The greatest political trait on display in 2018 was procrastination. Call it dithering if you like.
Theresa May was master of the art.
Jeremy Corbyn gave her a tremendous run for the title.
Jacob Rees-Mogg pursued the same strategy from a position of total politic irresponsibility.
And almost everyone else (with honourable pardons for the SNP, Plaid and the Greens) pretended that it is dogma and not the pragmatic ability to decide in a fashion consistent with principles that really matters in politics. Almost all the cabinet and I think the entirety of the shadow cabinet fell into that trap.
It was, then, what might best be described as a dismal year for UK politics.
But that was 2018. If the act is repeated in 2019 we leave the EU without a deal in the biggest act of wilful national self-destruction witnessed in living memory in what might be, optimistically, called the developed world. It will take an extraordinary act of collective neglect of duty by Westminster's politicians to achieve this goal, but if May and Corbyn continue as they have fur the last year it is entirely possible it will happen. Only the desire or back benches acting with wisdom and courage seemingly almost entirely absent in 2018 can prevent this now.
Will such courage be found outside the smaller parties? I have no idea. None at all. But some in them surely know that dogmatic belief is not enough to make a politician? Dogma is the stuff of academics. Real politics, like real business, cannot be driven by narrow-minded belief alone. That's largely because few such beliefs are widely shared and successful politics is a wide tent seeking to fulfil the needs of many, if not most in a population. We seem to have forgotten that. It would be very good if this understanding was rediscovered in 2019. For all our sakes.
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:
Little puzzled as to how decisions that are to be made by the govt. can be the subject of procrastination by the opposition
The Oppositiuon has not opposed
That is their job
They have failed because they too have procrastinated
And for heaven’s sake stop being in denial about it
Hello Richard and a happy new year to you.
Do you predict a recession for 2019?
There are many reasons for thinking it possible
I think on balance it is more likely than not
Good Sir,
I respectfully beg to differ and (avoiding the more frequently discussed topics) offer this as one of my main reasons:
“Companies buying back their own shares is the only thing keeping the stock market afloat right now” (US)
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/02/corporate-buybacks-are-the-only-thing-keeping-the-stock-market-afloat.html
Actually, I picked that one mostly for the headline. This one is much better: “Beware the ‘mother of all credit bubbles’ ”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/beware-the-mother-of-all-credit-bubbles/2018/06/08/940f467c-69af-11e8-9e38-24e693b38637_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9b57931c41ec
And this one has a very interesting chart which shows that a longer trend toward share buybacks had crossed what I believe to be a threshold in 2015 where the percentage of corporate ‘net operating surplus’ (something like profit) spent on buybacks exceeded the corporate spend on net capital formation (something like genuine investment):
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/22/17144870/stock-buybacks-republican-tax-cuts
Bloomberg takes thas conclusion a little further:
“Buybacks exceeded capital expenditures over the five years through 2017, while wages stagnated and workers’ share of business income remained near record lows.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/buybacks-dividends.
That trend has accelerated sharply as Trump’s big corporate tax cuts have funded a greater expansion of buybacks. This cannibalistic frenzy (‘the only thing keeping the market afloat’) has been going for a while, spiked recently, cannot last indefinitely and has probably peaked already:
https://www.insigniscash.com/are-we-reaching-the-top-share-buybacks-and-the-increasing-importance-of-cash/ (see chart).
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/06/record-share-buybacks-may-signal-end-of-bull-market-is-near-blank.html
I’m not saying that there definitely will be a crash or recession in 2019 but to me, it does seem to be more probable than not.
https://www.ft.com/content/1aaac576-e9bb-11e4-a687-00144feab7de
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/are-stock-buybacks-starving-the-economy/566387/
https://www.ft.com/content/9d62b65e-9c8d-11e7-8cd4-932067fbf946
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4156578-buyback-bubble-will-end-badly
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/stock-market-buybacks-keep-bull-market-afloat-8-companies-2018-9?r=UK&IR=T
For once, I was being cautious
Silly me!
