Despised: Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class
- Downloads：2886
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-08 11:51:11
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Paul Embery
- ISBN：1509539999
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The typical contemporary Labour MP is almost certain to be a university-educated Europhile who is more comfortable in the leafy enclaves of north London than the party's historic heartlands。 As a result， Labour has become radically out of step with the culture and values of working-class Britain。 Drawing on his background as a firefighter and trade unionist from Dagenham， Paul Embery argues that this disconnect has been inevitable since the Left political establishment swallowed a poisonous brew of economic and social liberalism。 They have come to despise traditional working-class values of patriotism， family and faith and instead embraced globalisation， rapid demographic change and a toxic， divisive brand of identity politics。 Embery contends that the Left can only revive if it speaks once again to the priorities of working-class people by combining socialist economics with the cultural politics of belonging， place and community。
No one who wants to really understand why our politics has become so dysfunctional and what the Left can do to fix it can afford to miss this authentic， insightful and passionate book。
No one who wants to really understand why our politics has become so dysfunctional and what the Left can do to fix it can afford to miss this authentic， insightful and passionate book。
Reviews
F。
，
A perspective that should not be ignored。 Food for thought。
Louise Whomack
，
An excellent critique of the modern left and Labour Party。
Terry O'donnell
，
Brilliant - very clear and well argued
Jo Kneale
，
Labour need to read this book。 And soon。
Jo Herlihy
，
On a descriptive level， Embery seems to capture aspects of the marginalisation of a large section of society that was once firmly labour。 He links the dramatic losses from the Labour to Tory in 2019 and draws on his own upbringing on an estate in Essex to illustrate what he believes to be the key factors that account for this heavy defeat。 My first observation is that Embery at least attempts to take account of these losses by confronting a number of thorny issues such as immigration and nationa On a descriptive level， Embery seems to capture aspects of the marginalisation of a large section of society that was once firmly labour。 He links the dramatic losses from the Labour to Tory in 2019 and draws on his own upbringing on an estate in Essex to illustrate what he believes to be the key factors that account for this heavy defeat。 My first observation is that Embery at least attempts to take account of these losses by confronting a number of thorny issues such as immigration and nationalism alternative influences on society。 There are other areas he identifies but I think they could do with being reposed or need further examination。 Here are the four that seem most important:Woke and its origins in the Counter culture - Embery gives the 1960s radical left too much credit。 More focus needed on the failure of the liberal establishment to provide any positive account of the various gains made and their own defensiveness and inability to respond in any effective way to the radical challenges made to their institutions and traditions。 This would help explain how ideas that became narrowly focused on the self， identity， sexual behaviours have become so dominant。 Without this balance it is hard to explain why these ideas have become so influential- The social conservatism of the working class。 There may well have some truth to it - and， from personal experience， is why young people took the opportunity to move away from their working class estates。 However， the social conservatism seems somewhat overstated as I am not convinced that is how people experienced values around nationalism， tradition， custom， familiarity or how deeply held these were by communities。 It may be that the narrative provided by Embery is， itself， a construction under the influence of identity politics。 In fact， it struck me during reading this how quickly identities form - think of the stable community Embery describes which developed in the space of just 50 years from the migration out of London in the 1920s。。。then the movement again from the 1970s of families to new homes further afield in Essex。 I am acutely aware of the changes communities have undergone， and some of the cynical reasons behind policy encouraging immigration was deeply problematic。 However， despite my reservations， it is important that this issue is openly discussed and debated - Embery is correct to say that by politicians avoiding difficult discussions， assuming racism where often this was frustration， has undoubtedly contributed to divisions in society。 The decline in wages and pressure on services - The period of mass immigration from the EU countries is viewed as particularly problematic for the impact on the working class - compared to the earlier waves of immigration。 This raises many issues but the key issue here， if Embery is attempting do a radical stock-take， is that that neither Labour or Tory have been able to look in the face the problem of more deep-seated economic decline。 Productivity really began to fall from the 1970s and wages from the 1980s。 This suggests that one major problem is the lack of radical ambition for the economy and no amount of discussion about immigration or resetting a balance is going to address this。 The family and the nation - Embery locates the importance of the family and of the nation as key pillars that need to placed as central to any future success of the LP。 I would suggest a recasting of these two areas which are important for any new project （of any shade of party）。 The first， the family should instead be the renewed separation between our private and public lives and second， the emphasis on the nation is one necessary for the practical workings of democracy and accountability。 。。。more
Gabriel Kite
，
A must read for anyone who wishes to see a Labour government again。 Whether you agree with Embery’s politics or not， you can’t deny there is truth in what he says about the reasons behind the brexit vote and 2019 general election。
Don
，
Paul Embery’s account of the state of modern left wing politics rests on more myths than the Quest for the Golden Fleece。 It is difficult to list them in any order of priority since each one seems equally egregious as another。 But let us dive in anyway。The framework for his story is provided by the idea of a ‘gathering storm’ which apparently broke as recently as 23 June 2016， when the result of the referendum on UK membership of the EU became clear。 The Brexit vote had， we are told， been driven Paul Embery’s account of the state of modern left wing politics rests on more myths than the Quest for the Golden Fleece。 It is difficult to list them in any order of priority since each one seems equally egregious as another。 But let us dive in anyway。The framework for his story is provided by the idea of a ‘gathering storm’ which apparently broke as recently as 23 June 2016， when the result of the referendum on UK membership of the EU became clear。 The Brexit vote had， we are told， been driven by a working class preference for place and community and the cultural politics which cemented these together。 It expressed a deep opposition to the globalism of previous decades， which had placed the transactional values of the market in the place where the desire for human association should have been preeminent。This elides over the fact that the campaign for Brexit was led by the likes of Nigel Farage， Boris Johnson， Michael Gove and was bankrolled by a segment of financial and industrial capital who were every bit as committed to global markets as the pro-Remain ‘progressives’ being rallied by Cameron， Blair and their followers among the captains of industry。 A case for Lexit was touted by individuals who looked to the line promoted in the Morning Star or Socialist Worker， but that line of argument had no discernible traction in the England-outside-London and Wales which swung the vote to Leave。 It would be more accurate to say that， rather than seeing it as a rejection of globalisation， the vote or Brexit measured the hope that the plebian voters of Britain could make themselves bigger winners from neoliberalism than they had been able to be in as members of the EU。But Embery offers nothing in the way of evidence that his idealised working class was as committed to the values of community as he claims， beyond reminiscence about growing up and living in the east London neighbourhood of Dagenham。 