is relevant: the nature of the voting Tory membership is just as much of an issue - they’ve picked Truss and Badenoch - this is just as much of a structural barrier right now.

stephenkb.bsky.social•14 hours ago

They picked Badenoch over *Robert Jenrick* and every bit of evidence is they would have picked James Cleverly, Ben Wallace, Penny Mordaunt, etc. etc.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply