Towards a new normal

There are two phrases that we keep hearing. The first is “we followed the science”. All I have to say about that is they didn’t. If they had probably half the people who are dead wouldn’t be. The second phrase is “we can’t go back to life as normal”.

Unfortunately, very few of the people pushing this line tell us what the new normal is going to be, or for that matter, what the old normal that we can’t go back to actually refers to. 

I started to think about what my normal was prior to the lockdown. It wasn’t that bad. I retired early last year. I’m by no means rich but I have enough money to live on (for the first time I even have a small amount in the bank for a rainy day). I run regularly (well, until recent heart surgery), I walk my dog, I go for walks on the beach with my partner, and we can afford a couple of trips out most week. I am, as readers of this blog will know, active politically though nowhere near as active as I was a few years ago.  It might  appear boring to some people but it’s a kind of normal life that many people of my age enjoy.

So, if I am to have a new normal I’d quite like it not to differ too much from the old one. Now, before you accuse me of being a selfish ***** (choose own epithet) I should say I am more than aware that for many people the old normal is nowhere close to being as comfortable as mine. I have experienced periods of unemployment, poverty and insecurity. Fortunately, I haven’t had to endure racism or sexism but I am more than aware that they exist and that a new normal that does not deal with these issues is not worth having.

A new normal has to confront racial and sexual harassment

The new normal has to see changes. A 2019 survey conducted by University of Manchester researcher Stephen Ashe for the TUC found that over 70% of ethnic minority workers had experienced racial harassment at work in the last five years, and around 60% had been subjected to unfair treatment by their employer because of their race. Meanwhile, a 2016 report by Safeline found that over half of women in the UK had experienced sexual harassment while at work. Whilst the ONS report that the Crime Survey for England and Wales revealed an estimated 2.4 million adults experiencing domestic abuse in the year to March 2019 (1.6 million women and 786,000 men). And, this is to say nothing of 14 million people in poverty, insecure work, homelessness or sub-standard housing. This is the old normal I would be happy to leave behind.

But, how are we to get to this new (and improved) normal. Some on the left see this crisis as an opportunity for change. Julie Hesmondhalgh told a People’s Assembly online rally:

“But some people, their eyes have been opened to the hypocrisy of a government that cheers the capping of nurses’ pay one week, and then cheer at the windows for our glorious NHS the next.”

Shadow Minister for Housing Mike Amesbury writing for Left Foot Forward has argued that we cannot return to a normal that fails to recognise the role that key workers play. But his new normal does not seem that far away from old normal aspirations based on state intervention. Invoking the spirit of World War II he argues:

“After the second World War the country was financially and physically broken, yet a visionary Labour government did not respond with austerity, it responded with bold state interventions which led to our welfare state and NHS, vital organs of our society on which we are depending on like never before.”

A new normal for social care?

But, we have a welfare state and an NHS now. Of course, it would be nice if they were properly funded but that in itself is hardly a break from “normal”, it is a return to “normal” but with a slightly friendlier façade.  The idea that all we need to do is to increase funding to the welfare state is quite common on parts of the left. As Nye Cominetti, Laura Gardiner and Gavin Kelly argue in Tribune:

“The necessary funding to raise pay levels isn’t going to be found via efficiency drives or in other parts of local authority budgets. If pay is to go up, taxpayers or those receiving care will need to meet the cost.”

In other words, there are only two options a public service funded by taxpayers or a private service funded by individuals. That certainly summarises the position regarding social care currently. But, if those are the options then in what way are we creating a new normal. Aren’t we simply adjusting normal to accommodate a threat from a virus that this time around has caught us unawares. The problem with prioritising the change as one which has to choose between privatisation and public ownership is that both can be achieved within a capitalist system which only values people as workers and in which human beings are reduced to vehicles for making money – either for themselves (in the form of wages) or for others (in the form of profits or to use the Marxist term ‘surplus value’).

The truth is we are faced with parallel crises. On the one hand we have a virus that is ruthless and deadly and for which, currently there is no known cure. On the other, capitalism is being plunged into a deeper recession than the one that was already coming. Those who support and are supported by neo-liberal capitalism want a new normal that restores profitability. They want stocks and shares that pay good dividends, and oil back up to $60 per barrel (it’s currently at -$35 a record low). They also want something that recently has seemed like a luxury – affordable and well resourced healthcare. They are desperate for a return to a low wage insecure economy for us, and wealth and opulence for them.

When I asked socialists on social media what they thought about a new normal, what struck me was how few people on the left held out much in the way of optimism. Terry Mac summed up well how many on the left feel:

“I know this term gets popularly overused now, but there is a cognitive dissonance where people generally know that they should have voted and supported Corbyn's Labour, but didn't, and now pretend that suddenly everything is different because of coronavirus, even though people like us were pointing out the problems way before this.

