I read the opinion polls and despair.
How can 34% of people in this country think voting for Nigel Farage is an answer to their problems?
The problems are inequality. And poor public services. And a lack of skills to supply the services we need. As well as climate change. And a preponderance of low paid work. And people want to vote for a man who has said nothing in this election campaign on these issues. But his past statements suggest he will make all those issues worse.
And then there is Brexit. In 2016 he never discussed No Deal. WTO rules were not on the table. Switzerland and Norway were. So was Iceland. But the WTO? Never. And yet he now claims that the WTO is what people voted for, when they did not.
And people believe him.
How bad do the main parties have to be for this to happen? Very bad indeed, quite obviously. And they are.
It is very hard to find a remaining reason for the Conservative Party now. Its One Nation element is forgotten. The Brexit Party is the ERG in disguise. May might well be its last elected Prime Minister.
And Labour. I could be both angry and weep for its failure. As Corbyn dithers - and he does despite all Corbynite denial - the party becomes ever more irrelevant as people lose faith in its ability to deliver for them. I don't blame them. How can they know what the party will deliver when it, and its leader, will not say?
I wish the result was a breakthrough for other parties. Outside Scotland that is, where I am sure that this is all a gift to the SNP. And maybe in time other parties might gain.
But I cannot help but think that hard Brexit is where we are heading ever more certainly. And I am quite sure that this will be disastrous. And I am equally sure that this will only intensify the appeal of populist politics in England, at least.
There are moments to analyse. And there my be moments to worry. I will never stop the former. I rarely do the latter. But I am now. This situation is really quite worrying now. We're heading for situations where fascism is not just a remote, but a real possibility. The mayhem of a hard Brexit will be the breeding ground for that. And that this is now in the cards recalibrates the risk on this issue. It's now very real indeed.
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:
The European elections are being used as sort of poll on whether we should keep on with Brexit or not.
The pro-Europe parties should have priorities for the EU:
1) action on climate change, use of natural resources and environment
2) action on curbing the flow of hidden profits and tax to tax havens
3) more research into new technologies to compete with China and the USA and make us less vulnerable to American sanctions such as those threatened after the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear treaty.
There are more. Some of this can be done on a national scale but there has to be an international dimension to be most effective. It is why we need the EU.
and in that way we can offer an alternative to the politics of division and discrimination.
There is dark money flowing into and around Europe to promote just those things.
The video shows Farage meeting with Bannon who proposes links between people like Modi, Orban and Duterti and take on the issue of immigration. Bannon , the former Breibart editor, says it will be funded ‘somehow’. Fargae refers to the election in Alabama with the reactionary Roy Moore. How any decent person could vote for him, let alone campaign for his as Farage did, is beyond me.
Does anyone seriously think these people have in mind the best interests of ordinary people trying to get by? Bannon says they have to fight Corbyn and Sanders and , no doubt, social democratic values.
It is a sad truth that many are letting themselves be conned.
I think this supports your point about the danger of Fascism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPKTl9VQ6Ww
[…] Is it any surprise that people are angry? […]
Richard
I have feared something like fachism would take over since the Referendum. The gap between what was promised and what was possible was I though insurmountable. I thought a breakdown and right wing Brexit was a near certainty.
I find Farage an utterly repellent con-artist. And agree totally that the performance of the two main parties has been dire. The Tories seem to have been taken over by the ERG wing. Corbyn’s leadership has been disastrous.
On a slightly brighter note it looks as if in Northern Ireland either Alliance or the SDLP have a very good chance of picking up the 3rd seat, which will be very good news.
It is also true that Farage has never won an election when the turnout was over 40% so the EP election may be better than expected. I have written a tactical voting guide which goes through the issues and I hope will be of use to your readers http://www.progressivepulse.org/brexit/the-european-elections-tactical-voting-principles
Thanks Sean
Yesterday evening I finished the novel ‘The Bridge of Years’ by May Sarton, published in 1948. Belgian born Sarton had kept up her childhood and family connections there. The final two sections describe the rise of fascism in Germany, and, as war approached, in Belgium.
And my immediate reflection was the same as yours, the disturbing parallels to what is happening around Brexit. There was the demagoguery that directed unhappiness with the way things were into hatred of another group – in our case the Remainers identified by the Conservative press as ‘traitors’ and the ‘thieves of our Brexit’. And traitors and thieves deserve their punishment. The formation of groups that drew strength from having their views validated by their fellow travellers, and which coalesced around, and were easily led by, the most popular (charismatic) in the group. The clear line if you are for us or against us.
