What is progressive politics?

Clearly the name implies a sense of progress in human affairs and in particular in political matters. What would we expect such progress to look like? I think it is not unreasonable to judge the state of a society by the life chances of its members – the prospect  they have of living their choice of life (within reason of course , excluding criminality etc. and the sort of lifestyle of that can only ever be available to few). Progress would be an increase in the number of people who have that prospect. The aim of progressive politics would be that everyone has a chance, probably several chances, to live a decent life according to their own lights.

That seems a fair start but it might be seen as rather utilitarian – the greatest happiness of the greatest number. It differs of course in aiming rather for a reasonable degree of happiness for all but it might be objected that some aspects of a good society cannot really be expressed simply in terms of the individual satisfaction of its members. For example the concern that a society shows for other societies and the level of public honesty. Many would also argue that a good society must show care for the planet on which we live and the other life forms we share it with. Some would argue for this on grounds of moral principle as the Pope has done recently. Others would base it on the practical grounds that there is no future for the human race without a healthy planet to call home. All these are valid points. In my view all morality has to be based above all on the principle of honesty – the recognition that the truth is not always what we want to believe and that it is our job in most situations to try to find that truth. Relatively honest and free public discussion is a privilege of British society which we take for granted and do too little to preserve and enhance.

I think I can deal with these objections by saying that while I believe strongly that individuals will want to define for themselves the life chances they want, we are only justified in expecting society to assist with and indeed tolerate some and also that society can insist on others such as public honesty, respect for others and respect for our planet. Most people would not I think object to this in principle though when it comes to applying it in practice and for example making decisions about the use of fossil fuels or the amount to be spent on foreign aid disputes can be expected.

Progressive politics therefore should aim to give everyone in society the chance of a decent life on their own terms (subject to the restrictions above). This has to include a basic idea of equality – which everyone is entitled to these chances and that differences of gender, sexual orientation, nationality etc. exclude no one.

This may seem rather banal but if taken seriously it is not. For example in the recent Budget the amount of financial support available to the third and later children in families on low wages was cut quite dramatically. Likewise no attention was paid to the needs of those people of working age who cannot work for any reason. In all the arguments about the changes to tax credits their needs have quite simply been ignored.

Current political rhetoric in Britain focuses on the needs of “hard working families” (whether the actions of government help them or not is another matter). Nothing is said about those who cannot work or who want to come here to work but are not allowed in. The first two children of “hard working families “are to be helped but not the third and fourth.

Although the political right would be perfectly happy to claim that their political philosophy fully accords with this progressive principle, in practice their politics operates in general by meeting the needs of the most privileged first and in practice by identifying some groups whose support they want and ignoring that of others. For example the Conservatives policy of selling Housing Association properties at a discount benefits those who live in such houses at the expense of those seeking rented accommodation. Taken seriously the principle of the equal inclusion of all takes one in my view to the left of politics.

This leads me to a second key idea of progressive politics – the full and enthusiastic acceptance of democracy, including the inevitable defeats and setbacks. There is a tradition among some on the left of seeing democratic politics as essentially a con trick by the ruling class. The concept of the class struggle does not sit well with elections and parliaments. There is sometimes a greater enthusiasm for direct action such as strikes. Progressive politics has to remain firmly in the democratic tradition. In a society like Britain that inevitably means persuading those who are a little better off to care about and be willing to help those who are in a less fortunate position. This makes a stark contrast with the right who tend to try to scare people that their hard won “privileges” are at risk – witness the Conservative rhetoric of scroungers and strivers.

The progressive path is sometimes a relatively smooth one – think of the progress of the sixties. But it can be much more difficult in harder times like now. Some will fear those not in their immediate grouping and will seek to exclude rather than include –this might take the form of nationalism or a reactionary desire to return to some imagined past heaven (a strong force on the American right). Others will weary of the struggle to persuade and look for more radical, quicker solutions – nationalism again, the industrial struggle, some form of direct action. There can be little doubt that progressive politics finds troubled times when people lose patience and confidence the most difficult and yet that is when they are needed most. That was the situation that faced Ed Milliband and , even while recognising that mistakes contributed to his defeat , he is due acknowledgement of the magnitude of the task he undertook.