Oh dear, having re-read your original reply there it occurs to me that we are in agreement. At first glance I thought you were saying that you thought the recession unlikely in 2019. It seems that I am the silly one. Oh well.
From what I know of procrastination, it is fermented by fear – fear of failure in particular.
There are all sorts of potential failures at work here to be afraid of:
– the failure of the Tory party itself
– the failure of the Tory government and its project to rip up post war Britain.
– the failure of Corbyn’s tenure of the Labour party and Momentum and maybe the splitting of the Labour
– the failure to get a deal of some kind
– the failure to deliver a BREXIT of any kind
– the failure of perfectly functioning import and export movements
– the failure to get replacement fair trading deals.
– the failure to keep one’s word (‘BREXIT means BREXIT’)
There are no doubt more fears out there. But that to me is the sub-text to 2018 and maybe 2019: FEAR.
The bravest thing to do is to confront the failure to deliver BREXIT and stop it once and for all and if the far right licks off confront them too and face them down with the sort of zero tolerance we have shown to the Irish people during the troubles for example. I would like to see Labour or a coalition of progressives tackle this.
And then we need to reinvest in happiness to heal the rifts that the Tories have created – hopefully through a Labour government or a coalition of progressives through PQE/GQE.
You are right that ear will drive a great deal in 2019
Pilgrim Slight Return says:
“From what I know of procrastination, it is fermented by fear — fear of failure in particular.”
Yes. I’m inclined to agree in general with that assertion, but never underestimate the fear of success.
It is difficult to conclude other than that Labour has avoided effective opposition because they have been afraid of forcing a GE and winning it.
In theory at least, it ought to be to be easier to take the wheel and steer clear of the rocks than wait until the ship is holed and the best that can be hoped for is something is left which is worth salvaging. Add to that that Labour will be blamed (if they win the salvage contract) for the dismal price they can get for the scrap.
All I’m saying Andy is that with so many things to fear inside and outside of each party, it is fear that will hold back reason or stifle progress regarding BREXIT and results in a case of who blinks first, who loses their nerve.
And of course, it is the people of this country that are caught in the middle awaiting their fate as this apparent game of chicken goes on.
Pilgrim Slight Return says:
“….. this apparent game of chicken goes on…..”
This ain’t ‘chicken’, Pilgrim.
Brexit is a turkey 🙂
It’s well stuffed, and it ain’t gonna fly.
“Dogma is the stuff of academics.”
I’m not sure even academics can legitimately hide behind dogma.
They certainly should not be allowed to. (or is that too dogmatic a statement 🙂 )
Scientists are now increasingly leaving behind the dogma that the universe is based purely on mechanical rules and seeing the central role played by information, it’s creation and processing function (towards increased complexity both genetic and culturally in the case of human beings) in conjunction with mass and energy.
This is not so in regard Brexit where the role played by information is ignored. The WTO and the EU have adopted free market capitalism as their central dogma in which competition based on the Hayekian concept of the wide and free dissemination of information in the shape of price signals is the central dogma.
This means both organisations exist by rules that do their best to discourage the distortion of those signals by government subsidies. What both organisations ignore, however, is not only do many countries play unfairly by finding means to provide government subsidies but capitalism itself distorts the “free” market through control of capital by the few.
Capital is after all a form of information and if jobs are outsourced to low wage economies or those which cheat in terms of subsidising their export businesses in one form or another then those workers whose countries play fair suffer through lack of decent paying income opportunites.
In short the “informational” aspects of free market capitalism are not being tackled in Brexit. This is not to say the UK because it isn’t a self-sufficient country doesn’t need to carefully consider what kind of trading arrangements it has with other countries and that the factors determining the arrangements should cover a large range including the outbreak of hostilities between countries over economic matters and of course governments being able to deploy MMT.
