In February I suggested that those who commented regularly here were offering opinions that were far too well reasoned, and important, to be consigned to the comments section of this blog. For good reason many people do not go near comments sections: they are usually far too toxic to be compatible with well-being. I have worked hard to avoid that on this blog but I suggested that there was a need for a new blog so that these opinions might attract a bigger audience, and grow into place where wider discussion could occur.
Others agreed. A dozen or so people expressed interest. Sean Danaher, Peter May and Bob Edwards took more leading roles in differing ways (and I do not wish to dismiss the offerings of others) and now Progressive Pulse is up and running. Please take a look.
My hope is that this blog will provide the opportunity for serious debate. I have a small role: the not-for-profit company that publishes the site is based at my address and I am a director because I have experience of such things and not because I am not making editorial decisions. These are being undertaken by a collective effort.
Moderation will be on the same basis and will be undertaken on a similar basis to that done here: persistent abuse or time wasting will not be tolerated. This is the only way in which discussion can occur in the face of those who think freedom is a description of the right to abuse and oppress others. Those with a proven track record of abuse here will find that they are already unwelcome on this new blog: there is no point in them trying their luck.
From the outset it was decided that the new blog should have a decided tone to it. As the 'About' page says of the motivations for the site:
Politics
- We are a centre left blog and are not affiliated to any political party but are willing to support like minded people in the Green, Labour and Lib Dem parties, and even some on the left of the Tory party.
- We do not support and actively oppose individual and parties that espouse right wing populism, totalitarianism, racism, sectarianism, bigotry or English (or any other form of) supremeism either expressed overtly or covertly. This includes the right wing of the Tory Party and UKIP.
- We believe in wider participation and electoral reform including PR and that governance and economic wealth in the UK is being increasingly skewed towards the South East of England. New structures are needed to address this.
- We very much regret Brexit and believe the UK will be impoverished Economically, Academically, Culturally and Diplomatically and that Brexit may cause the UK to break up with the loss of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Furthermore the normalisation of anti immigrant and racist rhetoric is a stain on the country, with potentially very unpleasant consequences in the future.
Creed
- We believe in society that works for the many not the few, which minimises wealth inequality, maximises education opportunity, delivers health and social care for all and provides decent housing and well-being for all its citizens.
- We believe in society that cherishes all the children of the nation equally, irrespective of race, religion, gender, age or sexual orientation.
- We believe that we hold the Earth in stewardship for future generations and that we have obligation to do what we can to enhance sustainability and combat climate change.
- We believe in a mixed economy where both the private and public sector works in partnership where for example the NHS and rail should be in public ownership and all retail and most manufacturing in private ownership.
- We believe our Society is enhanced by multiculturalism and celebrate diversity, but understand that too little has been done for areas which have been left behind by automation and international free trade over the past four decades.
- We believe in objective truth not dogma and that decisions must be made on the best available evidence. This is of increasing importance as the use of fake news and agnotology is on the rise.
- We believe new economic and social thinking is needed. Neoliberalism which came to prominence in the Thatcher/Reagan era, which puts money and markets before people, has worked for the few not the many and has been in crisis since the 2008 banking crash.
- We believe we are on a journey and there is a need to both educate and be educated, but that radically new economic and structural models are needed.
- We believe in having as close a relationship to our neighbours particularly the EU and believe in a spirit of cooperation and friendship rather than belligerence.
Direction
We are a progressive movement and know that our ideas need to evolve with the times:
— Step 1 is to provide a forum for ideas. This is here at progressivepulse.org
— Step 2 is to synthesise these ideas into a coherent vision fit for the 21st century.
— Step 3 is to develop a movement for the vision
— Step 4 is to promulgate the vision.
It's my intention to promote this new blog and I will do so, regularly.
It's also my intention to encourage people to write for it. This is a platform that will succeed if it has a regular supply of strong voices willing to put forward progressive ideas. If you want to be involved this is possible either by using the form on the Progressive Pulse site http://www.progressivepulse.org/contact-us/ or by emailing progress@progressivepulse.org
I am grateful to those who grabbed this idea and ran with it.
I wish the whole project well.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
What a good project, I wish I could help by contributing. Maybe I’ll think and see what would be a good fit.
Thanks Richard
1) I put the “About” section together and have tried to summarise the concerns of the Progressive Pulse team. It is however a working document and there is room to comment on the page. Constructive suggestions are very welcome.