He tells us that the culturally conservative values of the folk on the Becontree Estate were as firmly espoused on that fateful day in 2016 as they were when it was established as new homes for displaced East Enders by the London County Council in the 1920s。 Homes， high streets， churches， pubs， and jobs at the Ford Motor Company locked working class families together and provided them with the social identity that was expressed by consistent support for Labour across all those long years。 Until 2006 that is， when a large faction of them defected to support the neofascist British National Party。Apparently， it was as recent as the 2000s， when “Car production at the Ford plant was on its last legs， and what was once a stable， cohesive and enduring community was suddenly [my emphasis] by social instability and fragmentation。” In fact， the dislocation of community harmony had started long before that date。 The great experiment of pushed forward by the visionaries of the LCC should properly be seen as a victim of its own success， and the signs of fragmentation had become visible by the late 1960s and 1970s。 Embery represents these years as a fall from grace that had nothing to do with the Becontree Estate and similar working class communities， but instead was all about the emergence of a counter-culture of consumerist individualism driven forward by an ideology of personal liberation。 You would not know it from Despised’s account of the period， but it was during these years that powerful currents emerged from within the working class that were largely aligned with counter-culturalism， with youth and women being in the vanguard， which pushed back against the stifling horizons provided by community and place。 It did not need the outside influence of the progressive middle class to incite the generation born in the 1950s and after to reach for things other than the home， hight street， church， pub and local factory。 This was happening in Dagenham and in many other working class neighbourhoods， where apprenticeships were viewed less favourably than the chance to study for A-levels or business studies at a local FE college， topped off with a British Rail train ticket to somewhere where the lights were brighter and jobs more varied and plentiful。I worked in Fords in the mid-70s， when the plant had a workforce of around 35，000 people， of whom a diminishing number lived in Dagenham。 The PTA plant， where I put in 8 hour shifts bolting driver seats to the floor pan of Consuls and Marinas， had already by that time become workplaces for a majority immigrant workforce， with the latest arrivals of Asians from Kenya and Uganda were taking their places alongside an older generation of West Indians。 If the Becontree Estate could delude itself that the neighbourhood was ‘cohesive and enduring’ – i。e。 white – then this was because council tenancy rules didn’t favour the growing majority of Ford plant workers， whose recently-arrived immigrants status precluded access to council housing。So， no immigrants for the time being， but as the 1970s moved into the 1980s， and a real process of fragmentation was put underway which had working class households as its most fervent supporters。 The right to buy scheme led over the years to 48，500 homes in the borough of Barking and Dagenham being transferred from the council sector into private ownership。 Appreciation in the value of these assets went to finance the mobility of working class families， whose attachment to the area had declined as workplaces shifted from the Ford site down by the river to central London or Essex county jobs accessed by road or the District tube line。 Community connections weakened by property values hiked ever upwards， the next predictable step was to cash in on housing values by offering former council houses for sale or rent to the denizens of over-crowded inner London。 It took the immigrants a long time to move from being the stock labour force in what was still the borough’s largest private sector employer to people who actually lived there， but when it happened it seemed sufficient cause to register a silent protest by voting for a racist， neofascist party。The myths that Embery spins around the reasons for Brexit， the innocence of the working class in the counter-cultural movements of the 1960s， and developments within his own working class community are compounded by the disdain he obviously he obviously feels for those sections of the population who committed themselves to some version of antiracism across these years。 Partially exempted are the segments of youth swept up into enthusiasm for Rock Against Racism and the Anti Nazi League – he was indeed among their number。 But someone， or something let him down because the arguments he was furnished with to wage that fight seemed， to him， to be painfully inadequate。 Solidarity with the Oppressed across the planet？ Whoever is going to buy into that？ Only the middle classes， who in any event are ‘people from nowhere’ pitched against ‘people from somewhere’， it seems。In ploughing his chosen field in order to reap a crop of ‘culturally conservative’ folk prepared to chance their luck with an economically leftist political party Embery register the very emotional response which he condemns his opponents with – despising people who stand in a very different tradition of left wing politics。 I count myself among them。 Like many people of my generation， born and raised in declining northern English towns， the option of remaining in our ‘enduring’ communities didn’t seem all that attractive。 For some of us， as well the economic decline of our native cities， the notable events of the time included the war against American imperialism in Vietnam， the anti-apartheid struggle， the attempt by the British state to suppress the civil rights movement in Northern Ireland， solidarity with second-wave feminism and the burgeoning gay liberation movement， and revulsion against the speeches of Enoch Powell and his co-thinkers on the right wing of British politics。It was this experience of life across the final quarter of the 20th century which was the crucible of a politics that combined a class perspective with an internationalist commitment to solidarity， and made us deeply sceptical about the supposed virtues of community and national patriotism。 That legacy is being taken up and given new vitality by a millennial generation that has already taken new directions forward in campaigns against austerity， for migrant and refugee rights， and black lives matter。 It is likely to feel complete indifference to the charges made against it during the course of Embery’s tendentious mythologising。 。。。more
Alan
，
Though this book's title sounds like a Fox News rant， it's actually written by an old-school working-class left-wing Labour Party member and trade unionist who has lived through the transition from a left centred around the WC to a left centred around radical students and fringe "identity" issues。 As such， it should be read by all on the British left to understand where we went wrong and what we can do about it。As Embery convincingly argues， the WC largely embrace small-c conservative values （li Though this book's title sounds like a Fox News rant， it's actually written by an old-school working-class left-wing Labour Party member and trade unionist who has lived through the transition from a left centred around the WC to a left centred around radical students and fringe "identity" issues。 As such， it should be read by all on the British left to understand where we went wrong and what we can do about it。As Embery convincingly argues， the WC largely embrace small-c conservative values （like hard work， communitarianism， and patriotism） alongside socially liberal economic beliefs。 The WC's legitimate concerns around globalistion （like radically changing demographics， lack of national autonomy， and worsening job prospects） have largely fallen to death ears since the Labour Party embraced neoliberalism in the 1990s。 Those who did listen simply responded that the WC were fighting back against the inevitable。 Embery highlights former Prime Minister Gordon Brown's off-the-cuff dismissal of a WC Labour supporter's polite question about immigration as the ramblings of a "bigoted woman" as a prime example of the Labour Party elite's attitude。More recently， this new generation of leftists， united more by "identity" issues like minority rights than the plight of workers， has adopted an outright hostile attitude towards both the WC's concerns， the communities of which face the brunt globalisation while seeing very few of the benefits， as well as their traditional small-c conservative values。 To this new generation of leftists， giants of the Labour movement， like Clement Attlee and Tony Benn， would be seen as reactionary imperialists due to their strong sense of national pride。 Benn， in particular， would be an object of derision due to his fierce opposition to open-door immigration and the European Union。 Ironically， so too would be a younger Jeremy Corbyn， who's radical egalitarian policies as Labour leader that the WC overwhelmingly support， wasn't enough to keep the unfailing support of traditional Labour voters in the face of such hostility from the modern left。The result of this all is that the Labour Party were all but wiped out in the most recent General Election。 As Embery argues， Labour has no hope of making a comeback if they can't win back the support of the WC and the only way this might happen is if the largely middle-class student-centric membership compromise on some issues， which they're clearly unwilling to do。 。。。more