Beyond these group relationships was the reaction of the press and those in positions of authority that said they were entitled to their views, and to the expression of their views, rather than standing up to them.
Another – but pre-War (1938) – novel that deals with the rise of fascism as seen from a private school in Switzerland is ‘Swiss Sonata’ by the Canadian writer Gwethalyn Graham. The girls attending the school are from all over Europe, and include both a girl whose family is clearly pro-Nazi, and a German Jewess. Anyone who read this at the time of its publication should have not have been surprised at the problems inherent in Fascism.
In discussions with Labour party members, one theme comes out time & again: a total failure of the Labour party to offer a narrative that resonates with citizens.
Not the middle classes but those that are sturggling to get by. There is no “light at the end of the tunnel” provided by Labour – sure discussion about the NHS and “fairness” (????) but jobs? what about them – Labour talks but offers no specific policies.
I’ve posted elsewhere on this subject (energy efficiency etc) – & I know that Labour people will read this blog – & the messages on it have been, that there are several ways to generate fairly paid jobs with prospects. There is nada/zero/nothing in anything Labour says that indicates it has a clue in this area or any policies whatsoever.
Pathetic. Tryly pathetic – open goal (not even a goalie) – & labour keeps missing, time after time after time.
Populism/Fascism fills the gap – always.
At an interesting “Extinction Rebellion” event yesterday – hosted by the European Commission (yes surprising eh!).
One comment was that those at the top in politics are remarkably clueless and remarkably powerless – which seems to be validated by the current non-policies from Labour. I suspect they really do “don’t have a clue”.
False associations.
Vilifying Farage is simply wrong. If he was the demagogue you portray, he would not have “retired” when he thought his life’s work was accomplished.
At the same time you fail to associate the rise in GINI (It appears to have risen in virtually all EU countries) with membership of the EU. Where competition is law, thus the race to the bottom.
Good luck in getting the EU to change its rules on government support to implement the Green New Deal. They can’t even agree on changing light bulbs!
No one is more focused on creating a better future than me. I see the EU as a massive barrier to radical action.
Engineers understand governors and regulators (EU) are there to maintain the status quo. We need instability to create change, and yes it comes with risks!
Peter
We’ll never agree on the EU, or Farage
But to claim the EU caused the growth in inequality borders on the absurd
Richard
Peter Dawe is right about the EU increasing inequality. In fact the two biggest items in the EU’s budget explicitly drive inequality. The first is the centralisation of payments to large agricultural land owners, then designing a customs union that protects the recipients of the money from competition from outside Europe, and a set of regulations that make it harder for smaller businesses to come and compete e.g. the ban on GMO.
Now you may say that GMO food is bad, and that subsidising land owners makes us more secure, so the trade-off with rising inequality is worth it. It’s an argument. But there’s little empirical substance to it and it absolutely does drive inequality.
The second biggest budget item is convergence funding, sometimes called ERDF, or cohesion funds, which have been analysed many times and end up in rich people in poor countries who already own capital becoming slightly richer still compared to the rest of the country. The latest analysis is called “Making the best of EU regional support funds to boost productivity: Firm-level analysis
Naomitsu Yashiro, Konstantins Benkovskis, Olegs Tkacevs 06 May 2019” Another driver of inequality.
One thing that could reduce inequality is more freedom. Repealing regulations is not in the EU’s nature though.
Your comment just made it
But your troll name does not help you
I thought I would add this.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/revealed-trump-linked-us-christian-fundamentalists-pour-millions-of-dark-money-into-europe-boosting-the-far-right/
Is there any way that the binary question of Brexit can be decoupled from public discourse on politics in general, because at the moment it’s become an empty signifier onto which very different politics can be both projected and controlled in their binary form.
I understand your frustration with Corbyn – though if he’s upholding Party democracy, pursuing the course agreed at Conference, does Labour policy need to be personalised as ‘Corbynite’. Yet if the choice is between simplifying the argument to fit the required binary model, or to pursue a politics that allows for the complexity that exists, is the latter necessarily the wrong course? Surely we can all do better to still our twitching typist fingers, trust the team leading Brexit for Labour, and direct all our energy and fire at the massive inequalities and injustices that grow daily in the shadows, away from the intense light shone on Brexit. That’s something you do well too of course – we just need more Green New Deal, more demonstrations of the left’s ability to imagine a future worth living, and less feeding the beast that is feeding the far right.