2) A very strong motivator was giving voice to the voiceless. One has only to look at recent Daily Mail headlines to appreciate that Totalitarian tactics are being used to intimidate those on the centre left. This will be a safe place a Troll free zone as all comments will be moderated. As Obama said “We can disagree without being disagreeable” so we will not dismiss well argued comments however ant abuse and “ad hominem” comments will not be tolerated.
3) There is a good piece from Prof Simon Wren-Lewis: When journalism becomes propaganda: https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/when-journalism-becomes-propaganda.html
It is a big worry that there seems to be to me at least an increasing gap between perception and reality. I expect propaganda from the right wing press; the worry is that even the BBC is not always immune these days and often confuses relativism with impartiality. (Though in Climate Change at least it seems to be better than it was).
4) We will try to keep a regular flow of posts going; but that is up to the readers to some extent. The editorial team has different strengths but often on the science, computing, engineering and mathematical side. I personally am not a natural writer am am stunned by people like Richard who can write 8000 words on a good day.
5) One feature is Book of the Month; the first one for May is Richard Murphy’s “Dirty Secrets – How Tax Havens Undermine the Economy”
6) Another page is Tactical-2017 which is a link to a set of resources to vote tactically in the DE in June. We have adopted the slogan “Let June be the end of MAY!” suggested by a contributor on this site. Take a bow we need to attribute this to you.
A big thanks again to everyone who has helped.
Wish us well!
As far as I can see, it is not possible to subscribe to Progressive Pulse.
Will that change?
I will ask the team
“We are a centre left blog and are not affiliated to any political party but are willing to support like minded people in the Green, Labour and Lib Dem parties, and even some on the left of the Tory party.”
What about Plaid Cymru, the SNP, and parties in Northern Ireland
I would like to think a more general support of any like minded people in any political party is your position and not stating this is merely an oversight.
I think it would be good to in include them where appropriate
The more reasonable voices the better, of course.
Do any of those parties – the Scottish and Welsh nationalists, and the Northern Irish parties – espouse forms of sectarianism or national supremeism (if that is that a word)? Their forms of nationalism are OK?
Unlike some voices on the left, Progressive Pulse is clearly in favour of the EU, but is it in favour of the UK? Or it agnostic on Scottish and Welsh independence, or Irish reunification?
Andrew
I’m from Dublin and can speak for the Irish situation. I’m quite agnostic towards reunification. I want everyone in Northern Ireland to be treated decently and fairly. There is some of my thinking in If we close our eyes will we know we have left the EU? http://www.progressivepulse.org/brexit/if-we-close-our-eyes-will-we-know-we-have-left-the-eu/; but its a fairly long read.
Regarding Scotland we need a Scottish correspondent so to speak; but there is a big difference in my mind between sectarian nationalism and positive inclusive nationalism.
My feeling is that we are also agnostic about Scottish and Welsh independence but we need a fuller discussion.
I would very much like to express total support for your agenda and the reasoning on which it is based. I more than wish you well in this endeavour, not least because this country, and a few more besides, need the coherent, educated and informed ideas I have no doubt will emerge from it.
I hope that, in the not too distant future, I will have the time to offer some thoughts of my own to add to the mix. Until I Have that time, I’ll follow Progressive Pulse with as much daily fervour as I do Richard.
My thanks to all those who have played a part in making this happen.
I hope you can contribute Nick
Do any of those parties — the Scottish and Welsh nationalists, and the Northern Irish parties — espouse forms of sectarianism or national supremeism (if that is that a word)? Their forms of nationalism are OK?
Andrew are you for real? You are actually asking if the SNP supports any form of sectarianism or national supremeism?
Let me just challenge the on-going myth that the SNP are diisive nats.
Firstly, we are The Scottish National Party, (for the whole nation) not the Scottish Nationalist party. A fine distinction granted, but an important one.
To understand where the SNP are coming from, we should make the distinction between ethnic and civic nationalism. The SNP believes in the latter.
Ethnic Nationalists, (I take it that is what you mean by supremeism?) by contrast, emphasise exceptionalism, “born into” citizenship, inheritance, common roots, blood inheritance, ethnic rules and unity by provenance. They believe that the glue that holds society together is not shared political rights, but pre-existing ethnic characteristics. (Tories) Common ethnicity helps people unite against others, as we see in the rise of hate crimes across the UK, but it does not help people overcome divisions such as gender, class, and division of resources.
