How the 2011 Univeritsty Tuition Fees protest might relate to the 1984 miner’s strike.
There are as many histories as stars in the sky… is the sort of thing someone might say.
So when i stoop to give a paragraph on one of the most important political moments for the UK in the later 20th century, and perhaps the UKs most formative industrial dispute, i’m always going be hitting it from one of many possible angles, and never giving anywhere near the whole story.
From reading biographies and articles by the major players on the left and right of British politics of the early 80s, one things pretty certian. The miners strike was planned in advance, and not by the miners.
Thatcherism, for all its evils, always needs to be seen in the context of 1976-1979. but anyway anyway, from one angle i said, so i’ll try not to get distracted.
Elected in 1979 and again in 1983, the Tories had a clear mandate to crack down on the power of the unions, with Labour only getting 27% of the vote, there was going to be blood on the carpet, it was a dangerous time for government and it was a dangerous time for the Labour party. The latter of course fluffed it completely, and Neil Kinnock the leader at the time describes his decision to not openly condem the miners strike as his biggest political mistake. Quite a statement from someone who made a lot of political mistakes.
Thatcher thought she needed to win a battle, she needed to break the unions and scare them, its clear the Alan Clark diaries, Martin Westlake’s bio of Kinnock and indeed her own autobiography they were looking around for a stooge, a ‘good enemy’. Looking for a union leader so naive, idealogical, arrogant and completely out of touch with the bulk of the country that he could be provoked in to strike action. Up pops Arthur Scargill.
She implied that she intended to close a few pits, and subtly let it be known that she feared the miners could bring the country to a standstill if they went on strike. A pretence she kept up for a year, even though she had a secret stockpile of coal which would have seen the country through two more years. Harsh stuff, given what the miners families went through. Good working people, family men just wanting to keep their livelihood, communities torn apart and lives ruined. The goverment refused to compromise, not even to allow the men to save any degree to dignity, the aim from the start was the break them and to be seen to, and to be seen to have been strong and in control. Scargill took the bait, called a national strike without a ballot, the Labour party was split and it essentially ended the left wing as a political force in Britain until 1997. Even then, the parliament elected in 1997 wouldn’t have dreamed of undoing the union and labour relation laws passed in the mid 80s.
ANYHOO !!!
There were union disputes after that, when then unions could have and should have won, as they had a far better case and more support, but Scargill had poisoned the union brand, with Thatcher handing him the vile of liquid.
So is something similar happening today with the Tuition Fees riots? Have the Tories rushed this announcement out first to take the sting out of the inevitable anti-cuts feeling the country? The intellectual argument for tuition fees is, at least reasonable and can certainly be framed as fair in any sober analysis of the arguments. Along the lines of ‘Mrs Smith who works in Tescos and Mr Patel who worked his way up to factory manager from labourer should pay a bit less tax than little Joe Bloggs who walked in to a 25k job straight from his phycology degree’. There are good arguments either way but the fact remains that all three main parties are largely in agreement. So, the student protesters WILL lose. Then who’s going to bother protesting and fighting when the REALLY unfair cuts come?
Classic politics, 1984 style. It’s a shame the students and far left don’t see it.