I do not trust the team leading Labour
Why should I?
They won’t say what they’re doing and they’re definitely ignoring their members’ views
That’s not a basis for trust
You say the Labour leadership isn’t listening to its members, but what is it doing then if not following the course agreed democratically by its membership at the last Conference?
Yes, there is a majority for Remain among Labour members (myself included), but it’s not univocal, nor clearly a commanding majority.
Most Labour members I know (and I accept that is a self selecting group) do not think the conference decision is being followed and are very angry about it. Conned, is I think the word they would use
Topographie Des Terrors (Museum of Terror) in Berlin, deliberately built on the site of Gestapo headquarters, catalogues how Hitler got into power. It is made clear that it was the whole nation and not just Hitler that allowed Nazism to take over, and that this must never be allowed to happen again. This is my very brief take on the museum, and I am sure could be disputed, and argued about, and there is much more to it.
It is a sobering thought that Hitler got into power with only 34% of the vote.
WHY. Because the opposition spent most of their time squabbling amongst themselves.
It’s all there in the museum in Berlin. I wish our politicians would take note.
It is time we all started shouting. The biggest majority of us now want to stay in the EU.
34% is the minority.
You ignore that Labour and the Tories are both Brexit parties
2 middle aged men.
Irrespective of who you agree with, 1 is attempting to change the country by putting himself up for election, based upon his promise to take decisive action obviously, given the polling numbers, felt to be important to a large number of people.
The other attempting to change the country by writing a blog telling everybody his view on what everybody else should be doing.
If you believe that fascism is on the rise, and that you have the insight, and public support, for what really needs to be done to counter that rise, you owe it to the country to stand.
Doing the hard thing by putting ones personal reputation on the line, or shouting from the side lines ? Should I hold my breath ?
I do put my neck on the line
And if I had stood I would not have had time to co-create things like the Green New Deal and the Tax Justice Network
I am unashamedly a Corbyn supporter and I agree with A Prior. Let’s be honest Richard, the Green initiative is there with or without you and let’s face it you are very late on the bandwagon. You can achieve your successes from the sidelines but be honest they are modest in the grand scheme of things.
I have to say I doubt the Green New Deal would be there without me
I wrote most of its materials from 2010 to 2018
But am I vital now? I did not claim that: I create ideas. The pattern is others can deliver them
And I never claimed to be anything but modest in the grand scheme of things
But I’ve done a bit too, and that’s undeniable
I have posted on related thing on here previously, you really did miss a trick when you were a University lecturer in getting the students to survey various workplaces and their workers on attitudes to tax, politicians and such like.
The answers would have made for uncomfortable reading but that is the reason we are where we are. Do I like or agree, definitely not, but nobody, individual, party or otherwise has, or is unlikely to come along to convince people otherwise.
As much as I agree with the principles of EU membership, I have yet to hear any genuine ideas about how it could be reformed against those who “run” it.
Another thing to remember about Scotland is that more of the Scottish electorate voted to leave the EU than voted for the SNP.
I really do not think you know how study at university works
Most relates to theory
Almost all is comment
Original research is post-graduate
As to the EU – who runs it? Apart from the member states, that is?
Universities can carry out genuine research about social attitudes.
With regards to who “runs” the EU, yes representatives are elected by member states, but can you see any of those representatives and member states moving away from Capitalism and Neoliberalism?
Universities do
But only if funded to do so
And students don’t, almost ever, do such research
And do you have no faith the left can ever win elections? In that case why do you think neoliberalism should be replaced if it is what people can be persuaded they want?
When I was working at my local hospital, albeit over 20 years ago, we regularly had students in from the local University carrying out research with staff and patients. Mainly on experiences and improvements.
And unfortunately no, I don’t think that the left can win, especially with this rise in so called populism both here and in other EU states.
The world in which I have taught certainly has no provision for such things….
“Another thing to remember about Scotland is that more of the Scottish electorate voted to leave the EU than voted for the SNP.”