Akil Dowe
，
Excellent analysis of the quandary of the left and why 2019 was such a crushing defeat for them。
Derek James Baldwin
，
Uncomfortable reading， the author challenges some well established Left totems with gusto; his line of argument is very similar to that which George Orwell was advocating 80 and more years ago。 The strongest arguments are those which have attracted most criticism， as far as I can see， his disdain for political correctness at all costs， and the crude way in which communitarian ideals are scorned as intrinsically narrow minded （and worse）。 This part of his thesis shares surprising amounts of commo Uncomfortable reading， the author challenges some well established Left totems with gusto; his line of argument is very similar to that which George Orwell was advocating 80 and more years ago。 The strongest arguments are those which have attracted most criticism， as far as I can see， his disdain for political correctness at all costs， and the crude way in which communitarian ideals are scorned as intrinsically narrow minded （and worse）。 This part of his thesis shares surprising amounts of common ground with Owen Jones's "Chav"。 Jones is a complete twerp， of course。I do wish I shared the authors enthusiasm for trade unionism as a route back to activism but from what I can see the unions are firmly in the grip of the identity politics mob。 I speak from a position of many years' inside experience of Unite and UNISON， who are much more concerned with hoovering up member subs and stroking deals with finance companies than they are with real workplace politics。 The smaller unions are not yet beyond redemption， perhaps。The overriding concern about optics and inclusivity has intensified in the short time since the book was written， in the same way as Kier Starmer's weak capitulation to flag waving and keeping us safe has ceded ground to the authoritarian left。 A real shame。It's a shame too that Paul can't really write， arguments are often circular， and contradictory， and that the prose is bland and repetitive。 How many times can the word 'precept' be bandied about， for example？ Fewer grandiose claims backed up with zero evidence would make up for this。 Was the book proof read？ （Are any books， nowadays？）Despite grave misgivings， this is a worthwhile read and the author deserves respect for tackling some subjects dear to the chattering classes。 I like the way he stands his ground。 That I disagreed with so much of it says at least as much about my own preconceptions and conditioning as it might of any intrinsic flaws in Paul Embery's arguments。 He seems like a top bloke。 。。。more
Ren
，
Essential and prescriptive reading for any left winger who finds themselves continually baffled by IdPol and labour's acquiescence and developing adherence to it， or anybody who would like to see the Tories out。 Essential and prescriptive reading for any left winger who finds themselves continually baffled by IdPol and labour's acquiescence and developing adherence to it， or anybody who would like to see the Tories out。 。。。more
George Allen
，
Anyone on the left who was even remotely baffled by the 2019 election must read this book。
Sarah Lee
，
Despised: Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class by Paul Embery is not my usual reading matter but it seemed an interesting book and as someone who has always voted Labour I thought that it would be a good read。 Modern Labour has changed a lot from the Labour party that I grew up with， my mum was a trade union rep who later became a Labour councillor。 I often wonder what she would think of the Labour party now。 Embrey claims that a typical Labour MP is now more to be an university educate Despised: Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class by Paul Embery is not my usual reading matter but it seemed an interesting book and as someone who has always voted Labour I thought that it would be a good read。 Modern Labour has changed a lot from the Labour party that I grew up with， my mum was a trade union rep who later became a Labour councillor。 I often wonder what she would think of the Labour party now。 Embrey claims that a typical Labour MP is now more to be an university educated Europhile more comfortable in the cities and London， than in a typical working class town。 He claims that Labour has become completely out of set with grassroots communities and this is why the Brexit vote and the last general election came as such a shock to many within the Labour party。 He writes well， drawing on his experience as a firefighter and trade unionist and claims that the Labour party have become to despise the traditional working-class values of patriotism， family and faith and instead have embraced globalisation， rapid demographic change and a toxic， divisive brand of identity politics。He explores what he sees as the reasons why the Labour party have become so disconnected with its traditional voters and proposes ways in which they need to change to win them back。 Whilst I do not agree with all the views expressed by Embrey in this book， I do agree with some。 It is a well researched and written book， with some certainly thought provoking arguments。 。。。more
Scott
，
A brilliant read， and a must read for any Labour politician who wishes to actually be elected to government。 I had forgotten what the Labour Party was originally all about， until I read this book。 I think Sir Keir and his motley crew have as well。
James
，
A call to Labour to return to its roots and once again represent the working class people。I would recommend this book to members of the Labour Party concerned with winning elections。
Mal Shah
，
This book was recommended to me by a friend， and not because he thought it’d change my mind hugely。 In fact， the opposite – I think he thought I’d largely agree with it。 And for what it’s worth， some of the conclusions here are undeniable （e。g。， that the turn to New Labour constituted， as the name suggested， a break with traditional Labour practices， and it did so for the worse）。 But those arguments don’t make up the heart of the book。 Most of it is， I think insufficiently evidenced， logically i This book was recommended to me by a friend， and not because he thought it’d change my mind hugely。 In fact， the opposite – I think he thought I’d largely agree with it。 And for what it’s worth， some of the conclusions here are undeniable （e。g。， that the turn to New Labour constituted， as the name suggested， a break with traditional Labour practices， and it did so for the worse）。 But those arguments don’t make up the heart of the book。 Most of it is， I think insufficiently evidenced， logically incoherent， and sometimes patently disingenuous。 I recognise that these are bold claims， so will lay out the evidence for them below。 What I’d really like to do is a point-by-point refutation， but that isn’t something I have the time for – and， more importantly， it wouldn’t make for an interesting read。 But I will go into some specifics because I think only in the specifics is the debate actually worth having。 I will also make some remarks about the scholarship of the book （i。e。 the research conducted and the book’s academic integrity）， but there is plenty to go on even otherwise。Let me offer a quick summary of the book: Paul Embery is a Blue Labour （economically left-wing and socially conservative） advocate， and he takes similar attitudes to be representative， at least， in large part， of the working class in Britain。 The working class， is， according to him， mostly the lower income， non-graduate， post-industrial class （and he notes the break with the economically defined Marxist notion of the working class: anyone who has nothing to sell but their labour-power）。 He thinks the modern Left （a term I’ll come back to） has turned its back on the working class， going so far as to use the word ‘betrayed’， and for the following reasons: the ‘modern Left’ has embraced internationalism （or market globalisation – Embery only makes the distinction very late in the book）， derides any discussion of immigration as racist， ostracises those who adhere to ‘traditional values’ such as ‘family’， ‘work’， and the ‘social bonds’ that are forged in ‘national community’。 