We now live, despite appearances, in an age of consensus. We should perhaps call it Starnakism, a much more profound consensus than Blatcherism (the portmanteau of Blair and Thatcher) or the postwar Butskellism (Rab Butler and Hugh Gaitskell). Its most telling feature is that the Labour party’s fundamental criticism of the Tories is their lack of competence, rather than their policies.
Yet the idea that Labour remains a progressive social democratic party hiding in plain sight is still in the air. While it is granted this is not obvious from its programme, it is held that deep down it is the party of change, of welfare, of state intervention; the party of labour rather than of capital, the party of international law, not war. It is held that in power, either circumstances or opportunity will make it more radical. That hope animates many.