If anything, I think we on here would agree that things might actually only get worse when we've got to a point where the NHS is being viewed as a charity, funded by pensioners walking around their gardens and up and down their stairs.” (Terry MAC via Facebook LLA Discussions)

Others agreed with the view that the new normal would be the old normal but with social distancing. Dave Luxemburg told me:

“I want the new normal to be socialist revolution but I expect it will look a lot like the old normal but with more inflation, higher taxes and people nervous of handshakes.” (Dave Luxemburg via Facebook Left Wing UK)

Will the new normal just be the old normal?

Whilst Gloria Jones on Twitter (which proved rather useless in answering my question incidentally) gave a fairly cogent summing up of the issues facing us:

“I've thought long & hard about this and I've decided that the 'new normal' will be just like the 'old normal'.  The rigged system will still be here and the people who most benefit from and support the rigged system will not be giving it up anytime soon.” (Gloria Evans ‪@keepsayingit1  via Twitter)

If the new normal is to be different from the old normal it would require a change of direction so radical that the whole fabric of society would be threatened. For that to happen it would be helpful if the organisations of the working class were to take a lead. But, as Lindsey German, a leading member of Counterfire, argues:

“The temptation for Labour and the trade unions is to be too timid to challenge a government which is failing at every turn and which is getting an amazingly easy ride. But there is a major conflict going on, not least about class and who suffers – and pays for – the crisis. It will be hard for the Tories and big business to impose another major bout of austerity on the NHS, given the circumstances.”

Her view that we should turn the silences and claps into political protests may be fanciful for many, but the realisation that any debate about the post-Covid world is, by definition, political is a welcome corrective to those, including the LOTO, who seem to want to keep the politics out of it. It’s a view echoed, at least in part by CWU leader Dave Ward writing in the Morning Star.

“We will not go back to “normal” – we will create a new normal.”

What Dave Ward is less clear on is what this new normal will actually look like. Besides calling for the renationalisation of the Post Office new normal is to be found in “green shoots”, being “brave”, making it clear “workers will not pay for this crisis” and “a new model of collectivism”. None of which I disagree with, but none of which tell me how “new normal” differs radically from “old normal”.  Paul Callaghan on Facebook makes just this point:

“Saying things can’t go back to the way they were is a common trope after every major crisis. Economically the choice will be between austerity or a Keynesian new deal... As for Labour under Starmer sadly I can see (them) going for a watered down version of the Tory plan.”  (Paul Callaghan via Facebook LLA Discussions)

Most people avoid politics most of the time

Peter C Baker, writing in The Guardian, cites American writer Rebecca Solnit, who argues that crises can be vehicles for change, “Ideas that used to be seen as leftwing seem more reasonable to more people. There’s room for change that there wasn’t beforehand. It’s an opening.” This seems both overly optimistic and strangely true. What is true is that it will be very difficult to ignore the fact that in the UK the NHS has been the true hero, quite whether that translates into resources being poured in will not depend on whether we are optimists or pessimists, but rather will depend on how the Government senses the mood of the nation.

Those with an unhealthy obsession with politics, and I’m one of them, have a tendency to think that the debates, arguments and vitriol which are our everyday experience are mirrored amongst the vast majority of the population who really do not take the interest in politics that they should. However, those who are arguing that there is an opportunity to engage people in a debate about the type of society they want to live in may be on to something.

A recent YouGov poll (I know it’s YouGov and I’ve criticised their methodology in the past) found that only 9% of a sample of 4,500 wanted life to return to normal after the lockdown. Speaking to Sky News Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the Royal Society of the Arts who commissioned the poll noted  "This poll shows that the British people are increasingly aware that the health of people and planet are inseparable and it's time for radical environmental, social, political and economic change."

Ipsos-MORI reported recently that the new normal could be a very nervous one with 71% of UK respondents saying that even when the lockdown ends they will be nervous resuming their day-to-day activities. A poll of Americans carried out by PYMNTS found that unless a vaccine was found 48% would be unhappy leaving their homes. Over half of their sample did not expect to resume their normal activities when the crisis ends, but there were marked differences amongst different age groups. Younger people were more likely to expect to return to normal, though the percentages still hover around half.

Cordwainer Smith via Facebook LLA Discussions

Although these polls give us some indication of people’s feelings during the crisis they are of less use in telling us what will happen if the virus becomes yesterday’s news. Incidentally, that will only happen in one of two ways. Either a vaccine is developed which is largely available, or the human body defence mechanism (antibodies) finds a way to defeat the virus. The first seems some way off, despite media assurances to the contrary, and the second highly unlikely as in the antibodies vs Covid-19 match, Covid-19 seems to be well ahead.

