Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why did Blair bother modernising Labour? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'm reading Tony Blair's autobiography, "A Journey" and the main reason he gives for essentially reinventing the Labour party is that it was out of touch with the modern world and thus wouldn't ever get into power. That obviously makes sense, but why would he actually bother? As in, why not just join another party rather than completely transform one? He departed so far from the 'roots' of Labour that there was no point in Labour winning the election; he might as well have formed an entirely new party.
    I'm really tired and probably haven't made what I'm asking clear, but yeah.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    By doing that, he gets a good chunk support of traditional Labour supporters (who else would they vote for otherwise?), at least initially, while also attracting new voters.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Because the Conservatives were quite unpopular so he was essentially making the alternative more popular. He wasn't going to be PM as a Tory any time soon.

    And because making a new party would have taken a very long time to get a fan base. The Lib Dems hadn't managed it by this year's general election.

    This way he got power and money
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, but I'm asking why he would want power for Labour in the first place if it meant changing the party to that extent - seems kind of pointless. I dunno, maybe he didn't really depart from the core values of Labour and socialism etc?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Sure he wanted power for Labour? Or just power?

    Am I being cynical?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The policies of a party would inevitably change over time. Keeping them the same would not only be stubborn but would also lose you votes because of outdated policies. It is similar to what the centre right did with Neoliberalism.

    That said, while Third Way is a departure in some aspects, it is still not that far away from social democracy and while it is more centre than traditional social democratic centre-left, it is still centre-left.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Name another party who was in that position, which he had been a long standing member of and who had the potental for progressive change. I really think people overestimate how far he moved from Labours roots-he moved from the madness of 1983 and the far left but Labour was never rooted in those ideas. Labours history is based in evoloutionary change, social democracy, fabian socialism, social liberalism and so forth-not in far left socalism. When one looks at Labour's key leaders-Wilson, Gaitskill, Callaghan, Healey, Attlee and so forth they where all from the right of the party and essentally moderates who didn't push truely radical policies.

    Essentally Blair was just continuing this tradition-he pushed some highly progressive mesures (Minimum Wage, Sure Start, investment in services etc.) and governed in a broadly centre-left manner. Old style Labour socalism was never really the socalism of the Labour party-it was the socalism of a faction and people shouldn't overestimate its strength. After all other moderates such as Smith and Kinnock came before Balir and in many ways he was continuing there work...
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    To make them electable
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Like WharfedaleTiger said, Blair was not the sole moderniser of the Labour Party. Most synonymous with it perhaps, but his predecessors set him on the path and he just likes to take the credit. As for why he didn't start up his own party; would you? You can either take the biggest opposition party in the country into an election or try and start up your own, hmmm, I wonder what to choose...
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Why did you buy his autobiography? He gets even more money if you do that...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WharfedaleTiger)
    Name another party who was in that position, which he had been a long standing member of and who had the potental for progressive change. I really think people overestimate how far he moved from Labours roots-he moved from the madness of 1983 and the far left but Labour was never rooted in those ideas. Labours history is based in evoloutionary change, social democracy, fabian socialism, social liberalism and so forth-not in far left socalism. When one looks at Labour's key leaders-Wilson, Gaitskill, Callaghan, Healey, Attlee and so forth they where all from the right of the party and essentally moderates who didn't push truely radical policies.

    Essentally Blair was just continuing this tradition-he pushed some highly progressive mesures (Minimum Wage, Sure Start, investment in services etc.) and governed in a broadly centre-left manner. Old style Labour socalism was never really the socalism of the Labour party-it was the socalism of a faction and people shouldn't overestimate its strength. After all other moderates such as Smith and Kinnock came before Balir and in many ways he was continuing there work...
    I didn't look at it like that but you're probably right. Thanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I suppose that the electorate had moved towards the centre. The reduction in the strength of the working class vote meant that Blair followed. As has been said, he couldn't have defeated the tories with a newly formed party.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chloeee!)
    I didn't look at it like that but you're probably right. Thanks
    No probs-in politics the perception of things is generally more extreame than they really are...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Because he wanted to be in Government?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    We can certainly say without a shadow of doubt that it would have been better for us all if he had never taken his journey.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.