I say, steady up, Richard. “Dogma is the stuff of academics.” Well, only if they are the sort who shouldn’t be in the academy. From scientists to historians, we are the last people to be so labelled, for the role of supplying judgement for us is matched by our awareness of its necessary fragility when faced with new work/ evidence/ improved analysis. Perhaps your gloomy view of our tribe is derived from too much contact with economists? One or two do perhaps spring to mind…
However, on the dogma ridden state of our politics, you are certainly right – especially on the Brexit/Lexit front lines. Nothing but a willingness of ordinary MPs to rediscover their constitutional role – at least to the extent of the shuffling off of the decision to the public – will save the ‘U’K from the insanity of Brexit, be it a la May or a la Mogg. The appallingly maladroit Home Office video for EU citizens stinks of the xenophobic pioson that these fact-free dogmatists have either deliberately unleashed (at the Tory Brexit end) or shamefully connived at by inaction (at the Corbynite/Lexit end). Corbyn’s latest ‘call for the recall of Parliament’ for the “meaningful vote” is yet another piece of time-wasting grandstanding by the worst Opposition leader facing the worst PM in memory. What is the point when he failed to mount a genuine No Confidence vote which could have forced the issue? The only possible conclusion is that he is actively conniving in the running down of the clock to satisfy his own Lexitanian doctrine.
Perhaps worst of all is the deliberate expenditute of billions on ‘No Deal’ contingencies, when May says she doesn’t want that outcome. This profligacy on a gigantic scale… and for what? A means of terrorising MPs by threats of economic, social and even physical harm into providing the outcome which satisfies her own – demonstrably unpopular – political demands. I thought we had laws against that. Maybe MPs will notice, resent and rediscover at least half their backbones… and if so all may yet be saved.
As that late, great Biblical scholar Rev Prof. Willie Barclay used to say, when indulging a particularly dubious piece of scriptural exegesis – “Of course, there’s no evidence for it, but it’d be lovely to think, lovely to think….”.
You’re right
I see too much social science
And some related subjects where dogma far too often prevails
I should not have maligned all academics
When it comes to leaving the EU what you have written above is your opinion. There are others with different opinions and the two I have been reading are Costas Lapavitsas and Bill Michell. From reading those I conclude that the EU is a bastion of neoliberalism and will not be reformed from within. You think it can. Well, we shall see. Anyway, happy new year.
I have said it before and I will say it again: if you will sacrifice the well-being of millions for your dogma I have not an iota of respect for your opinion
Or that of thsoe whose opinion you are following
Bill Mitchell, most especially
But the well being of millions has already been sacrificed by British Governments in thrall to the market place and financialisation. I find this whole discussion tiresome in its Brexit=Bad, Remain=Good. If that is not dogma then it’s awfully close to it. Where is the enlightened discussion about how to reverse neoliberalism? On these pages, none. Bill Mitchell discusses that, Costas Lapavitsas discusses that. On the Remain Camp just the vain hope that remaining in the EU might make things better with no evidence at all that it will. Look at France, look at Greece,look at Italy .. the whole edifice is rotten. Phlogisten, bloody phlogisten. Cling to nurse … good heavens, I’m totally fed up with Corbyn getting the blame for all this. Life may be comfortable for a lot of people but for a helluva lot more it’s bad and getting worse.
That was the choice of Torygovernments
Labiur’s Fiscal Rule shows it us committed to the same austerity still, and even to the household analogy.
I suggest you stop blaming everyone else and get your own party in order
It so happens Bill Mitchell would entirely agree
I think that “the fiscal rule” will quietly disappear if it hasn’t effectively done so already. It is passe.
In the Trump era fiscal rules seem to be quietly disappearing everywhere. While I have no regard for Trump I must say that he has been inadvertently useful in some ways (though unfortunately not enough). A lot of disruption has occurred since “the fiscal rule” first appeared. Priorities and perspectives have changed. The Italians have shown some leadership on this in more difficult (EZ) circumstances and while they may be backing-off a bit for now they will be back and fighting again soon enough. History is on their side
We shall see what happens on that account, here, there and everywhere.
