One of our main political parties is at an immense disadvantage. Labour is tied to a form of idealism. Socialism is a strong form of idealism. It can only gain and hold power by diluting this idealism, mixing it with realism. This is psychologically difficult, existentially unstable. When it finds a way of gaining power, it is not calmly at ease with itself, but divided. And this intensifies after a period of power: purists seek revenge on those behind the ‘successful’ compromise. Blair’s Iraq war adventure is incidental to why he is so hated by the left. He is really hated for winning all those elections.
How has such a party survived thus far? How can the moderates bear to rub shoulders with the purists who so hate them? How, in the past, did idealism and realism manage to coexist? Only just is the short answer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/33b44/33b44f1966e79a8bbc533866eeb159e672891b43" alt=""
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in