He lays some of the blame at 1960’s counterculture， which advocated free love， saw traditional ‘personal morality’ and religion as oppressive， and was largely critical of notions of borders and immigration control。 He then advocates a return to national values of the nation-state， restrictions on immigration， and a defence of ‘freedom of expression’， while the modern Left is currently embroiled in ‘groupthink’。 The reader will note my excessive scare-quoting。 That’s because Embery doesn’t offer anything by way of definition of any of these terms。 But I’ll come back to this， as I said。The first question I want to raise is “who is this book directed towards？” Embery， in the rare occasions he provides quotes， often derides New Labour neoliberals （and rightly so）。 But besides that， a lot of the anger seems to be directed towards ‘Twitter’。 I don’t know what Embery means by ‘the modern Left’， but it seems to be the disjunction of people who respond to him on Twitter and the neoliberal ascendency。 Why these people are singled out and not， say， the Labour Left （i。e。 Corbynites） is fairly clear。 He doesn’t really have a bone to pick with the latter， and it wouldn’t make for good writing。 But the other two groups – i。e。 opinionated teenagers on Twitter， and the Blairite ‘movement’ that was rejected almost wholesale by two party leadership elections （the second time with more vigour than the first） – are written as if they’re representative of the entire Left。 Now， none of this is actually disclosed。 It is instead left to the reader to work out what Embery actually means by the Left。 I suspect， as with a good deal of the book， it’s rather easy to fill in the gaps with this sort of thing if you already agree with the conclusions。 Actually reflecting on the use of the words is a lot more telling。 A lot of Embery’s arguments trade on ambiguities like this （a typical feature of post-modern political soapboxing that is more interested in provocative titles that sell well than it is in genuine sober analysis）。Now， to return to the discussion of values。 I’ll pick one example， but the point generalises。 Embery writes at length about how the Left should ‘return’ to wanting families to stay together and oppose the trend in which ‘families fragment’ – it should embrace an ‘explicitly pro-family stance’， and stop identifying ‘family values’ with right-wing ones。 All I can say to this is ‘duh。’ What Embery does is use vague terms like ‘family values’ that have no clearly defined content （not that he’s looking to provide a definition）， so you’d be a fool to disagree。 Obviously， I don’t want families to fragment – that sounds awful。 What follows is then what appears to be an argument but is really a collection of weasel words， misleading you into believing something concrete is being said – sound and fury signifying nothing， et cetera。 As I said， soapboxing。 So what remains is a picture of the Left who are committed to things unthinkable like the destruction of families。 What evidence is provided that anyone actually believes these things？ None。 They’re taken to be common sense， as if that should pass in a book that purports to provide a respectable view of the political situation。Some brief remarks about the scholarship。 Embery seems to have some kind of chronic aversion to referencing。 Sometimes he’ll even say things like ‘the evidence is all around us。’ Cite it then， if it’s so easy。 Sometimes the ‘evidence’ is backed up by citation to editorials。 Sometimes， sentences will be included in quotation marks but aren’t followed by a citation， where polemically convenient。 This violates standards one is familiar with from virtually childhood。 All of this contributes to the general posturing attitudes of the book – some kind of role-play of actual rational analysis is apparent， without actually doing much of the work required。 The majority of the evidence （where Embery decides it’s important to include） is anecdotal at best。 ‘I know this， because they told me so。’This is all to say nothing about facts that are neglected where they don’t fit in with Embery’s polemical point。 Take for instance， religion。 Embery seems to take it that the working class are religious。 In fact， Britain is a majority non-religious country as of 2019， as documented in British Social Attitudes surveys。 His discussion of immigration is worse – it isn’t that he provides no citations， I think it approaches dishonesty。 For what it’s worth， I don’t think anyone asking questions about immigration is a racist。 But I do think it’s flatly disingenuous to fail to mention crucial facts in certain contexts as the following。 Embery argues that immigration is problematic as it puts an additional strain on public services such as the NHS。 He mentions the left-wing argument that this is due to rampant underfunding， not due to immigration， but dismisses it as being only part of the whole picture （no argument provided for that）。 What he fails to mention is that a quarter of NHS workers aren’t even UK nationals （this will then be a proper subset of non-UK ethnicity， i。e。 even more than that are immigrants in general）。 Likewise with his discussion of Japan – he mentions that Japan has a relatively coherent national attitude， and we should strive to be more like them。 ‘The Japanese’， he writes， ‘do not， it would appear， wish to see their country turned into a place that no longer resembles Japan。 It is hard to sustain an argument that it is any the worse for that。’Turning instead to the facts， we find that Japanese immigration laws are actually quite lax。 A sizeable majority of Japanese citizens actually support importing labour。 The question to ask is why people don’t migrate to Japan as much， and the answers there aren’t too difficult。 Migration to Japan is actually not popular within people considering migrating – it is not that it is disallowed by the Japanese， as Embery asserts。 What’s even more interesting is that this is all very well documented – indeed， there’s Wikipedia pages about it。 Embery’s entire discussion is so divorced from any research that a Google search dismantles it （and indeed， the discussion contains not one citation）。 Facts are routinely ignored in service of Embery’s moralising conclusions。Another interesting case is Embery’s discussion of the role of police in ‘freedom of expression’ cases。 He thinks that the role of the police has expanded beyond reasonable standards （I suspect， the conclusion taken verbatim is actually correct）。 His reasoning for this conclusion is， at times， troubling。 He goes on about the ‘totalitarian’ attitudes of ‘the Left’ （historically， famous supporters of the police force…） with respect to same-sex marriage， gender pronouns， and sexual harassment。 He says what is now condemned as falling under harassment would once upon a time would have been looked at as ‘mild flirting’。 I don’t know how to respond to this， other than by saying that calling out sexual harassment is hardly some object of freedom of expression。 One would do well to bear in mind that freedom of expression holds for opinions in particular， and not for any language whatsoever。 ‘Flirting’ （or harassment） is not an expression of an opinion。 Where he does discuss opinion， it’s to do in particular with homo-/transphobia， where he complains that anyone who disagrees is branded a homophobe or a transphobe。 Well， what his genuine complaint there is， I don’t know。 Is it that someone called him a homophobe？ Surely that falls under their freedom of expression by the same token。 It’s hardly like someone has been arrested for voicing the opinion that gay people should not marry。 His mention of Sam Smith is equally embarrassing – he writes “Though still relatively tiny， the number of people declaring themselves ‘non-binary’ […] has increased in recent years […] One such was the award-winning singer and songwriter Sam Smith， who came out as non-binary in 2019。 Needless to say the entire media and cultural establishment fell in line and， in accordance with Smith’s wishes， began using neutral pronouns when referring to him [sic]”。 What his point was （other than to deliberately provoke， or come off contrarian and edgy） evades me。 And worse yet， it’s patently false: the entire media did not fall in line。 Take for example， Joanna Williams writing for The Times。 The article， titled “Declaring your pronouns is pure narcissism”， is filled with these sorts of jabs: “Kae [Tempest – a poet and musician] follows in the footsteps of the Grammy award-winning singer and songwriter Sam Smith， once “he”， now “they/them […] I’m all for denying biology。 I pretend I’m not getting older and can still drink too much without suffering the next day。 I pretend I can fit into clothes I bought 20 years ago。 But I don’t insist other people confirm my delusions。 