This is diametrically opposed to the ethos of SNP. The last thing the SNP are promoting is exclusivity. If the SNP are nationals, then they are civic nationals. Civic Nationalism emphasises rule by consent, democratic pluralism, liberty and strength in diversity. It provides the framework in law, legislative possibilities and political participation to reconcile differences.
We in the SNP are deeply concerned about Brexit and not just on the economic front. We are worried about the cruel new culture of xenophobia and isolationism that has been unleashed. We welcome and need our European nationals. (I’m embarrassed that I even need to make that statement because it shouldn’t even have to be said.) We are alarmed that we are entering a world that has seen a new and worrying war against human rights with Le Pen and her party’s history of fascism and racism and we are determined to resist the tide of hate. The turn of events in Europe and the US should be a rallying cry for progressives in all parties. If we don’t defend our values then they are no better than meaningless.
For those who think the SNP is anti-English, you must think again. This is a deliberate lie carry out by certain sections of the media who are hell-bent on stirring up war between Scotland and England putting Scotland in its place. I have far too many English friends in the SNP to buy that lie. We in the SNP, whether we are Scots, English, Canadian, French, German, Dutch, Indian, Irish, Pakistani or any other nationality, believe in progressive politics of inclusivity and the value of interdependence among nations, a view that runs counter to the fear-filled sentiment of the exclusive nationalism of Brexit and the right wing press who dominate the news in our country.
The SNP do not believe that we in Scotland are ‘better’ than any other nation, but just that we can think of ourselves as ‘as good as’ any other nation, something that our masters in Westminster seem to find very difficult to get their imperialist heads round.
I hope that has cleared a few things up for you.
I share your view of the SNP
To share a view on the SNP and independence I think you need to to be Scottish. The whole independence argument is very emotive and despite what the SNP or anyone else says for that matter unless you are and feel Scottish your view does not matter. Excluding Scottish people who live in England from voting was just plain wrong and who knows which way they would have voted. And remember the SNP 45% vote share got them 95% of their Westminster seats. A system , unless I misunderstand , that you fundamentally disagree with. Anyway , horses for courses I suppose.
Members of the SNP ask me my opinion. I am not Scottish
I was not talking about you or anyone else the Nats speak to. My point was a general one. I would have thought the whole point of of ‘ self determination ‘ in a vote about the future as a nation was obvious. And I am sorry to offend but if you are not Scottish or have only lived there for a couple of years you cannot understand what it means to be Scottish and I include both sides of the argument in that – I understand where both sides are coming from and it is very divisive and , as I say , very emotive.
I am very aware it is emotive
I am aware Irish nationalism was and is emotive
And I am aware such sentiments can give rise to abuse
But human failing does not mean nationalism per se is wrong
That is an extrapolation I cannot make
One I can make is that nationalism does not permit oppression
And I would suggest nationalism should always embrace a recognition of ‘the other’
What is this term “Scottish” of which you speak Michael?
The independence argument is clearly emotive, but the campaign includes people who live in Scotland and self-identify as English, German etc. They may not *be* Scottish by whatever your definition is, but they either feel Scottish because they live here or they just support the idea of self-determination of the country they have chosen to live in.
I wonder why you single out “Scottish” people who live in England to be included in a referendum franchise? Would you also prohibit anyone living in Scotland who is not “Scottish” from voting in a referendum? Would that also apply to elections for the Scottish Parliament and local councils?
It is also generally agreed that any other referendum franchise would have been impractical.
The question of independence may be divisive, but it seems to me that is true of all elections, and life in general. It would be a strange world if there was not a divide between those who vote Tory and those who vote Labour; or for Le Pen versus Macron.
Wherever I lived in the UK, I would vote in GE17 for any party but Tory to stop Theresa May getting an increased majority under FPTP – because I believe she is trying to stop division. Am I being divisive – no, I’m voting in the best interests of the country.
Note: The SNP have always, even after the 2015 GE result in Scotland, vociferously supported proportional representation and have made it clear they would support any move in that direction at Westminster.
Grace I don’t want to pester but I would love an extended article on Scottish Nationalism for Progressive Pulse and you will be of course credited in full.
However these islands are governed in future a disproportionate amount of resources are being poured into London and the South of England. In some years for every £1000 spent on infrastructure spent in London and the South East less than 50p has been spent in the North East of England (I think the West Country does even worse). And pretty much any UK growth in the past decade has also been in the SE.