Why should we “remember” that aside from the fact that its somewhat dubious? The 2016 Scottish Parliament election SNP Constituency vote: 1,059,897 ( on 55.6% turnout) Referendum Leave vote : 1,018,322 (on 72.2% turnout) : says the opposite and in fact it’s the Remain vote at 1,661,191 thats impressively greater than the SNP vote.
Sure, so you selected the Westminster election to make your point but the above leaves it weak and as you’re comparing oranges and apples ( – elections unlike referendums aren’t binary.) It’s moot too.
Farage draws the majority of his support from older middle class voters at the right of the Conservative Party voting spectrum. This was why the Referendum was called because the Tory Party was desperate to stem the losses from them to UKIP. These older middle class voters have their views magnified by a Right Wing press which over exaggerates the dangers from rising crime and immigration. Many of these voters have never seen the effects of crime or seen a person of colour in their neighbourhoods. The real “Project Fear” was perpetrated by the Brexit leave campaign which used propaganda to instil fear in these voters that their country would be over run by a mass influx of foreign criminals (Farage and his poster) and that the EU had absolute control over the laws of the nation that we were powerless to vote against (Boris and his loss of sovereignty argument). Both of these views were and still are untrue.
The sad thing is that the remain argument is put across in a fragmented way because there is so much wrong with leaving. When faced with the simplicity of Farage’s argument which is that “we voted to leave and we should leave” Remain persists in attempting to point out every reason why leaving is wrong. It would be better to stick to a single simple line.
“We were lied to and leave committed verifiable abuses of the vote. The result cannot be upheld until those lies and abuses have been tested by a confirmatory vote.” The will of the people is not a single vote obtained dishonestly by a group with no interest in anything but themselves. If, as they frequently insist, that democracy must be upheld then a second vote is no less democratic than the first. Their fear is that they have been found out and that now the consequences have become obvious the will of the people will punish them for their deceit.
it is all rather disturbing,
like watching a slow motion car wreck,
the painful reality is that broadly speaking most people are equipped with stone age brains and are trying to cope with the complexity of a global civilisation comprising of 7.5 billion people,
most of us are riding on the backs of a tiny minority of rather ingenious and inventive people who have invented and created the cornucopia of technical gadgets and systems that manage to support us all, but most people have only the vaguest idea how it all works or came about,
the modern world gives us all the illusion we are sophisticated modern people but we are just confused hairless autistic monkeys screeching and flinging poop at each other.
no doubt this will all degenerate into violence, it usually does,
Brexit will push the UK into the arms of Washington,
the Americans are convinced they have some sort of divine right to rule the planet,
the UK establishment will willingly follow the US into whatever disaster they seem hell bent on causing,
and so will collapse yet another civilisation, just as every other major civilisation has over the last 10,000 years,
we’ll probably make a real mess of the planet in the process but with dramatically less people about it’ll recover somewhat over time,
the remaining hairless autistic monkeys, pre occupied with basic survival will lick their wounds, create a new mythology to explain what they never understood in the first place and the wheel of life will roll on,
homo erectus, homo heidelbergensis, homo sapiens, homo stupidicus, homo brexitus…..
http://survivingprogress.com/
I’m with Richard on this one. He has achieved more than virtually any elected person in Europe. When the electorate votes for the biggest liar, what hope does an honest man have?
( I’ve stood and found out the hard way!)
And, Yes, Farage is included with Corbyn, May and ALL the others!
Your fears, Richard, are all too credible – and I share David Lucas’s uneasy reading of the Berlin Museum. I also note that it is this post of yours which has provoked some of the least helpful and worst informed contributions for some time and you should not be left to field all these ‘no balls’ on your own.
So let us get rid of Jim Round’s misinformed pitch about Scottish voting which, apart from the misleading delivery of a comparison of two totally different electoral events (Scottish Elections and EU Referendum), also gets the numbers wrong. The SNP vote in the Scottish Election of 2106 was 1,059,897 and those voting to Leave the EU in the EU Referendum of 2016 was only 1,018,322.
If Peter Dawe is a devotee of instability, he should have a heed for what he wishes. His contribution, complete with the ‘tabloidy’ flourish about changing light-bulbs merely reminded me of your recent and wise item on ‘disaster socialism’. Those who look for massive social and economic disruption, as their chosen means to radical change, should remember the historical pedigree of such prophets in the past, not least in Italy.