James Meadway was tweeting Labour’s commitment to it this week
“James Meadway was tweeting Labour’s commitment to it this week” Well of course he was, they haven’t been elected yet 🙂 Weren’t the Tories going to do all manner of wonderful things before they got elected? Once elected, they claimed the nation’s books were in a far worse state than they’d realised and therefore they had to abandon all their election promises (remember how their manifesto disappeared from the web?) and tragically introduce austerity so the books would balance. Why would you imagine Labour aren’t playing a similar game?
Marco Fante says:
“I think that “the fiscal rule” will quietly disappear if it hasn’t effectively done so already. It is passe.”
Indeed. Both Germany and France have ignored it when they felt it was in their interests to do so. !!
“…..While I have no regard for Trump I must say that he has been inadvertently useful in some ways (though unfortunately not enough). ”
Not enough, indeed. I’d say his utility was short-lived, mostly rhetorical, and now evaporated. He’s been very effectively corralled. Reigning him in instigated the whole of Russia-gate which is mostly an elaborate fiction, and the top end tax cuts were a slap in the face if he recognised it. I don’t think he did. The FED is killing the Trump boom and what’s he going to do about it? Not a lot.
” The Italians have shown some leadership on this in more difficult (EZ) circumstances and while they may be backing-off a bit for now they will be back and fighting again soon enough. History is on their side”
They wanted 2.5% and got 2.05%, but they broke the 2% barrier. Chalk that as a success. Without them the EZ is dead. They have the whip-hand if they are prepared to use it responsibly. Last year they bailed-OUT their banks when the EU rules said they should be bailing-in. Who raised a murmur? No-one.
Rules are made to be broken, (well tested to destruction)….when there are some that look plausible some bright spark will write them down and pretend to have invented them. They’ll maybe stand until they no longer suit. Possibly for months. 🙂
We are in a state of Flux. It’s a Clusterflux 🙂
Rod White says:
“But the well being of millions has already been sacrificed by British Governments in thrall to the market place and financialisation.”
Absolutely. For four decades. Both sides of the house played the same tune.
” I find this whole discussion tiresome in its Brexit=Bad, Remain=Good.”
If somebody had bothered to make the case for ‘Remain=Good’ in the run up to the referendum, we might not be where we are. Every ‘Remain’ statement was prefaced with, ‘The EU may not be perfect , but…..’
NOBODY was speaking for ‘Remain’ except as anti-leave. A rearguard. The rearguard always gets minced.
Brexit isn’t going to be ‘bad’. It’s going to be disastrous. Hard or soft there is nothing in it for the UK. Nothing at all.
While none of us can prove any of this I suspect that Bill Kruse is more or less right in this case.
Blairite diehards will ocassionally kid themselves that fiscal recititude is still a priority while apparently paying little attention to it. Other Labour members will humour them knowing that the issue is a dead letter (so why bother starting a fight).
Things are changing too rapidly for the diehards to adapt quickly (with the US Republicans being one obvious exception). The Germans, the Bundesbank in particular (and therefore Brussels), will be the last to cave in but cave in they eventually will.
At the popular level (grassroots, social media even mainstream media) it seems that no one really cares about that fiscal surplus crap anymore. Not much anyway. Things have moved on. No one openly says that, well not outright. Its just that the nonsense of balanced budgets is rapidly losing whatever grip it once had on the popular imagination.
“This (the GOP) is supposed to be the party of fiscal conservatism. Suddenly, deficits don’t matter, even though just two years ago, when the deficit was lower, they said, ‘I couldn’t help working families or seniors because it was, the deficit was, in existential crisis.”
Barack Obama, 7 Sept 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrTNIT3BK3s
It’s still hardcore in Labour
“It’s still hardcore in Labour” Hardcore in which Labour though? Can one even speak of Labour as an entity when clearly there are two, one with McDonnell and Corbyn which might readily be associated with the beer and sandwich traditionals, and then the Cheerleaders such as Umunna and Yvette ‘May all your wheelchairs be imaginary’ Cooper who appear intent on selling us out to the American insurance giants? Or any American giants who can pay well, really, food giants, health giants, whatever, just so long as they got the bucks. ..