Demanding to be called they/them rather than he/she is to insist that the rest of the world share in your fantasy。” Embery， of course， doesn’t care about the fact that this represents a good deal of the media establishment。 He wants to look like the underdog， and so （like before， lacking any citations）， just doesn’t mention any of this。Embery’s argumentation is equally lacking。 Take， by way of example， his discussion of 1960’s counterculture。 With its embrace of sex， drugs， and John Lennon， he thinks a good deal of today’s teenage pregnancy， drug abuse， so on， can be attributed to this。 If such a causal connection exists， no work is done to establish it， and thereby inferring causation from correlation （or really， not even correlation – just precedence in time）。 Again， mistakes one is warned about in middle school are repeated。 He does mention alternative explanations （say， the destruction of the working class by rampant de-industrialisation， but dismisses them out of hand as inadequate – no argument needed）。 Arguments in the book are often like this。 Embery will make some bold claim， mention some contrary explanation – claim it doesn’t see the whole picture （sans reasoning） and carry on as if it’s irrelevant。 To take an example from the immigration chapter， he， while regaling us about the flaws of immigration， says it would be ‘absurd’ to suggest immigration has no benefits （not that he mentions any of the benefits， of course）， and carries on。 Mentioning alternative explanations and doing nothing with them doesn’t make your argument any more nuanced than not mentioning them at all。 At least in the second case you can claim ignorance。Embery also makes wildly unsubstantiated claims about the intentions of people talking about， say， critical theory。 Now， I’m actually sort of in the field of philosophy， and I don’t take critical theory seriously。 But I don’t think for a moment that anyone talking about it is just trying to signal the fact that they’re enlightened because they went to university – and if they are， I expect some evidence。 Otherwise， you’re just assuming bad faith on the part of people who disagree with you。 But what I find more troubling about this is the deep patronisation implicit in it。 If talking about philosophical issues must mean you went to university， you’re implying that you can’t talk about these things if you didn’t。 Whereas in truth， you can walk into any Waterstones and pick up a copy of Foucault and interpret it for yourself。 Compare this attitude to the one you find in Jonathan Rose’s “The Intellectual Life of the British Working Classes”， a well-researched history of the reading habits of working people in the UK。 You find that many working people were regularly involved in thinking about political and philosophical issues。 It isn’t just ivory tower liberals who think about these things， and Embery， in all his condescension， seems to think it is。As you can tell， I’m not impressed。 Now， I should note， I doubt all of the conclusions of the book are false。 What arguments for those conclusions exist aren’t to be found here though。 I expect a lot of the people who are rating this book so highly already agree with it and so don’t realise how much work exactly they’re doing interpreting Embery’s undefined terms and filling in all the gaps in his reasoning。 Embery seems to think that anyone who disagrees with him must be divorced from the attitudes of the British working class。 Maybe I am， I don’t know。 It’s obvious though， that this kind of argument serves a moralistic conclusion more than it serves a factual one。 Indeed， Embery’s interest in the facts seems to wax and wane。 Unfortunately， I can’t offer any deep moral insight， as Embery seems to think he can， but if you happen to think the facts are relevant， I think one ought to look elsewhere。 。。。more
Josh Lloyd-Jones
，
Some good points throughout the book， raises important reasons about why Labour lost the last election so badly and makes some good economic suggestions。 However the parts about the rights of Trans people and “wokedom” just seemed to complete miss the point of those causes IMO。The biggest disappointment was when the author referred to cases of sexual harassment as mild flirting。。。。
Viola
，
https://www。prometheusjournal。org/202。。。Paul Embery’s Despised: Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class， Cambridge: Polity， 2020。 By Sabrina Huck 6 January 2021Some might rightly ask what the merit is in writing a review of Paul Embery’s book。 “Don’t give it oxygen – it will only help drive people towards him” is a common – and sometimes not unfair – criticism of left-wingers who write ‘outrage columns’ about their opponents。 As a former columnist for LabourList， I have spent a huge amount https://www。prometheusjournal。org/202。。。Paul Embery’s Despised: Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class， Cambridge: Polity， 2020。 By Sabrina Huck 6 January 2021Some might rightly ask what the merit is in writing a review of Paul Embery’s book。 “Don’t give it oxygen – it will only help drive people towards him” is a common – and sometimes not unfair – criticism of left-wingers who write ‘outrage columns’ about their opponents。 As a former columnist for LabourList， I have spent a huge amount of time this year thinking critically about my role as a writer， and how I engage with those who spread dangerous ideas， and what consequences this has for those affected most by them。 With this in mind， I set out to write a review of this book not as ‘left wing bait’ that says only the obvious – that Embery is a reactionary and his ideas should have no place on the left – but to focus instead on why， despite most people’s passionate insistence on the contrary， the ideas he sets out have had a place on the left for a very long time。 Some might even argue that they are essential components of social democracy。 Many of the criticisms Embery makes in his book of the “left-liberal elites” that staffed social democratic parties and governments – that they are too soft on immigration， that they do not care about what those working class voters with an attachment to community， law and order and the nation state want – are demonstrably false。 From rhetoric to the actual policies that Labour has implemented in government， there is plenty that chimes with the arguments that Embery makes in his book。 Labour’s social democrats think there is a big difference between themselves and the likes of Embery – but they rarely engage self-critically in how they are blurring the political lines， enforce and enable the same reactionary politics and gradually make worse things possible。 I want to make a contribution to this strategic discussion in the current political context in Britain: the Brexit referendum that delivered the vote to leave the EU; and Boris Johnson’s subsequent landslide election victory for the Conservative Party in 2019。 Keir Starmer， who succeeded Jeremy Corbyn as Leader of the Labour Party in spring 2020， and his team will also have former Labour voters in Brexit-supporting constituencies in their mind when they are designing their strategy for electoral fight-back。 How he chooses to position the party to appeal to his coalition matters to organisers within and outside parliamentary politics。Class analysisDespised participates in this conversation by advocating for Labour to appeal once again to its traditional base to win back power。 Embery argues that currently there is a disconnect between the Labour Party – both its members and elected representatives – and this voting base， the ‘traditional’ working class。 Embery says that this is because Labour is more concerned with pleasing its membership that is “urban middle-class liberals， students and social activists”。 Their needs conflict with the needs of the working class。To restore the ‘traditional’ working class vote， Embery argues that Labour must marry a social democratic economic policy with social conservative values。 He praises Corbyn’s 2019 manifesto for its commitment to anti-austerity measures and readiness to intervene in the economy to stimulate growth。 But he argues that the economy and people’s material conditions are not the only – and not necessarily the most important – driving factor when it comes to voting behaviour。 Moreover， Embery calls for a social policy agenda on the basis of ‘shared values’ to accompany the economic programme。 These values centre around family， work， community， immigration， national identity， law and order and the welfare system。Despised claims that there are currently two different types of working class in Britain: the traditional working class and a new working class。 The traditional working class is described as those workers with lower wages or social status， that might be unemployed or on benefits， and who own little or no property or wealth。 