Brandon Ambrosino, has an interesting article on the BBC website questioning the whole concept of ‘normal’, but gives the game away when he says:

“So we kind of want to go back to where we were, but we also kind of don’t. We want things to be the same, but we also want them to be different. We want to return to normal but we know deep down that our journey won’t be a return so much as a departure.”

In a sense this is precisely what I have argued earlier. I like the life I was living and want it to continue. But, I don’t want it to continue at the expense of other people. Perhaps I am looking at a bigger picture than many middle class people who have been brought up on the dream of individualism.  At the same time as wanting change, they don’t want that change to alter all the things they like. One of the things they tend to like is their feeling of superiority which comes with their higher than average salary. So, doing away with poverty is a good aspiration, but not if it means giving up that second bathroom or caravan in West Wales.

It is hard for the left not to be affected by a media which seems to surround us and is all pervasive. In this sense, the demoralisation of the left is hardly surprising. We have seen our best hope of radical change in the UK literally sabotaged by our own side. We have seen the Sanders campaign in the US also sabotaged by his own party. And, we now have Joe Biden likely to lose against a man who thinks drinking detergent might be beneficial, and in the UK a Labour leader so lacking in charisma that the description of him as ‘forensic’ seems a very bad misspelling of anaemic.

Is it time for revolution?

Despite all this the current widespread enthusiasm for the NHS coupled with a disenchantment with elected officials who look less in control every second that passes provides an opportunity. It is by no means the ideal circumstances in which to take on the ruling class, but revolutionaries have rarely been accorded the luxury of choosing the time of the revolutions they end up taking part in. Many people reading this will not, of course, consider themselves revolutionaries, but to quote the now departed leader of the Socialist Workers Party, Tony Cliff,  “this side of the revolution, the revolutionaries are a minority.”

As Imogen Bowler put it: “this is literally our best chance for change right now” (Imogen Bowler via Facebook Labour Left). Putting some substance to what we might want to fight for Max Caley argues that a new normal might include the following: “A completely restructured economy. Similar to post WWII. Massive programme of nationalisation to the point where every industry that provides essentials for us to live a dignified and healthy life is nationalised and centrally planned by experts that are democratically accountable.” (Max Caley via Facebook Jeremy Corbyn: True Socialism)

Mike Ironside via Facebook Labour4MorningStar

It is never possible in advance to know what demands are going to tip a simple protest movement into a revolutionary one.  In France in 1789 political reforms were demanded but it was a call for bread that brought millions onto the streets, as the often mis-quoted “let them eat brioche (not cake)” reminds us. In Russia in 1917, the First World War was a significant factor but the slogan that brought millions onto the streets was “Land, Peace, Bread”. In other words, the demand for food, which you might see as a human right, has been the fuel of revolutionary movements. The point is that, hoarding notwithstanding, bread has not been an issue in the developed nations, but something else we take for granted, healthcare, has.

If, and this is a big if, the left can see beyond its own demoralised state and put aside its factional differences, the opportunity is about to arise where it will be possible to demand that things most people regard as simply ordinary become a tipping point for a system tottering on the edge. We need to put our efforts into developing a movement that sees beyond parliament. That is not to say that we should give up on parliament, but that the movement we need is beyond parliament. Far too much time is spent on trying to obtain parliamentary power (or even worse its mini-versions in council chambers) to the detriment of building a mass movement capable of taking on, and defeating, poverty, inequality, and discrimination. 

The problem with parliamentarianism is that it has developed a political class that looks after its own interests and which even its left-wing often regards itself as above ordinary workers. Labour MPs are happy to tell us what to think, they are less good at listening to what we actually think. We see this mirrored in trade union bureaucracies which too often protect themselves regardless of the impact on their members. In this sense, it is difficult to see either the Labour Party or trade unions as vehicles for change. However, neither is this the right time to abandon them entirely. In building the new normal we cannot simply replace these organisations which millions of people look to, but as the left we need to see them for what they are, and not have illusions in their commitment to change.

Gerry Riley via Facebook Labour Left

In building the new normal we will need to find demands that many people will agree with and support. A properly resourced NHS funded from taxation, workers on proper contracts with health and safety not seen as a burden but the minimum we should expect, an end to homelessness etc., and all of this whilst keeping our focus on the climate emergency which has not disappeared whilst we have been busy elsewhere. Unfortunately, we don’t have the luxury of demoralisation or self indulgent reflection. The stakes are as high as ever but it is because the response to this crisis has had a socialist flavour that the left are being handed an opportunity to build a new normal. Our new normal will not be the old normal with social distancing, but a new normal with collectivism and compassion at its heart.

Please don’t forget I am also doing a regular blog on the Covid-19 crisis, mostly tracking the figures. You can find it here