I am talking of the Corbyn / McDonnell version
I have little acquaintance with the other one
Rod White,
Bill Mitchell’s contentions, as far as I am aware, concern the Eurozone first and foremost and not the EU.
Actually, I’ve just remembered that we went over this in August.
The “Fiscal Credibility Rule” is entirely conditional on the continued viability of monetary policy where non-viability means that the BoE has not reached the Zero Lower Bound (0% interest rates): Labour’s own document states that:
“When the Monetary Policy Committee decides that monetary policy cannot operate ( the “zero lower bound”), the Rule as a whole is suspended so that fiscal policy can support the economy.”
Given that interest rates have been below 1% for about 10 years and that monetary policy, as such is virtually dead, this is actually an ingeniously cunning device for ensuring that real fiscal policy would be used as soon as a serious crisis or downturn kicked in.
The genius is in the fact that it uses fiscal rectitude as a pretext for declaring the intention to use fiscal expansion and it quietly preys upon the establishment’s inability to acknowledge (or mention) that monetary policy is no longer ‘viable’. It also leaves the door open for MMT.
The Machiavellian in me is quite impressed. My full explanation for this conclusion is here in the comment at 7.48pm:
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2018/08/14/labours-fiscal-rule-is-much-worse-than-the-headlines-suggest/
I wish it was that clever
I know the authors…..
Pretty much agreed. The real issue for me us that science has not yet freed us from the specters of Inquisition and demagoguery. We’re in bad need of new institutions.
Agreed
‘Perfidious Albion’ and its rulers have endured through a long period of history. Its ‘modus operandi’ has usually been opaque in its presenation to the hoi-polloi and seldom has been driven by the interests of plain, ordinary people.
The Prime Minister, to my mind, has not simply procrastinated over the past year. She has refused to engage in ‘normal’ politics and has avoided any clear definition of fundamental policy over the leaving of the European Union. My fear is that our political leaders may be following undeclared agenda leading to who-knows-where. In short, the present state of apparent chaos may be an integral part of a plan for something of deeper significance to the governance of nations.
The fact that the term “conspiracy theorist” has become pejorative in recent times does not negate the actual existence of conspiracies, past and present. I just hope my anxiety is not well founded.
Shock Doctrine. Disaster Capitalism. Yes, that’s very likely.
Indeed, Phil McGlass: to quote Joseph Heller: “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.” When democracy has been undermined so consistently, with the Government having to be taken to court repeatedly over the past year simply to prevent the Prime Minister from effectively ruling by dictat; it is difficult to have faith in our unwritten constitution to keep her from acts of outright despotism. I long for an independent Scotland (with a proper written constitution) but fear the recent manoeuvres in the Supreme Court have paved the way for the Scottish Parliament to be dissolved. The chaos ensuing from No Deal Brexit could easily be used as an excuse to declare a state of emergency. The Home Secretary has just declared the landing of a few immigrants per day on the coast of England to be a “Major Incident.” An increase of 13% in food bank referrals during 2018 is not regarded as significant however, with a DWP spokesman opining: “The reasons why people use food banks are complex…”
I fear all parliaments might be dissolved
“I fear all parliaments might be dissolved”
In favour of what? Dictatorship with military backing?
That would be one way to prevent war in mainland Europe…..we’d have a civil war here instead.
I seriously wonder what the result of dissolving Holyrood would be; the new Scottish Office building looks like a part of a sinister gameplan. I think it would play very badly indeed.
In fact I’d rather not think about how badly that would play.
I fear martial law in the case of a hard Brexit and rage resulting chaos
And civil disorder if we remain
Perhaps a transition period of indeterminate length then, to keep the plates up in the air till circumstances change.