They usually have less control or authority in their workplace。 These working class people are most commonly found in post-industrial， small town or coastal communities。 He argues that this working class also shares a common set of values， which includes patriotism， social conservatism and communitarianism。 He describes them as ‘rooted’， ascribing a high value to family， place， social solidarity and cultural stability。 Embery says that he uses no standard scientific definition of class， but interprets the term as he and his social circles “understand it”。The other type of working class is a new， emerging working class。 This group is described as “younger， urban， more likely to have gone to university， highly diverse， less politically tribal and more cosmopolitan in outlook”。 Here， Embery seems to borrow from Claire Ainsley， Keir Starmer’s Head of Policy。 Ainsley， a former think tanker， published her book The New Working Class: how to win hearts， minds and votes in May 2018。 It argues that， whilst the traditional working class is still an important part of society， there are now millions of people up and down the country that fit a new description: they are more likely to work in service sector jobs such as retail， hospitality and care; are multi-ethnic and diverse; and live off low and middle incomes。 They are not concentrated in just one area， but can be found across the country。 Ainsley argues they make up nearly half of the population。 Like Embery， she says these voters are less politically tribal。 This means they are up for grabs for Labour and the Tories。 （Ainsley wrote a piece with policy recommendations for both Conservative Home and LabourList） Crucially， Ainsley recommends that political parties who wish to reach out to these groups should focus on their most important values as a way in。 She identifies these as “family， fairness， hard work and decency”。Embery’s book is pitched at the traditional working class， rather than this new working class， but both his and Ainsley’s policy prescriptions are based on a focus on similar social values。 Embery recognises this overlap in his UnHerd column， where he praises Ainsley’s appointment to the policy chief role as an encouraging sign that Starmer is taking a ‘values’-based appeal to the working class more seriously。 Despite these attempts to frame two distinct sets of the working class it seems that regardless of what ‘type’ they belong to， social conservative values are what unites them all。 Ainsley herself says that elections cannot be won off the back of the new working class alone， and any party that wants to win power will have to build coalitions。 A coalition based on these social values rather than material conditions （an analysis that chimes with Embery’s book） will be the outcome of her work for Team Starmer。Ainsley and Embery will be familiar with each other: for example at Labour Party Conference 2018 she chaired an event on how Labour could win the next election that had Embery as a panellist， alongside current Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy MP， the former MP and ‘English Labour Network’ founder John Denham and businessman， party donor and previous Labour Leave chairman John Mills。 Despite Embery’s claims to be a brave political outsider and different from other hacks that influence Labour’s policy， he clearly is a well-networked individual with access to the right people that make decisions at the top of the party。The economyClaire Ainsley’s and Paul Embery’s focus on social values is not the only commonality between Despised and more ‘mainstream’ Labour thinking。 As previously mentioned， Embery also acknowledges Jeremy Corbyn’s economic policy as a positive change for which there is no reason to retreat from going forward。 This is a commonly held position that unites Blue Labour style thinkers and soft left and social democratic members who believe that Corbyn’s views on social issues or foreign policy was what cost Labour the election， rather than the economics。In Despised Embery speaks out against going any further than 2019 on the economy as capitalism should be managed， not abolished as only the most extreme wings of the Labour left demand。 Instead， merely the worst excesses of Blair-style financial liberalisation and neoliberal globalisation should be opposed。 He argues that another focus must be on improved terms and conditions for workers， achieved through organising in trade unions。 Other ‘cornerstones of early Labour traditions’ like co-operatives， friendly societies and credit unions should also be seen as useful tools for civil society to tame the dominance of capital markets。When Ed Miliband became Labour Party leader in 2010， he too sought to distance himself from New Labour’s economic policies and the domination of the financial sector。 He began advocating for a ‘responsible’ brand of capitalism which sees companies pursue profit but where businesses should be more integrated in a social contract that results in greater sharing of prosperity and equality。Ahead of the 2015 General Election， LabourList commissioned a pamphlet containing essays of Prospective Parliamentary Candidates （PPCs） from across the country who wrote about their understanding of community and politics。 Then-candidate and now Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland， Louise Haigh MP， who chaired Lisa Nandy’s leadership bid in 2020， penned an article on ‘responsible capitalism’ which explains this narrative。 A responsible capitalism is one that focuses more on sustainable， long term goals where companies are more accountable to employees， customers and the communities they operate in， rather than for example shareholders。 As part of this more accountable capitalism， Trade Union relations with businesses should not be fractured。 The Union’s role is not to fight antagonistic struggles on behalf of the working class， but rather to “work hand in hand with businesses， in the interest of jobs， productivity and better living standards”。 Haigh also endorses cooperatives and calls for more workers on boards， two policies that can be found in Corbyn’s manifesto。 Embery supports ‘workers on boards’ too， claiming that this would represent an extension of social ownership that diffuses power and wealth in industry and commerce。 Embery and Labour’s social democrats both speak of Trade Union organising but rather than viewing it as means for the working class to engage in an antagonistic struggle， it is a corporatist approach that guides their policy prescriptions。But as the late Leo Panitch put it in a Guardian piece in reply to Ed Miliband， responsible capitalism offers no route out of Labour’s misery。 He warned that fundamentally， capitalism’s competitive， relentless drive to maximise profits， which has become the basis of all our social relations， will eventually only come to serve extreme nationalists and the far right。 People will try to protect whatever they have left at the expense of ‘the other’。The politics of placeEmbery describes communities as places where shared backgrounds and cultural familiarity foster a deep sense of cohesion。 He argues that this social and cultural homogeneity is what engenders a spirit of reciprocity and belonging from local citizens。 Cohesion and a feeling of mutual obligation then gets disrupted by a rapid change of the local area brought about by immigration。 Different shops， cultural and religious customs and a variety of spoken languages in neighbourhoods mean there is now no common backbone between the people anymore。 Relentless competition in every aspect of our lives alienates people from each other and erodes communities across the country。 But because Embery and Labour’s social democrats do not wish to break with capitalism， they are unable to offer a solution that tackles the root causes of this alienation。 Instead they prescribe ‘unifying’ policies on the basis of ‘social values’ that not only aim to plaster over the destructive tendencies of capitalism but uphold and reproduce them。Let us return to our LabourList pamphlet。 Among the many familiar faces featured in it， we find the former BBC journalist and Ed Miliband adviser Polly Billington。 Billington， then PPC for Thurrock， previously orchestrated Miliband’s media operation during his successful bid for the Labour leadership in 2010。 As her former boss was contesting the premiership of the United Kingdom， Billington， like many Special Advisers before her and since， sought to make her own entry into front line politics。Just a few months before the pamphlet was published， Labour had lost control of Thurrock Council。 Although the Party continued to govern a minority administration， the surge of UKIP votes there and in neighbouring Essex constituencies so close to the general election worried Labour strategists。