Is London and the SE bleeding the rest of the country dry or would the UK be in an even worse position without them? Discuss!
The Northumberland roads are a potholed disgrace. The road between Newcastle and Edinburgh (the A1) is not even a dual carriageway for large sections never mind a motorway. Both extended conurbations have well over £1M people.
There is over 1000km of motorway in the Republic of Ireland; what’s the comparative figure for Scotland?
Not in a position to answer today -Grandma duties!
I’ll be back 😉
Sean
Reminds me of when I was younger, and reading Geography in Leeds.
There was a French book which we were recommended to read – ‘Paris et le Desert Francais.’ (Our prof was interested in the geography of regional development.)
France has corrected its bias to some extent. (Toulouse and Montpellier are the cities I immediately think of.) The UK, on the other hand, has taken some of the criticisms in the book, and implemented the policies criticised.
But then the French have had some politicians who have thought about the long term. The UK , since the 1950’s, has been ruled by short-termism.
I don’t think there’s any one politician now who thinks beyond the next election – the one we’re having doesn’t count! Except, perhaps, for some in the Greens, and in the SNP. ‘Without a vision, the people perish.’
And the UK may fall apart – I have to admit to a bit of Schadenfreude here!
Thanks Grace, I found that very interesting. I’ve always been against nationalism, associating it, in the main, with aggressive right wing ideologies of conquest, racial supremacy, exploitation and violent conflict. Which is where British nationalism comes from.
Civic nationalism, as you define it, is a different matter, and makes me view the SNP in a new light. If all the SNP was about was anti-English resentment (understandable given how badly run the UK is from Westminster, but hardly an inspiring political message) I’d have little time for it, but as a vehicle for the progressive values espoused by social democrats I’m firmly in favour. If its a choice between these values or the imperialistic delusions of grandeur of the Britnats, I know which side I’m on.
I was planning to raise the “issue” of Scotland in particular as a topic for Progressive Pulse but, thanks to Grace, I don’t need to say much at this point.
It’s also encouraging, but not surprising, to see a positive response to what she had to say so far. Here’s hoping the Grandma duties, as pleasant as I’m sure they are, do not prevail for too long.
Yours sincerely, a Grandpa.
Thanks, Grace. I was just asking the question, which you have forcefully answered in respect of Scotland, so thank you. It seems your answer has give helped several other people too.
There is of course a fine distinction between different sorts of nationalism, and indeed patriotism. But I have to say: the label “national” rather than “nationalist” gives me no comfort whatsoever – there are plenty of nasty groups who use the same word. The ethos and the policies are the important things.
I am not so convinced that the Northern Irish parties are as free from sectarianism or “supremeism” as the SNP might be. But perhaps someone from Ulster can explain why I have got that completely wrong too.
I’m still not sure what “supremeism” means – I was just quoting it from the page where Progressive Pulse say what they are all About, so perhaps they should explain what they mean by it.
You need an internet whiz to get you higher up the google search.
At present if you google “progressive pulse” at the top of the list is an american site and then a lifestyle/leisure site. No mention of your site that I can see
Give it time…
If you use DuckDuckGo (the search engine that doesn’t track you) progressive pulse is number one!
Yay!
As some of my friends say
I should choose them more carefully
I just googled progressive pulse, hoping to start pushing it upwards and it came up first
Great
Actually, no I didn’t google it – I use Ecosia – first on that SE.
Good idea. The website dosent work well on an iPhone though, the Facebook etc links sit over the text of the articles making them harder to read
An issue to look at
Anth
Sorry; as Richard says we are looking into it. We are just volunteers so bear with us
Sean
Folks
Have not read as far as I’d like at this point but would like to:
a) laud your project,
b) ask whether you think there can be useful cross-fertilization between this & other projects like the “pan-European, cross-border movement of democrats” https://diem25.org/ and the Scotland based http://allofusfirst.org/vision/
c) ask whether there my be any interest in looking at jury based selection of our representatives as it is hard to see the vote based democracy, as influenced by the heavily biased MSM who are in turn in the pay of those with power & money, going in the right direction.
Best of luck
OT
Both good groups
I know the Scottish one well – and love what it does
Oscar
I have added both links. I was well aware of DiEM25 and have heard Scottish friends talk about Common Weal.
Regarding Jury based selection of representatives it is an interesting idea. If you put together a piece we can publish in Progressive Pulse and see if we can get a discussion going.
My heartfelt best wishes with this.
Well done to all.