SHADOW AND SUBSTANCE
MR. WILSON and the Labour Party have now mingled their blood. Although the rites lacked picturesque symbolism, a sufficient representation of political atavism was enacted to estab- lish a durable bond. Naturally the cere- mony was a success—the favourableomens were enough - to ensure an impressive demonstration of unity—and the big magic of scientific progress was there to divert attention from part of the traditional attitudes of the Labour Party disappearing into the gullet of a technocratic Moloch.
In effect, the attitude of both main politi- cal parties towards technocratic advance is one of competition to be in on one of the more powerful modern myths. If the Conservative Party points to the fruits of affluence with legitimate pride, the Labour Party must go one better. Where Mr. Mac- millan provided washing machines, Mr. Wilson will offer washing machines with a purpose—and, if necessary, two washing machines with a purpose. This competition in betterment of the means of life in this country can only be welcomed. To offer people more of what they want is always better than to offer them more of what they do not want—nationalisation, for example.
The fact is that any British government will go as fast as it can in developing science in this country. Mr. Wilson's white heat of revolution would certainly become lukewarm with office, and essentially he was saying, more flashily and with overtones of implication, no more than Lord Hailsham had said already. It would be unfair to judge the Labour Party's intentions for scientific education by Mr. Crossman's speech at Scarborough or even by his sub- sequent explanation in The Times of what he actually meant. But it is hard to see that all this boils down to anything more than 'Me too'—or that it has anything par- ticular to do with the humanitarian socialism from which the Labour Party has usually drawn sustenance.
The image presented at Scarborough of a Britain pulsing with dynamic energies where technologists and scientists will be valued at their proper financial worth is hardly that of a more just or a more humane society. It is a society of techno- cratic privilege, high salaries and early coronary thrombosis, of men with Sir Charles Snow's future lurking in their bones, like strontium-90. Obviously it is unfair to examine too narrowly the philo- sophical implications of party political programmes, but Mr. Wilson's energetic tones at Scarborough answered almost every question except what all this energy was in aid of. It was the ad-man's image of an efficient Britain that was stamped upon the conference, unexpectedly reviving the language of laissez-faire and the iron laws that regard an expanding economy as self-sufficient and self-explanatory.
That is the image. The reality would have to be a little different. It seems to be not so much Britain's technological backward- ness as its involvement in the sterling area that has made expansion difficult. It would be interesting to see Mr. Wilson deal with that. Welfare, too, seems to be up against difficulties of personnel and methods rather than lack of money. Could a Labour Minister reform the building in- dustry more quickly than Sir Keith Joseph? Perhaps; but the proposition is not proved by any public flexing of muscles. Could a Labour Foreign Secretary protect the Afri- can protectorates if Dr. Verwoerd decided to take them over? Dynamism would hardly help here. Nor is it by creating a Minister for Disarmament that decisions which have to be taken by America and Russia will be altered. The job seems a sort of lay equi- valent of organising a day of public prayer.
In every sphere of activity a Labour ad- ministration would come up against the fact which Mr. Macmillan and his Minis- ters know already. and which surely would have been the main substance of the Prime Minister's speech on Saturday : that there is no panacea for this country's problems. Parties in opposition. of course, are accus- tomed to imagine that they are coming up with a brand-new remedy which has escaped the notice of the morons on the Government front bench. Panaceas are, therefore, understandable and even permis- sible at party conferences, but that should not lead us to take them for more than they are, or to mistake the war-cry before the charge for the operational orders which will actually be executed. But it is, per- haps, something which even political opponents of- the Labour Party may be allowed to regret, that this year's slogan should represent the movement's abandon- ment of concern for the quality of life and its .direction in favour of one of the more vulgar myths of our time.
Previous page
