When left and liberal don’t go together - the case of strikes

In the last few years, I have been unusually preoccupied with strikes. Conditions in UK universities are highly volatile, making them strike-prone; conditions at my employer, Cardiff University, have been more unstable than most places and we have had a local dispute. I have my disagreements with the University and College Union (UCU), yet strongly believe in unions and, currently, am a UCU representative for my department.

Recently, there was also the 40^th anniversary of the 1984-85 miners’ strike. This event is central to Welsh/British industrial history – despite an 11-month strike, the miners were defeated and coal mines eventually closed – and there was an exhibition at the Welsh National Museum. Entry was just £3, the museum is on the way to my office and, during the exhibition’s six month run, I went three times.

Naturally, I reflected on the similarities and differences between these actions and some of my thoughts are relevant to this Substack’s focus on progressive ideologies and the political economy. Of course, differences between mining and academia are profound and my own interest in mining does not reflect first-hand experience. I come from mining stock – my brother is researching our family tree and has found five ancestors who died following mining accidents/illnesses linked to the occupation – yet have no direct experience of life in such communities. Indeed, my upbringing and life in middle-class Wales could scarcely be more different.

There are also differences between the trade unionism of miners and public sector workers – technically, UK academics are not public sector workers, yet effectively they belong in this category – and these differences are nowhere starker than in the treatment of those who cross picket lines. During the miners’ strike, ‘scabs’ were the enemy. If a miner crossed the line, they might suffer physical attacks and their children might be bullied at school. To this day, former friends do not speak with each other. To be clear, I abhor such behaviours, but one thing is undeniable; they helped keep a strike going.

By contrast, public sector unionists have no such means at their disposal. Aside from structural differences – workers tend not to live in the same communities and remote working can make the breaking of a picket line impossible to detect – there are profound legal-cultural differences. Public sector workers are bound to behavioural codes – these forbid the calling of names, let alone the breaking of arms – and open conflict lies in tension with occupational identities and notions of professionalism.

Coinciding with these factors, I have been thinking about the influence of distinct ideologies. Historically, most trade unionists combine left-wing economic values with authoritarian cultural values (the term ‘traditionalist’ is more neutral/euphemistic than ‘authoritarian’ but, for this piece, I prefer the latter). For those used to Western politics, left-authoritarianism is a curious mix – Western elites tend to be either right-authoritarian or left-liberal – yet it remains the default position of ordinary voters. Left-authoritarians come in different forms – they range from working-class Trump/Reform supporters to far-left revolutionaries – but let us say that such voters favour hierarchies and authority and divide the world into ingroups and outgroups.

I suspect that left-authoritarianism lends itself to the defence of picket lines. The tendency of authoritarians to seek ingroups and outgroups is relevant. Left-authoritarians may have different outgroups to right-authoritarians, notwithstanding certain overlaps, but, in contexts in which strikes are salient, strike breakers would be a primary outgroup. And if one has a worldview which revolves around authority, the identification and punishment of outgroups comes naturally; the miners’ strike shows this.

Contrastingly, public-sector workers tend to be left-liberal. Famously, liberalism is suspicious of hierarchies and rejects divisions between ingroups and outgroups. In recent decades, Western liberalism has become very averse to judgements of the choices of others; unless your actions are harmful, others should not judge you. This, of course, is based on the Millian harm principle.

Some liberals would argue that the worker who breaks a picket line is harming others, but this argument is more difficult to make. Aside from their dislike of moral judgements, liberals can find it difficult to be prescriptive. Consider, for example, the Jack London poem which is famous in union circles – ‘No man has a right to scab as long as there is a pool of water deep enough to drown his body in, or a rope long enough to hang his carcass with.’ – and imagine liberals reciting this. By contrast, such discourse comes more naturally to authoritarians; they are far more comfortable with judging and imposing their standards on others.

On one hand, this helps explain the weak levels of strike participation in certain public sector occupations. Many other factors are relevant (as I emphasize above) yet the liberalism of such workers seems germane. From this perspective, certain tendencies in liberalism do not bode well for unions. For example, some liberals now emphasize the fragility of certain groups; yet to win a strike, one must be strong rather than fragile.

On the other hand, this sheds further light on tensions between left and liberal aspects of progressive ideology. Recently, I appeared on a podcast with David Goodhart, the intellectual who is most associated with this argument. Goodhart emphasizes incompatibilities between progressive support for ethnically diverse societies and the welfare state. Ostensibly, this is a convincing argument – some people show greater solidarity with members of their own ethnic group – yet the extensive empirical research on this question has arrived at a stalemate. In important ways, immigration and ethnic diversity also help consolidate the welfare state. I am not aware of any research on ideology and the picket line – indeed, operationalizing this might be a challenge – yet suspect that research would confirm my hunch; liberalism is not conducive to union solidarity.

This is a very interesting area. As Westerners, it is our fate to live in political space in which left goes with liberal and right goes with authoritarian. But such coupling may not be natural – indeed, conditions in other regions suggest it is not – and, as Western politics realigns, tensions may become more obvious.

---

If you enjoyed reading this, do think about subscribing! Subscription is free – all it means is that you’ll receive a weekly email. But every new subscriber makes me very happy 😊 😊 😊