Leftwing Take on Taking Back Control: A Critical Response 2026

In the debate over a leftwing take on taking back control, a recent letter to the Guardian raises a crucial question: can working people exercise control collectively over those in power? The letter, responding to Gaby Hinsliff's portrait of political strategist Claire Ainsley and her book Control: How We Lost It and How to Take It Back, challenges Ainsley's focus on individual ambition and tax breaks for career advancement. Instead, it argues that for cleaners, care workers, and security guards, control means having a say over working hours, workloads, and pay. This critique strikes at the heart of how the left should approach worker empowerment.

The Left's Dilemma: Individual Mobility vs. Collective Power

Claire Ainsley's work has sparked a necessary conversation about how the left can reconnect with working-class voters. Her book The New Working Class, reviewed by Mark Bergfeld in the Global Labour Journal in 2020, was praised for its insights but criticized for treating working-class people primarily as voters to be won over rather than as people capable of organizing to change society. This tension between seeing workers as individuals seeking upward mobility and as a collective force for systemic change is a longstanding dilemma for progressive politics.

The letter argues that Ainsley's policy prescriptions—such as tax breaks for those who sign up for courses—miss the mark. While ambition to climb the career ladder is important, the ambition to spend time with children, work safely, and earn a decent living deserves equal political recognition. For many workers, control is not about moving up but about having a voice in the conditions of their daily work.

What Collective Control Looks Like for Workers

For a cleaner, a care worker, or a security guard, control means having a say over working hours, workloads, and pay. It means being able to organize collectively through strong trade unions and collective bargaining. Democratic participation at work should be central to the left's answer, not an afterthought. This approach recognizes that individual advancement, while valuable, is not a substitute for collective power.

The letter's author, Mark Bergfeld, makes a compelling case that the left must think through how to expand collective workers' rights rather than focusing solely on individual incentives. This is not to dismiss the importance of ambition or skill development, but to argue that these should be part of a broader strategy that includes robust labor protections and worker voice.

The Political Implications: Who Speaks for Working People?

This debate has significant political implications. As the left seeks to build coalitions and win elections, it must decide whether to prioritize policies that appeal to individual aspirations or those that strengthen collective institutions. The two are not mutually exclusive, but the balance matters. A left that only speaks to individual mobility risks leaving behind those who cannot or do not want to climb a career ladder—and those are often the most vulnerable workers.

Moreover, the letter's critique resonates with broader concerns about the direction of leftwing politics. Similar debates are playing out in other contexts, such as the Berlin election, where a leftwing victory exposed liberal failures on freedom. These examples show that voters are hungry for a politics that addresses their material conditions and gives them a sense of control over their lives.

Trade Unions as a Vehicle for Control

Strong trade unions and collective bargaining are essential to any serious leftwing agenda. Unions give workers a collective voice, enabling them to negotiate over wages, hours, and working conditions. They also provide a democratic structure through which workers can participate in decisions that affect them. The decline of union density in many countries has coincided with rising inequality and a sense of powerlessness among workers.

Rebuilding worker power requires more than just legal reforms; it requires a cultural shift that values collective action. The left must champion unions not just as a special interest but as a democratic force that can help restore balance to the economy. This means supporting sectoral bargaining, making it easier to organize, and ensuring that labor rights are enforced.

Lessons from Australia and Beyond

The debate over control is not confined to the UK. In Australia, politicians like Bridget McKenzie have made headlines by declaring war on leftwing globalists, tapping into a similar desire for control and sovereignty. As we reported, Bridget McKenzie declared war on leftwing globalists at CPAC London, a move that resonates with voters who feel left behind by globalization. While the left may disagree with McKenzie's politics, it must understand the underlying demand for control that she is exploiting.

Similarly, the Michigan primary showed a Democratic leftwing shift, with voters fed up with the status quo. These examples illustrate that the question of control is central to contemporary politics, and the left must offer a compelling answer that goes beyond individual advancement.

In Australia, the Bridget McKenzie-led conservatives are in a war against leftwing globalists, framing the debate as one of national sovereignty versus global elites. The left needs a response that speaks to workers' desire for control over their daily lives, not just abstract notions of global solidarity. The background to this story is set out in Claire Ainsley's New Book Challenges the Left to Take Back Control. A related thread runs through EPA Union Sues Trump Administration to Restore Collective Bargaining.

Ultimately, the left must embrace a vision of control that is collective and democratic. It must empower workers to organize and bargain, and it must recognize that the ambition to live a decent life is as worthy as the ambition to get ahead. Only then can it truly take back control for working people. Earlier coverage in UK PM's Working-Class Reboot: Unions Demand Action, Not Just Words shows how the argument developed. A closer look at the same subject appears in Unions Warn Labour's Zero-Hours Plan May Break Manifesto Pledge.

FAQ