LETTER: Scargill and the tide of history
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Scargill and the tide of historySir: Gone are the days when Arthur Scargill could incite anything more than mild amusement from a Labour audience. His article (2 May) symbolised a career built on historical revisionism and an ostrich-style approach to policy. He argues that new Labour's changes to its constitution and policies have meant an abandonment of socialist values and working-class needs.
The Fabian Society helped draft the old Clause IV, in 1917, not as a timeless definition of socialist values but as a reflection of the political debate of the day. No matter how well written, it can hardly come as a surprise that by 1995 it was badly in need of reform.
But abandoning the needs of working people is a far more serious charge. Yet it is a charge which Arthur would have made of Labour in 1966, 1976 and 1986. So it should come as no surprise that he makes it today, in 1996.
The reality is that on the economy, on employment, on health and on so many other things Labour's policies will radically improve the lot of working people. It is a shame, but no revelation, that Arthur cannot welcome that.
Ian Corfield
Director of Research,
The Fabian Society
London SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments