The Gorton and Denton By-election has rightly prompted much soul searching for the Labour Party. One particular piece of analysis arising from the catastrophic defeat is that “Blue Labour”, the party’s socially conservative tradition, should be repudiated. A return to “True Labour, not Blue Labour” goes the cry. But what is “True Labour” and how does an ever narrowing interpretation of it help our movement fulfil its historic purpose – to act as a vehicle for working people to govern our great country?
For some, the history of the Labour Party is viewed through a prism of relentless, linear progressivism. In this narrative, the movement has always been a vanguard for social revolution, making the emergence of “Blue Labour” feel like a grit-toothed betrayal – a foreign body injected into a purely progressive bloodstream.
I do not write this piece to trash the social progress that was made under the last Labour government. We should celebrate and continue to defend The Equality Act, equal pay, greater diversity and acceptance in our institutions, including within our politics. We must defend these things particularly as it comes under attack from the populist right, and we should say clearly that the mainstream of this country has no desire to go back to the bad old days where racism, homophobia, misogyny and other social evils were more prevalent.
However, to suggest that a focus on the traditional values is “alien” to Labour values isn’t just a political critique; it is a profound rewriting of history. If you peel back the layers of the movement, you find a plurality of traditions holding our historic coalition together, of which Methodism, trade union protectionism, and a deep-seated desire for social stability are a key part.
MDU warns Chancellor clinical negligence system ‘not fit for purpose’
Northern Ireland RE curriculum is ‘indoctrination’ – Supreme Court
The oft-quoted phrase that the Labour Party owes “more to Methodism than Marx” is more than a catchy aphorism. The early pioneers of the movement were often socially conservative figures who viewed the excesses of raw capitalism not just as an economic failure, but as a moral one.
Their primary concern was the protection of the “moral economy.” This included:
- The sanctity of the home: Early unions fought for a “family wage” specifically so that the domestic sphere could be protected from the industrial machine.
- Communal discipline: The movement was rooted in self-improvement, temperance, and a strict ethical code.
- Localism: The focus was on the parish and the branch, not a borderless global utopia.
It is one of the great successes of neoliberalism that we have been convinced that “radical” and “conservative” are polar opposites. We are told we must choose between a left which is socially liberal and or a right wing which is socially conservative. Both of which have accepted the dominance of free market orthodoxy.
However, for the Labour movement, the most potent periods of change occurred when radical economic reform was fuelled by conservative social values. The two are not only compatible; they are often mutually dependent. To rebuild a broken economy, one needs the “social glue” that conservatism provides. A radical socialist program – nationalisation, wealth redistribution, the empowerment of unions – requires a high degree of social trust and solidarity.
The 1945 Attlee government – the gold standard of radical Labour achievement – was culturally traditional. They built the NHS and the welfare state not to dismantle the British way of life, but to fortify it. They were radical in their means because they were conservative in their ends: the health, dignity, and stability of British families.
Modern progressives often view “radicalism” as synonymous with “disruption.” But for a worker, radicalism is the tool used to achieve stability. You nationalise the railways or protect the NHS not to cause a revolution, but to ensure that the foundational things in life remain predictable and secure. In these times of global insecurity, the security of those things we most hold dear as a country and in our communities is a potent political message.
By dismissing the socially conservative streak of the movement as an aberration, we risk alienating the very heartlands we should aspire to represent. When the “Red Wall” crumbled, it wasn’t necessarily because the voters moved; it was because gradually, over decades, the party’s centre of gravity shifted toward a metropolitan liberalism that felt increasingly judgmental of parts of the tradition that founded it.
It’s not just potential Reform voters who could find some appeal in a Labour party talking which places fairness, security and tradition at the core of it’s message. Despite the vehement disrespect for working class communities shown by Zack Polanski when talking about social care workers, we should note that in Gorton and Denton Hannah Spencer secured the support of a coalition of voters who would once have cast their vote for Labour, by focusing on the bread and butter things that most people, regardless of their background, care about. Am I going to be able to afford to put food on the table or heat my home? Can I afford to go on a holiday this year? Is my community divided?
Blue Labour isn’t a Tory-lite infiltration. It is a reminder that work is a vocation, not just a contract, that relationships matter more than abstract rights and that patriotism is a valid expression of solidarity, not always a precursor to prejudice.
To purge the “Blue” from Labour is to lobotomise the party’s own memory. We must stop treating social conservatism as a stain to be scrubbed out and start seeing it for what it is: a foundation stone of the British working-class experience. If Labour wants to win again, it cannot retreat into a comfort zone of any one part of its coalition. It must not lean into the fragmentation of our politics but instead reach back out towards the things that unite us – a radical desire for security, community and a good life that resonates with our historic base.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
Discussion about this post