As to those who seem unable to recognise that Corbyn has slid from being ineffective as an opponent of the gathering right-wing coup, which ‘Brexit’ truly is, to becoming close to its enabler, I can only register my concern that, across so much of the non-rightwing spectrum, internal party calculation appears to be as detrimental to engagement with the wider facts as ‘Brexitanian’ beliefs are on the farther right. In sum, the ‘U’K appears to have become almost entirely non-functional as a mature democratic polity leaving alarmingly wide territories open to the post-fact/post-truth nostrums typified by Bannon and about to be harvested – in most of England – by Farage. May has already surrendered her party to the ERG and it is hard to imagine them resisting the embrace of its gutter alter ego.
Thanks
My figures were from the 2017 General Election (977,569)
It is also concerning that The SNP cannot gain a majority in the Hollywood elections, this may be further eroded in 2021.
The Scottish constitution is designed not to deliver a majority
Two points to make about “my figures”, Mr Round; It would be more persuasive if you sourced the evidence when you first made the claim, and as Mr Mace demonstrated, it is easy to contradict your conclusion with other figures: in short, “my figures” are scarcely authoritative. At the same time Richard has demonstrated the flaw in your appeal to the “Hollywood” (sic) elections: Holyrood’s electoral formula is the (proportional) Additional Member System (AMS). AMS was deliberately designed for Holyrood NOT to produce outright majorities (which ironically was overturned by an exceptional vote for the SNP in 2011). Finally, “this (an SNP majority) may be further eroded in 2021”; I catch your drift, albeit clumsily expressed, but I note you assert the claim once again, without providing the source, or indeed any evidence for it.
You appear not fully to understand the Scottish political system, nor even the geography. Frankly, I can see no evidence that you write with any authority at all on this subject.
Thank you, Jim Round. You make my case.
Not content with one lot of apples v. pears, you are resorting to fruit from two totally different vintages as well.
As to the next Scottish Election… which may even be an Independence election, if May and her cohort – or their likely, scarily vacuous successors – are dumb enough to try to block a new Scottish Referendum… “We’ll see,” said Kanga – but I fear you appear not to be reading the polls.
Mr Mace,
Well said. I commend your efforts; decisive on the quantum of votes cast for Leave versus SNP. I bow to your respect for facts. Unfortunately, following the success of the use of ‘Fake News’ in popular politics, the practice has become widespread. I do not say that it is always deliberate,or planned or executed by everyone who errs. I am sure some motivated Brexiteers, for example believe such ‘facts’ must be true, because they are in the right – and even if not certain, the inherent justice of the cause allows the casual use of evidence, with no checking required in the knockabout of debate.
The public has come to realise that the important point in political debate is simply to assert the claim, point the finger, or make the accusation. Checking the facts is unnecessary; the facts do not matter. The effect is all. Those who meticulously check the facts, like yourself, and provide the telling rebuttal are left trailing in a past that is already dead. Nobody is listening. Indeed, somebody is already making the next outrageous or unverified claim or accusation that would need even more manpower to check. This is the nature of the game. You can’t win. You are not supposed to win. That is why it is done. Those who respect facts are supposed to lose.
I am on the move so I apologise for the “Hollywood” error, Richard will have some sympathy with that I’m sure.
Let’s remember how wrong the polls were in the 2017 General Election. It is also worth remembering that the clichéd “will of the people” frequently used by leaver’s would see the re-introduction of the death penalty in a public vote, if of course said polls are to be believed.
Unfortunately there are little in the way of facts about things like voting, even Scottish Independence refuses to creep above 50 percent in polls. This may or may not be a reason why Nicola Sturgeon is not fully pushing another vote in the very near future.
Because if it is defeated again, it’s game over for at least 20-30 years.
My “experience comes from traveling England, Scotland, and Wales as part of my various employment over the years, the people I meet have never been contacted by the likes of YouGov etc… and are unlikely ever to be, there is plenty of evidence about how unreliable these polls are.
Jim
Anecdote is not evidence
You seem to think it is
Richard
There are some rather nasty and personal contributions here denigrating a rather effective person who runs this blog. It’s a shame.
As for me, there is no doubt in my mind that Labour is still suffering from trying to chase swing voters in the Blair years which explains why their ideas are (shall we say) a little tepid. I still think that there is tendency in Labour to look down their noses at the very people they say they care about. I’m sorry – but it has to be said.
