The Left and the left

What do the following have in common?

Firstly the hugely respected and influential Father Z, over at WDTPRS;

I have been thinking about the priest who was assaulted in Italy and the way the Catholic left treats conservatives and traditionally minded Catholic priests and lay people.

Next, indomitable blogger on all things English, Byrnsweord

Since the time of George Orwell, the hatred and fear of England by the left has been a decidedly unguarded prejudice. My documentation of the phenomenon is merely a brief synopsis of some of the permutations that it has taken recently. Now, the logical conclusions of devolution – a scheme entirely concocted by the left and advised and warned against by anyone with a modicum of common sense – are provoking new swathes of histrionic fear and implicit anti-Englishness.

And lastly, Melanie Phillips, about whom I need say little more

For the atrocity has produced a reaction among people on the political Left in Britain, Europe and the U.S. that is in itself shocking and terrifying.

Answer: all of them depart from anything approaching mainstream reality in their characterisation of ‘the left’ . Truth is, ‘the left’ per se is not at all like that. Quite the opposite, in my experience. Indeed, the kind of lefties you see bombarding twitter with faux-outrage are decidedly unlike the kind of lefties one comes across in everyday life. To think that all lefties are like Sunny Hundal is little like thinking all conservatives are like Roger Helmer.

Not one bit of it.

Thank goodness.

And so, to Father Z, one would have to say that many on the ‘Catholic left’ are on the left precisely because they are Catholic. Rightly or wrongly, they feel it kind of comes with the territory. They are not opposed to tradition or orthodoxy, and certainly do not ally themselves with every passing ‘progressive’ piece of dissent. Quite the opposite – they take their faith seriously enough that it informs their whole worldview; their political/economic preferences are part of their fidelity, not an obstacle to it.

To Byrnsweord, one would simply say: ‘tosh’. Many (most?) on the left are deeply patriotic, for which they receive more than enough stick from the metroliberals within their own camp. They take pride in being English, and are quite often supporters of the monarchy. They fight for their country and their Queen when asked to, partake in public displays of patriotism and pride for which they are routinely ridiculed, and make little effort to hide the identity that is the source of such pride – the flag of St. George is more likely to be draped out of the windows of Labour strongholds than it is in the quads of Oxbridge or the sleepy villages of the Cotswolds.

And lastly Melanie Phillips. Well, the truth is simply that not everybody signs up to the destructive metroliberalism you despise. Many lefties are socially and indeed morally conservative. They cherish the things that the metroleft take great delight in smugly scorning. At times, this erupts and the Labour Party suddenly find themselves cast adrift from the very people they always thought they most closely represented. This is evidence enough that the ideological map and habits of thought of the privileged metroleft are by no means universal; indeed, as often as not, they are derided and despised as much on the left as they are on the right. The identity crisis currently engulfing Labour is partly a testament to precisely this fact.

The impulse that vexes these three writers is not a ‘left-wing’ phenomenon at all, even if one can readily admit that since the 60s it has resided more prominently on the left than anywhere else. Indeed, some would argue that the hedonism, individualism and atomism the New Left is ac tually a triumph of radically right-wing thinking – which is probably why the right, particularly the libertarian right, are more and more enthralled with it. Which leads one toward the conclusion that this impulse (signified by whatever slogan we might at various points attach to it) transcends traditional boundaries of left and right and is loyal only to itself.

All of which means that, for those who crudely write-off the left with absurd polarising caricatures (and vice-versa), it might be worth playing the ball now and then and leaving the man intact. After all, he might just happen to be on your side.

 

 

Advertisement