There are times when I despair of the left and supposedly left wing think tanks. My current despair is the result of work by the Policy Network which says of itself:
Policy Network is a leading thinktank and international political network based in London. We seek to promote strategic thinking on progressive solutions to the challenges of the 21st century and the future of social democracy, impacting upon policy debates in the UK, the rest of Europe and the wider world.
In that case it's little surprising to find that it has today published this:
The report is quite extraordinary. It is nothing more or less than a puff for the City - who very clearly have funded it.
There is not a single mention of the City's role as a tax haven in the report.
Nor is there any hint of a link with the Crown Dependencies or Overseas Territories.
It's secrecy and unaccountability gets not a mention.
That it trashed the economy in the pursuit of global capitalism is ignored.
A hostile approach to the financial transaction tax is adopted.
The City is described as a force for good.
It is said that mechanisms used to force down wages, reduce worker security, strip tax from the UK and increase the wealth divide such as "private equity, venture capital and investment funds are of particular relevance in today's context of capital shortage and the need for a more innovation-based economy".
All in all its a perfect example of a left wing sell out and might suggest exactly why the Labour front bench has risen to almost none of the challenges that their Treasury team should have faced, leaving them trailing in the wake of the Tories with policies that are a pale imitation of what Osborne is proposing.
I look forward to a resounding condemnation from Labour.
I'm not expecting to hear it.
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:
You’ll die holding your breath waiting, Richard. Especially with Ed Balls as shadow chancellor.
They condemn coalition spending (or in their case, non spending) policies, then announce they will follow the same discipline.
Labour have promised several times to challenge the neoliberal economic consensus, only to stab those hungry for change in the back when it came to the crunch!
He who pays the piper: plays the tune.
An almost perfect example of ¨political capture¨
You will also note there has never been any ¨fight back¨ against the constant attachment of blame of our woes on the previous government.
Obviously they have received their orders from the piper/s.
I don’t understand why anyone should be disappointed by this. It would be wrong to have any expectation that Labour would tackle the colossal abuses of the financial institutions. They did nothing about tax avoidance from 1997 to 2010; they were all too ready to suck up to City bosses and Russian billionaires.
If you want a government that will take these people on you need to start voting Green. Yes, we have a long, long way to go but the journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.
Apologies, Richard, for hijacking your site for a nakedly party plug but it seemed appropriate. I hope you and your family have a peaceful Christmas and that you can keep up your inspirational work in 2014.
It’s a valid opinion
Remember I have co-authored Caroline Lucas several times
I agree with you Chris, and I vote Green (in Australia), however…we should not be surprised if one day, the Greens also succumb to the lure of free market economics.
My experience of global politics these last 20-30 years is that the corporate elite have the knack of co-opting the democratic process to their own ends. Political parties that have the highest of ideals seem to forget these when they eventually win office.
Take South Africa for example. The ANC had the aim of bringing social and economic reform to South Africa once Apartheid was defeated. This eventually happened, but the rich white capitalists retained control of the country’s assets and resources and millions of blacks still live in poverty (Have a read of these 2 pieces on Mandela: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/12/09-1 and http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/12/06-0 )
Clearly we have to work with what we have, but at the end of the day the party system may never deliver what we are seeking. What other options there are for large scale change, I’m not sure. Andrew Simms, in Cancel the Apocalypse, suggests ways in which individuals and communities are working around the ‘system’ to find solutions that the pollies won’t institute at national levels. Perhaps that’s the way of the future.
I think you´ll find that the polos´ are already working around things like that. I suspect that the legislation covering campaigning (the gagging law) and various others will have all-party support as they try desperately to build bigger walls between them and us. At least in the UK.
Nothing gets polos´ agreeing with each other like people getting interested in politics.
I suspect that the largely uncontrollable internet will be the target soon, the mainstream press (the ´free´ press) having already been captured on behalf of its owners.
It would be great if Occupy or UK Cut would publish a send up or spoof report. Humour has a way of driving home big issues.
I’ve written several comedy pieces with austerity and all of the above as central themes. My writing mentor Julie Rutterford loves them. Ice&fire human rights theatre in London love them. But ice&fire and other groups have had their funding slashed by The Arts Council. So they can’t produce them. Which is how things are going at the moment.
“Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it? This question, which at first sight might not seem difficult, is really one of the most difficult that can be asked.” Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy
The think tanks are guilty of failing in their primary academic and intellectual responsibility, Scepticism. They begin by assuming that their description of the status quo is accurate, complete and correct. They circumscribe the intellectual horizon of investigation for the sake of pragmatism. They often set goals for their research to achieve. Worst of all, having invested so much effort to achieve a result they defend it against all challenges, regardless of worth.
Robert Nozick’s exposition of neo-liberal philosophy in Anarchy State & Utopia was a wonderful display of intellectual brilliance, logical, cogent, coherent. It was also incomplete with no practical foundation. Nozick described an end game operation with no thought of how we get from where we are to where he would have us be. There was no description as to how society could rebuild societal, economic and political mechanisms to a new design.
We are reaping the rewards of adopting Nozick’s beautiful, simple but flawed dream, a fractured and crumbling society, a rejection of moral values. We have heard an RBS spokesmen say of their customers that they “have no duty to act fairly and in good faith” because the relationship is “purely contractual”. Our think tanks should be offering a sceptical critique – they are not. I resigned from my studies for an MA primarily because the faculty displayed a marked reluctance to consider alternative views to libertarianism. I hold a growing fear that we stand close to a socio-economic cascade failure and I too think our intellectuals are failing in their duty to prevent it by refusing to countenance ‘awkward’ alternatives to our present course.
Bill, spot on. Thanks