As you may know, I’m a big fan of the book ‘This Blessed Plot’ by Hugo Young. According to Young, Labour did not really get a pro-EU leader until a certain Mr Blair came along, so there is tradition in Labour from the immediate post war period that smacks of antipathy to Europe that looks to me like political exceptionalism – that only we (Labour) have the answers and we are not into sharing.
Labour has a sort of Gollum like focus on the exclusive prize of ‘The Precious’ – power. But power to do what? I’m still none the wiser and I have voted Labour for most of my life.
But I wanted to go further back in time and look more deeply into how society was in that period before and as the EU formed and I have discovered ‘The Fear & the Freedom (How the Second World War Changed Us)’ (2017) by Keith Lowe.
This is a far from orthodox book on post WWII history (I think you’d really appreciate it Richard). There are lots of admirable things to say about this book but one of the human phenomena Lowe focuses on is the theme of ‘belonging’.
Nazism, communism even a rise in people joining clubs in the post war era were examples of people wanting to belong to something Lowe argues because of feeling insecure in such times of upheaval. You could say that of the EU.
I think people flock to Farage because they feel the same. I also go back to what I said in another post about ‘Thatcher’s Children’ – these are people whose biggest fear in a poor society that pretends and behaves to suggest that it is uniformly affluent – is to be seen to be hopelessly dependent on a Government, people who intend to provide for themselves but also crave for more fairness in doing so. This is a world where a lack of money is something to be shameful about remember.
These people are those who find (say) the writings of Jordan Peterson so attractive. Labour’s mantra ‘the many and not the few’ means nothing to them because they want to know what the government can do for them – because they are the few as they see it. They refuse to be drawn into class politics because the class they are supposed to despise in Labours view is actually the one they want to be – affluent. How can you be taught to be against your social objective? And this section of society do not want to be associated/belong to a social security culture which they see as the mark of Cain and failure.
Eric Hobsbawm died very worried that the Left had not yet come to terms with Thatcherism. He’d still be disappointed if he were around today. The Left has been an abject failure because they’ve either relied on swing voters and slagged off white van man but also because they got sucked into the Third Way which was just a really crafty way of legitimising and increasing entrenched greed.
Until the Left can genuinely just help white van man without resorting to class politics, or pithy rants about inequality and just toying with policy at the margins, the Left is going no where and people like Farage will all too often have their day in the sun.
The only ideas that can deliver the help people really need to steer them away from fascism are things like PQE, GND and MMT.
Yes – that ‘s right – the kindest most effective thing is to print some bloody money – lots of it. Who on the Left is listening?
PSR
Thanks
I appreciated that
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/05/06/charlie-munger-be-afraid-when-a-democracy-thinks-it-can-print-money-to-solve-all-its-problems.html
Charlie Munger v PSR
So a very old business man who has no idea about macro is your authority?
You really are desperate
“So a very old businessman who has no idea about macro”..
Or “one of the worlds greatest ever investors who must know a bit about macro otherwise he wouldn’t have been so successful “
As it happens he probably is a match for your arrogance.
I see remarkably little evidence that many business people have ever understood that the state is a money creator and they are money users and the two are fundamentally different
My comment is not arrogant
It is based on evidence
Nigel Farage has never won an election where the turnout has been above 40% so I am not as worried about him as some others are in terms of electoral outcomes. A growing trend towards Fascism generally is a risk and it is here that people in the middle ground must join forces with the left in confronting this evil. The historical precedents suggest that those who consider themselves to be moderate will fail to act with courage if and when the time comes.
Jo
Who is Charlie Munger? ‘ Never heard of the geezer.
But look, I advocate MMT, PQE and GND simply because since 2008 and especially since 2010, this country has been denuded of real money by the stupid Governance of the Tory party aided by a stupid New Labour minister called Liam Byrne whose infamous post it saying that “there was no money” was waved about by the Posh but Not Nice David Cameron as austerity was given an excuse to exist. That is what our excellent and ‘humanist’ Labour party bequeathed the British people: a gross lie.
Jo – even if the Tories printed just what they had taken out of economy since 2010 – put it back – that would help. But they will not. Like the Victorian quacks they are, they will bleed us dry.
Secondly, Munger can go on all he likes – given that austerity has solved nothing, that inequality and environmental degradation has continued to rise, do you seriously not think printing money might be worth a try? Hmmm?
