The Many and the Few

How minimal and commonplace can a quotation or allusion be, and still be traced back to its source with some degree of confidence? Labour’s adoption of “For the many not the few” as its election slogan provoked comments on the Twitter (e.g. from Jonathan Freedland of the Grauniad) about whether Jeremy Corbyn realised he was quoting Tony Blair’s revised version of the infamous Clause IV – doing away with references to the common ownership of the means of production etc. – followed by the argument from Phillip Collins of the Times that this was actually taken from Pericles’ Funeral Oration, the famous line (as included in the preamble to the draft European Constitution!) that “our constitution is called a democracy, because it is administered for the sake not of the few but of the many [or: of the whole people]” (2.37).

I don’t actually recall any discussion, back in 1994/5, of the possible sources of Blair’s new wording, and I haven’t found anything helpful on the internet – any suggestions or information gratefully received! I’d always vaguely assumed it had some connection to Shelley’s The Masque of Anarchy – “We are many – they are few” – which on reflection seems unlikely, but does highlight the fact that the words and phrasing are so vague and conventional that it’s difficult to make a definite link to anything. What makes the Thucydidean line distinctive is the whole phrase, defining democracy in opposition to oligarchy (even when this is problematic; one C19 French translation preferred “our constitution is called ‘popular'” because of the negative connotations of democracy at the time). Blair and Corbyn aren’t talking about democracy as a system but about how a democratic society should be managed (implying that the institutions alone aren’t adequate, which looks less like a Periclean claim that a Cleonic one…); why should they look back to Pericles at all?

In the absence of further information, I’m sceptical that this is a quote or reference, rather than a very banal rhetorical trope (I mean, is *any* western political party ever going to claim to represent the few? Rather, they simply redefine the many to suit their own agendas). In which case the more interesting questions are about the process of attribution – is this another sign of the creeping Americanisation of a British political discourse, or of the ongoing infiltration of it by Thucydides, references to the Thucydides Trap and all (which, is, of course, simply a more specialised version of Americanisation)? Freedland’s original tweet has a certain ‘Gotcha!’ tone – hey, bet Corbyn doesn’t realise he’s quoting the accursed Blair! – whereas Collins seems less concerned to defend Corbyn than to deny Blair credit for coining the phrase (which is fair enough)…