If martial law is implemented, what would the army do exactly? Are they going to be shooting their relatives and neighbours as they clamour for food and medicines, or their erstwhile colleagues, to save them from dying homeless on the streets? They might not be too keen on this, which is why I suggested long ago this role would be adopted by the American mercenaries, formerly Blackwater, now Academi. Or maybe the role will go to G4S, giving us all a laugh.
Phil Butler wrote “The chaos ensuing from No Deal Brexit could easily be used as an excuse to declare a state of emergency.”
I agree Phil, but there’s chaos a-plenty in the UK today with the UK Gov’t acting like headless chickens, sending out contradictory signals and procrastinating at the very moment when clear-headed decisions and actions are essential. They’ve already demonstrated that they can’t do efficient management in more normal times and clearly they can’t do crisis management either. The result is that the UK has become a laughing stock around the world, as reflected in Juncker’s despairing statement to Welt am Sonntag today: “I find it entirely unreasonable for parts of the British public to believe that it is for the EU alone to propose a solution for all future British problems. My appeal is this: get your act together and then tell us what it is you want. Our proposed solutions have been on the table for months.”
If ever there was a time for the Scottish Government to show clear thinking and announce a logical proposal to start secession from the UK it’s now. They’ve demonstrated competence in their governance of Scotland despite having one hand tied behind their backs by a devolution framework designed to fail regardless of which party is in power at Holyrood. By setting the secession ball rolling in 2019 they’d generate respect and support world-wide for being sensible and pragmatic in detaching Scotland from the whole UK Brexit shambles.
I have to say that I agree….
Any major institutional change involves some disruption. Getting into the EU was disruptive. Getting out will be disruptive too. The relevant question is whether the disruption is manageable and worthwhile.
State aid, public procurement, and socialization of industries are all very important policy levers that a sovereign government should be able to use without being second-guessed by an external institution that enforces an inherently neoliberal set of rules.
The UK needs to avoid the fate of Italy’s Marcora Law of 1985, which was suspended in the 1990s and re-introduced in a watered down form in early 2000s. The reason? According to the ECJ, giving workers right of first refusal when a business is up for sale, and having the state provide three quarters of the purchase price, contravened EU rules about competition and state aid.
The EU fosters vigorous debate within a narrow range of neoliberal policy options.
Democratic socialism is off the table under EU rules.
Reforming the EU into something that is non-neoliberal is a pipe dream – much more of a pipe dream than UK voters reforming UK institutions.
I wish the remainers would be pragmatic and understand how power works. They are letting the dogma of the EU limit the UK’s policy options.
Read George Peretz
Everything Labour wants to do is possible within EU law
As is the more radical Green New Deal
Stop making excuses for your claims
“State aid, public procurement, and socialization of industries are all very important policy levers that a sovereign government should be able to use without being second-guessed by an external institution that enforces an inherently neoliberal set of rules.”
In 2015, the UK spent 0.35% of GDP on state aid schemes (excluding railways), while France spent 0.62% and Germany 1.22% (Source: House of Commons briefing note published July 2017).
It was the decision of successive UK governments to minimize state aid schemes. It´s the UK that was and is wedded to the “let the market decide” idea.
If you look at the numbers above you see that Germany spends more than three times as much as the UK. Don´t blame the EU for it. Especially since the EU rules weren´t forced on the UK, they were negotiated between the EU member states. And every single member state had to agree to the rules.
And let me mention too that it was the UK since Thatcher which was pushing for a “neoliberal set of rules”. Plus enlargement of the EU at any opportunity.
Not to forget:
State aid also needs to follow the “WTO Subsidies Agreement”. Or will you leave the WTO too?
Public procurement. As far as I know the UK has signed the WTO “Agreement on Government Procurement” too.
“Socialization of industries”? What´s that supposed to mean exactly?
Germany does have a state owned bank for regional development.
Germany does have a dense net of local savings banks owned by local municipalities. Remunicipalisation of local water and power utilities is also happening (if sold at all).