Printing money got the banks moving again didn’t it? Printing money helped to provide Theresa May with DUP intensive care to keep her shitty administration going a bit longer didn’t it? So why would it not help us and the environment?
Thirdly, supporters of MMT here know that you would not cut taxes and print money. Effective taxation would take the heat out of the economy – act as a break or limiter. But we won’t know until we try. And after all the shit we’ve been through – what have we got to lose?
Finally – yeah – no one knows who I am and the inconsequential person I am – one day I will shuffle off my mortal coil to be remembered only by family and colleagues who will also go the same way so that I will not even exist in memory.
Charlie Munger OTOH might have an entirely different life – he might be rich enough to fund an educational establishment with a certain view on economics, have a road named after him or a plaque but somewhere on Wall Street celebrating his wealth and wealth acquisition record.
But I still think that I am right Jo. We should try printing money again. We should try. We should have a go.
We should. You are right PSR
Thank you Richard.
The spectre stalking Europe now is fascism. It is credo based on the rejection of that which is not us who are amongst us. ‘Not us’ is defined as anyone the fascists think can be targeted as a scape goat for our ills other than those who cause it – surrogate hate figures if you like – inanimate punch bags upon wich to take out our hate and frustrations. But they are not inanimate – they are our own.
I have Klaus Lanzmann’s ‘Shoah’ on DVD and I watch it from time to time. There is also the BFI’s ‘German Concentration Camp Factual Survey’ which is more of a knee in the groin about the consequences of fascism (it really is quite harrowing – even now).
If anyone thinks the way the world works now is hunky dory, I’d advise you to seek these films out and watch them.
Fascism needs to be dealt with courageously by kindness and fairness. Fascism needs to be outflanked by MMT, PQE and GND and a whole raft of others problems need to be addressed off the back of it.
Another possible fuel for fascism is environmental degradation as our planet changes as a result of us not listening and we fight to keep what is ours as other lose what is theirs as a result. We can only survive if we work together and share. I cannot see how fascism – which like Neo-liberalism believes in winners and losers / the strong/the weak is the answer. So we have to defeat it with some new ideas.
This to me at least is where we are.
Nigel Falange
I agree with PSR on his analysis of Labour’s failure to capture the votes and commitment of those who would most benefit from its policies.
Most of the time, at least in recent years, Labour Leaders have come from privileged backgrounds, and have little understanding of the ‘working class’ aspirations and needs, or of how to address them.
It is impossible not to draw parallels with the Thirties.
Expert Historians today write about how different things are now, that History doesn’t really repeat itself…etc…all very rational and sensible.
But many danger signals are showing red in the UK by now, and the usual “it won’t happen here” is also being floated around by some.
That makes it worse because our so-called leaders are asleep at the wheel and so are much of our media, when they’re not pressing on the fascist accelerator…
We have the perfect storm brewing in the UK:
– People prepared to believe lies at any cost because they need hope, they’ll believe the biggest lies because they’re communicated simply, in slogans, and repeated again and again- Any teacher will tell you that if you repeat things often enough, it’ll reach the most bored and switched off child in the end.
– A neo-fascist opportunist backed by Bannon and his white supremacist money laundering machine being used all over the States and Europe- so far unchecked, un-impeded.
– The two main traditional political parties eaten up from within by opportunists or out of touch ideologues, unable to think a way out of the deadlock, too weak to resist the ERG on one side, or the Trots on the other.
– An electoral system (FPTP) which muffles voices from smaller parties, disabling creative suggestions to improve civic participation, and making it more likely to disenfranchise voters.
– An education system which has maintained social segregation over decades, and for those at the bottom of the pile, a degree of ignorance about our wider European History, concentrating instead on our relationship with the U.S. and the Commonwealth.
– Hardly any political culture/awareness unless you reach university level education.
( I may not remember all that much from my civic education in primary school in France – our substitute for RE – but we were made aware of the purpose of local elections, and in secondary school, we were taught about our parliamentary system).
– An influential gutter press which must surely be the worst in the democratic world, now copied by too many journalists on our TV screens.
I’m sure there’s more…but that’s depressing enough.
We also have:
Youngsters and oldies prepared to take to the streets peacefully in their millions to resist all this BS and very pro-active community networks.
OK…so that doesn’t quite balance out. What else can we do?