Billington’s essay tells a tale of “unrelenting and rapid change” caused by globalisation and immigration in Thurrock which saw many former Labour voters turn to UKIP。 Residents would be asking ‘understandable questions’ such as whether it is right that someone who has lived in a place all their life is treated the same way by the welfare state as people who ‘have only just arrived’。 To restore trust， Billington calls on the Labour Party to change its policy on welfare to a system that is harder to access for immigrants who have not yet ‘contributed’。 Her claim is that such a policy would not only speak to people’s concerns on public services but also reflect ‘Labour values’ of decency。 Billington’s vision of Thurrock as a welcoming community is one that accepts “those who work hard， pay their taxes， learn to speak English and contribute to the society they chose to become part of”。 Solidarity among locals can then be built on these ‘shared values’ that cross the boundaries of race， language or class。Sound familiar？Strategists have long connected certain places with the bellwether voter du jour to make their point。 Before the ‘Red Wall’， there was the ‘Essex Man’。 The term was popularised to describe young and ambitious self-starters that should normally support Labour but had voted Conservative under Thatcher because of her economic policies。 The term became superseded by the ‘Mondeo Man’， a voter group that used to vote Labour but then shifted to the Tories because they now owned their own home and a decent car。 This voter inspired Tony Blair to pitch New Labour to the ‘aspirational working class’。 。。。more
Alex
，
I found this a very interesting read， an insightful narrative of the failures of the left and more specifically the labour party in appealing to the working class。 Against the backdrop of Labour's worst electoral result in nearly a century and a collapse of traditional support in the so called "red wall" seats。 Embery seeks to explain and provide some ideas of how to reverse the collapse of appeal to the working class and suggests it is an uphill battle。 Rather than suggesting the decline is sho I found this a very interesting read， an insightful narrative of the failures of the left and more specifically the labour party in appealing to the working class。 Against the backdrop of Labour's worst electoral result in nearly a century and a collapse of traditional support in the so called "red wall" seats。 Embery seeks to explain and provide some ideas of how to reverse the collapse of appeal to the working class and suggests it is an uphill battle。 Rather than suggesting the decline is short term， he in fact suggests it started with the advent of the neoliberal dogma which has blighted the economic landscape of the working class for the past few decades。 I find his economic analysis and remedies particularly convincing and think they have the potential to significantly improve the quality of life of the working class in Britain。 I also found his more cultural discussions as at times raising very good points such as surrounding immigration and the discussion of a return to more communitarian values。 His arguments were sound and based in logic but at times I think he perhaps brushed over them too quickly such as in the discussion surrounding law and order。 Whilst it may be true that many in the working class want tougher sentences for criminals and prevention of reoffending， his suggestion that the left tries to always explain the root of crime I thought was unfounded。 I think that a lot of crime is down to desperation and a failure of the state to provide an adaquate safeguard in early years， whilst reoffending is an issue， tougher sentencing isn't going to solve the root cause of crime。 Secondly， his brief discussion on making the benefits system more robust was slightly flawed in my opinion。 Inevitably， there is likely some degree of benefit fraud， but this claim is vastly exagerrated by the right wing press to distract from the much larger scale white collar tax evasion。 I think a step to more robustly enforce benefits could be fraught with difficulty and lead to antagonising of legitimate claims and creating a stigma around needing support from the state。 This is counter to Embery's overall claim to want to help the working class and whilst it is very important to understand their views as they should be the foundation of the labour party。 It is not possible in every realm of policy to reflect what is perceived to be their view in order to gain electoral success， as it could alienate sections of the middle class which he hopes to build a coalition with。 。。。more
Harry Willis
，
Essential reading for anyone interested in politics。 Perfectly encapsulates the abandonment of the working class by the Labour party and demonstrates the Cosmopolitan Elite's sneering contempt for ordinary people Essential reading for anyone interested in politics。 Perfectly encapsulates the abandonment of the working class by the Labour party and demonstrates the Cosmopolitan Elite's sneering contempt for ordinary people 。。。more
Chris Vaz
，
Brilliant book summing up perfectly all the excesses and fallibilities of modern Britain's left。 Would recommend to all， left and right wing in order to understand both what they agree and disagree with when it comes to British Socialism Brilliant book summing up perfectly all the excesses and fallibilities of modern Britain's left。 Would recommend to all， left and right wing in order to understand both what they agree and disagree with when it comes to British Socialism 。。。more
Simon
，
I have watched with amazement and dismay the British tear themselves apart over Brexit， immigration， BLM。 Street crime， Metoo， climate change ， wokeness， the rape gangs of English towns ans cities， the bias of MSM and BBC etc etc over the past 10 years。 I have frequently felt that if I were to publicly air my views I should be shouted down as bigot， racist ， homophobe， stuck in the past etc 。Here comes a book which explains to me what has been going on and why so many of us Brits have been feeli I have watched with amazement and dismay the British tear themselves apart over Brexit， immigration， BLM。 Street crime， Metoo， climate change ， wokeness， the rape gangs of English towns ans cities， the bias of MSM and BBC etc etc over the past 10 years。 I have frequently felt that if I were to publicly air my views I should be shouted down as bigot， racist ， homophobe， stuck in the past etc 。Here comes a book which explains to me what has been going on and why so many of us Brits have been feeling like nobody represents us。 In a nutshell。 the social changes caused by mass fast immigration caused communities around the UK to shatter as Blair’s multi cultural experiment took shape。When anybody challenged the situ they were branded racist or bigot 。 The Labour Party has been a liberal London group and they have come to despise the working and middle class communities most affected by immigration - hence the Red Wall that voted Tory at the last election。 Although I am massively simplifying the message， the key to it is that ordinary people place great importance on stability of community， and feel a patriotic pride for their country。 Today’s Labour Party has not connected with this。 Emberys message is that the Labour Party must become less liberal London elite ， connect with ordinary working class people in the towns across England or face disintegration 。I might just vote for them myself This is a brilliant analysis of what has been going on。 It explains things I have observed but not understood and it presents a sort of earthy patriotic socialism， grounded in love of community and country which I find very appealing 。 It would solve much division and be a good way forward 。。。more
Steve Birchmore
，