The major German railway company DB is 100% state owned.
Germany still has cooperate co-determination. In any German business with at least 5 employees over the age of 18, the employees have the right to elect a works council.
Germany still has nationwide apprenticeship training programs.
And I´m genuinely curious. How is a single market supposed to work without rules for state aid? The single market is supposed to be “almost” like a national market.
Businesses in Kent would be deeply unhappy if businesses in Cornwall got state aid which would make them more competitive than Kentish ones?
Detlef says;
Amongst much that makes important points….
“Businesses in Kent would be deeply unhappy if businesses in Cornwall got state aid which would make them more competitive than Kentish ones?”
I think that’s a false comparison there…… businesses in Kent and Cornwall are in receipt (or not) of assistance from local government spending surely?
As for Central Government spending I suspect that a huge amount has gone into the establishment of Channel Crossing links, with massive knock on benefits to the Kentish Economy (or should that be ‘Economy of Kent’) and not a lot of anything into Cornwall for anything at all.
Small wonder there is a still small, but vociferous, independence movement in Cornwall.
If dogma is the stuff of academics, then they’re not very good ones…
Dogma is more often the stuff of unchallenging believers of any kind, it has invariably lead to extreme oppression, conflicts and destruction.
It has no place in a modern, democratic political environment.
For dogma to thrive, you need an autocratic leadership, and ignorant or/and desperate followers. We might have the former, potentially, but I hope we won’t have quite enough of the latter.
Labour and the Tories both seem to court the dogmatic fringes of their parties because that’s where they believe they’ll find most followers, who will put them in charge. Whether the leaders themselves believe in their own dogma is open to speculation, but what seems clear is that they both use it to try and gain power.
Meanwhile, they’re heading for disaster, followers and non-followers in tow.
The waking up from this hypnotic procrastination must come now, and the ‘small’ parties must find their voice, since they appear to be the only ones capable of enough lucidity and courage.
The binary political system has served its time, if we get out of the present mess, we must challenge the political system which lead to it.
Dogmatism is the way of the world. Most commenting in here are pretty dogmatic about global warming as a reality we need to get on with sorting out. I’m one, as deniers get me reaching for my gun. Climate science is by no means precise, though as a general scientist I know I’m always an approximater and modeller rather than truth-finder. Climate science, like any science, is contestable. The problem with most contesters is they are contemptible, bleating lines already fairly dealt with and little clue their counter-examples are already in the science. This said, it is rare to find people on ‘our side’ who know much of the science.
Academics usually control through limited syllabus and textbook and are little interested in creating circumstances for adventures with ideas. Most are dogmatised and have learned the disguise of liberal platitude. Plato (generally a dork) noticed half the human resource was female and suppressed. Two millennia later we have realised this in a small part of the world in still partial action. Dogmatism seems likely so successful because most of it is invisible in such as credibility, etiquette, politesse, weaponized political correctness and the feigned disinterestedness of the objective voice. The soggy mediocrity of neo-liberalism and neo-classicism is to be soaked-up everywhere in our schools, media and universities. Nodding agreement in this cultured and silent dogma makes any opposition to it ranting heresy.
Not sure the biggest sin was procrastination. I think the biggest, and most expensive, has been correction. The cost of correction financially and in wasted human energy has been enormous – billions, e.g. Railtrack: wrong, correct to Network Rail; on-off privatisation of failing train services; NHS and Council outsourcing: Capita – fail, more work for Capita. The same for Virgin; prisons and probation privatisation – fail – do it again with the same companies; MOD procurement – fail – do it again; school academisation – fail – finance them again, while the directors are paid £100,000 k +; PFI – fail, fail, fail.
Grayling gets promoted, so does Hunt.
The biggest failure of correction has been the cuts, e.g. council and social care. Major supplier of patients to the NHS. Funding cut, bed delays rise a third, annual costs of this go up to £600 million in 2016/2018 compared with 2010-2014.
And so it goes