Scare in Britain

Britain’s rejuvenated Labor Party threw a good scare into Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her ruling Conservative Party. But if the most recent polls are accurate, the Conservatives will maintain a comfortable majority in Parliament after Thursday’s election.

That is good news for the Atlantic Alliance and, it would seem, for the many Britons who have benefited from Thatcher’s “capitalist revolution.” The unfortunate byproduct, however, may be greater hopelessness and anger among those who do not share in the country’s growing affluence.

When Thatcher and the Tories took over in 1979, Britain was the perennial “sick man of Europe.” The economy was in chronic trouble, class hatred was rife, and powerful labor unions stood in the way of industrial modernization. Eight years later inflation, though still a problem, is way down. Britain enjoys the fastest economic growth rate of any major industrial country, and is a respectable international competitor. Class distinctions are eroding as more and more people come to feel themselves part of the middle class.

In part the Conservatives are simply the beneficiaries of technological change, which has shrunk the number of jobs in traditional smokestack industries and therefore cut into the base of the Labor Party. But Thatcher’s policies, which included the sale of public housing to tenants and the sale of stock from state-owned companies to ordinary citizens, also created a new class of former Laborites who now vote Conservative.

Unfortunately, there was a price to paid in the form of unemployment, which has tripled under Thatcher, and in the creation of a bitter--possibly permanent--underclass that was left behind by Thatcher’s “capitalist revolution.”

Under the leadership of Neil Kinnock, the Labor Party mounted a surprisingly strong comeback. The party’s lunatic fringe was smothered--at least temporarily--and Kinnock presided over a smooth, even slick, campaign that fairly exuded moderation on domestic issues while castigating Thatcher--with some reason--as an autocrat with no concern for the jobless, the sick and the elderly.

Foreign-policy considerations aside, there is probably no reason that Washington could not co-exist comfortably with a Kinnock-led Labor government. Unfortunately, Kinnock wants to eliminate Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent and expel U.S. nuclear weapons. Such a program would send waves through Europe strong enough perhaps to deal the Atlantic Alliance a fatal blow.

For that reason, Americans cannot be blamed for pulling for Thatcher. But if the Tories win as expected, the prime minister must show a practical concern for the have-nots who may otherwise become a nucleus for a hard-core leftist movement capable of polarizing British politics in a most unhealthy way.