In a critique of our book New Labour, David Rubinstein has argued that we exaggerate the degree of difference between Old and New Labour and underplay the similarities. In this article we agree with many of the continuities that Rubinstein outlines. However, we argue that he himself gives plenty of evidence in favour of our thesis that change has been marked in many policy areas. We argue that we give a good account of the wider social factors that he says accounts for such change. In this article we offer a restatement of the view that New Labour offers a ‘post-Thatcherite’ politics. New Labour breaks both with post-war social democracy and with Thatcherism.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaleT. (1999), ‘The Logic of No Alternative: Political Scientists, Historians and the Politics of Labour's Past’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations1(2), pp. 192–204.
2.
CowellN.LarkinP.(forthcoming), ‘Social Democracy in Britain: New Labour and the Third Way’ in MartellL. (eds.), Social Democracy: Global and National Perspectives, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
3.
DriverS.MartellL. (1998), New Labour: Politics after Thatcherism, Cambridge: Polity.
4.
DriverS.MartellL. (2000), ‘Left, Right and the Third Way’, Policy and Politics28(2), pp. 147–161.
5.
HallS. (1998), ‘The Great Moving Nowhere Show’, Marxism Today (November/December), pp. 9–14.
6.
HayC. (1999), The Political Economy of New Labour, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
7.
RubinsteinD. (2000), ‘A New Look at New Labour’, Politics20(3), pp. 161–167.