This book is aimed at the Labour Party， of which the author is a long time member。 The author， Paul Embry， clearly despairs at what the Labour Party and the British left in general have become。 In particular， the book addresses the alienation from the Labour Party and the modern Left of the Labour Party's traditional support and who it was created to represent: the working class， or more clearly， the traditional working class。 The descriptions of the British traditional working class and its val This book is aimed at the Labour Party， of which the author is a long time member。 The author， Paul Embry， clearly despairs at what the Labour Party and the British left in general have become。 In particular， the book addresses the alienation from the Labour Party and the modern Left of the Labour Party's traditional support and who it was created to represent: the working class， or more clearly， the traditional working class。 The descriptions of the British traditional working class and its values are excellent。 I consider myself one of the traditional working class and I think it very unusual and striking to read a book that describes and knows what I consider to be my tribe so well。 There are very few books that I have read that resonate with me so strongly， David Goodhart's 'Road to Somewhere' or 'The Likes of Us: A Biography of the White Working Class' by Michael Collins， come to mind， but in many respects， I think Paul Embery's book is the best。At times the book made me think of George Orwell's 'Lion and the Unicorn' which the book references。 I think if Paul fails in his desire to make the Labour Party electable again， a future as a contemporary George Orwell is a definite possibility。I think it unlikely that the Labour Party and the modern Left will change。 I used to vote Labour but was never a member。 I am quite sure that were I to join the Labour Party， I would be made to feel unwelcome。 I don't think my attitudes and values are unusual， one of the great things I got from reading this book， was of reading of people like me， being so well described and known。 I strongly suspect that patriotic ghastly oiks from council estates who didn't go to university when they were 18， whose opinions of many controversial topics have been formed from actual experience rather than Cultural Marxist theory， would not be wanted， other than as a token， who will play the victim role， who could be seen， but definitely not heard。 But I wish Paul well。 As he wrote， if the Labour Party will not represent the interests of the traditional working class who else will？ 。。。more
Trevor Thomas
，
Bang OnVery well researched and realistic account of the alienation of traditional Labour voters。 Resonated with me as an ex-steelwoeker watching Chinese steel dumping eliminate our industry with no response from the EU or our government。 Privatisation without investment to promote competitiveness。 Foreign takeover of our Stainless Steel plants in Sheffield to our detriment。Ultimately merging with Dutch and German steel plants to reduce excess capacity at our expense。 Sel！ing offway our to Tata Bang OnVery well researched and realistic account of the alienation of traditional Labour voters。 Resonated with me as an ex-steelwoeker watching Chinese steel dumping eliminate our industry with no response from the EU or our government。 Privatisation without investment to promote competitiveness。 Foreign takeover of our Stainless Steel plants in Sheffield to our detriment。Ultimately merging with Dutch and German steel plants to reduce excess capacity at our expense。 Sel！ing offway our to Tata leaving a basic strategic industry in foreign hands， in the same way energy producing industries in the hands of a Sino- French stranglehold 。。。more
Bradley Endsor
，
This is a great book， if you are on the left， and want to be relevant again read this book！ If like me， you are on the right， and believe in having a decent opposition in our great democracy read this book！ Yes i disagreed with Paul's analysis of the economic situation but as a free marketeer what do you expect。 Final book of 2020 and it was a good one。 Clear， precise and accurate and thic book should be reccomended reading in all politics class and every Labour MP should have to read this TWICE This is a great book， if you are on the left， and want to be relevant again read this book！ If like me， you are on the right， and believe in having a decent opposition in our great democracy read this book！ Yes i disagreed with Paul's analysis of the economic situation but as a free marketeer what do you expect。 Final book of 2020 and it was a good one。 Clear， precise and accurate and thic book should be reccomended reading in all politics class and every Labour MP should have to read this TWICE！！！！ 。。。more
Ian Williams
，
The 1980s saw the destruction of our industrial base by Margaret Thatcher。 This resulted in the emasculation of the trade union wing of the Labour movement。 The 1990s saw the ascension of Tony Blair and New Labour。 This resulted in the political wing of the Labour movement being taken over by middle class professionals。 In fact， the entire Labour movement had been hijacked by the middle class。 These university educated middle class professionals knew nothing about the working class and cared eve The 1980s saw the destruction of our industrial base by Margaret Thatcher。 This resulted in the emasculation of the trade union wing of the Labour movement。 The 1990s saw the ascension of Tony Blair and New Labour。 This resulted in the political wing of the Labour movement being taken over by middle class professionals。 In fact， the entire Labour movement had been hijacked by the middle class。 These university educated middle class professionals knew nothing about the working class and cared even less about them。 They totally abandoned them while pursuing their own multiple agenda of woke politics， subservience to the interests of high finance， and with a dogged belief in the benefits of the European Union。 All of this worked against the working class。 Woke politics was an irrelevance to them， high finance had sold off the industries that had given them gainful employment， and the European Union benefitted only the metropolitan elite。 The working class were not only dismissed as racist， misogynist， homophobic， transphobic， and suffering from every other type of phobia， but were openly despised - hence the title of this excellent book。 Hillary Clinton would have fitted in perfectly with New Labour。 Paul Embery goes into detail how this happened and how it lead to the working class voting for leaving the European Union in 2016 and the collapse of the red wall in England in the 2020 national election。 He then argues for a re-engagement with working class people in order to get the Labour Party （a genuine Labour Party） back into power。 I think he is mistaken。 The time of the Labour Party has come and has gone。 It is beyond saving。 We need a new party that leans right on social issues， left on economic policy， and with a determination to defend the interests of labour。 If such a party was created， I would love to see Paul Embery lead it。 。。。more
Mat Davies
，
One of the most important political books that I have read this year。 I don't agree with everything in it， but what it contains matters and needs to be discussed。 There is， I think obviously， a failure on the left to listen and connect with people beyond the cosmopolitan and graduate groups that enjoy putting issues such as the importance of pronouns as core political issues and cancel heretics who think otherwise。 The author here offers a narrative that I am confident will resonate with many re One of the most important political books that I have read this year。 I don't agree with everything in it， but what it contains matters and needs to be discussed。 There is， I think obviously， a failure on the left to listen and connect with people beyond the cosmopolitan and graduate groups that enjoy putting issues such as the importance of pronouns as core political issues and cancel heretics who think otherwise。 The author here offers a narrative that I am confident will resonate with many reasonable people who find themselves in a political void。 Perhaps they feel like there are things that they cannot discuss in fear of cancellation， or perhaps artists who doublethink their artistic choices wondering if they have been diverse enough。 After the decimation of the Labour Party in 2019， there has never been a more important time to discuss these issues。 Solid！ 。。。more
Mr B
，
Great book。 Paul literally spells out the problem with today's labour party。 As he says at the end， if they want to get back into power 。。。 "They had better start listening"。 It's well worth a read and does a good job of summarising how many working class people feel and think about economic issues as well as immigration and their affinity with their community and country。The working class are perhaps the most overlooked， ignored， marginalised and patronised group in our country right now。 At la Great book。 Paul literally spells out the problem with today's labour party。 As he says at the end， if they want to get back into power 。。。 "They had better start listening"。 It's well worth a read and does a good job of summarising how many working class people feel and think about economic issues as well as immigration and their affinity with their community and country。The working class are perhaps the most overlooked， ignored， marginalised and patronised group in our country right now。 At last someone takes the time to represent their views。 。。。more
Matthew Eskuf
，
A modern day The Road to Wigan Pier， a must for every Labour Party member。 Can anything halt the Left’s fall into the deep Woke abyss， disconnected from the community it was born to represent。 Paul Embery’s first book gives much needed analysis of where Labour has gone wrong and what it must put right to have any chance of regaining power。
Bob Wigin
，