I know it's an opinion poll. I know it's the European elections. I know these things can be wrong. I know that it's YouGov. I know it's from the Times. I know how to get my excuses in early. I still think this is pretty staggering:
The Tory collapse is staggering. Labour's position is little better. Remain parties just outdo the Brexit Party. And the far right lead, overwhelmingly in the UK.
Do I much care if the Tories fail? No, not really. They have brought it on themselves.
Corbyn's prevarication has done for Labour: a lot of people can have very good reason for being deeply angry about that. As a strategy it has failed, dismally. Surely nobody can disagree now?
And I am pleased to see the Remain parties coming through.
But the rise of fascism has been something I have feared for a long time. And what we now have is a party made up, in the main, by far-right candidates, led by a person who has refused to issue a manifesto and will not tolerate having a membership of his organisation, taking the lead in an election in this country. If you're not depressed by that you do not believe in democracy, and all that this country was once about, but is no longer because of neoliberalism.
In England, at least, we are heading for a long dark night in our political history.
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:
Well, Richard, I can disagree with you about Jeremy Corbyn’s approach and I will.
Not in any order:
– The people with the extreme views on this matter, Brexiteers and Remainers both, are the ones creating the divisions. The Labour Party — not JC himself — is the only one trying to reach an acceptable compromise and has been at least since their last conference.
– There are individual Labour MPs, people in the media and some bloggers who persist in misrepresenting the LP position, which may account, in part, for the type of poll you refer to.
– Quite a number of other polls show huge differences from the You Gov one you refer to, it seems to be the real odd one out and I hope it is.
– If that poll is compared to the results in the last EU election, the balance between pro and anti-EU parties has not changed a great deal, showing just how difficult this matter is to resolve.
– The way to stop fascism is not to, as some do, advise people to vote for a centre ground party like the Lib Dems, we have seen the results of this in America and in France.
– The answer to fascism is a true anti-fascist government, a Labour government.
This is tribal nonsense
And voters have realised that
Sorry, but Jeremy has shown himself quite unable to lead
And you are not in the only anti-fascist party
Or even the only left wing party
Get real
How can Labour talk about being ant fascist in light of the anti Semitic row? They have a nasty undercurrent..
I am aware that this could be debated
I am letting it be noted and will leave it at that
I can’t believe anyone is prepared to stick up for Labour’s position on Brexit. As disgusted as I am that the Tory Party has brought this upon the country, and as disappointed as I am that the Remain factions find difficulty in working together, I think I reserve my greatest ire for Labour actually.
Let me be clear, Brexit is the house that the Tories have built, they own it. However, instead of objecting to it being built at all, Labour are inside it, busily deciding how to decorate when the current occupiers leave. Meanwhile, they are failing to notice that the roof is about to fall in!
Labour seemed to have learned nothing from the age-old quote about ‘not being able to please all of the people all of the time’. Instead they have gone for, ‘let’s please none of the people none of the time’. What slogans do we recall from the EU Referendum campaign? Forget the banal ‘Brexit means Brexit’ and forget the blatant lie that is ‘No deal is better than a bad deal’, they came after the 2016 vote. Perhaps no one can forget the greatest lie of them all ‘£350M for the NHS per week’; but, the most common soundbite from June 2016 was ‘Take back control’. I’m an ardent Remainer, but even I can empathise with Leavers and understand that being in a customs union as Labour propose gives control away! So, Labour are pissing off Leavers. There is no succour in that for Remainers who think that any form of Brexit, ANY FORM, is totally, completely and utterly moronic. But there Labour are, standing on the threshold and wondering where to place the lamp stand.
I am actually comfortable with Labour’s position. If you accept the legitimacy of the referendum and thereby the result, then the job of parliament is to deliver that – not to prevent it. I agree that it will upset Leavers and Remainers alike.
I voted remain and won’t be voting Labour today due to demographics. I graduated in politics and have followed it fairly closely all my life. Short of stating right after the result that the result was illegitimate I find it quite hard to understand just what position people expect Labour might have taken. And I don’t believe I have seen a coherent answer to that question.
Do you actually think a second referendum was going to be approved by parliament? Do you still think that is possible?
Regrettably I see leaving as the only option now. I would prefer that to be of a softer variety (I would prefer it not at all) but that option seems to be almost dead too.
(I am heading off on holiday straight after voting so won’t be reading further on thread)
How can the legitimacy of the referendum be accepted when it is obvious that the result was secured by corrupt means?
I despair….
What is it about the rise of fascism that troubles you so. I mean what policies do you think these fascists will implement which will make us poorer and less free?
Do you really think that requires an answer?
No, I don’t it does require an answer. It’s your blog, you’re not required to answer anything. It’s still a free country. At least here it is.
But I would like an answer. Fascism is not one single thing at one particular time. It might just be a label rather than a set of policies. That’s why I asked.
So again: “What is it about the rise of fascism that troubles you so. I mean what policies do you think these fascists will implement which will make us poorer and less free?”
Fascism, always and without exception works on the basis of blaming a minority who, it says, can be blamed for the ills of society.
Right now British fascism blames the migrant.
Migrants add massively to UK society, but I would say that: my family were economic migrants.
If you think fascism is innocuous think how it feels to be the person victimised.
Do you think that acceptable?
Do you think we can afford the cost of that?
Do you want that?
Just deal with that, for now
@ Horace Holohan
‘What is it about the rise of fascism that troubles you so.’
‘The 14 Characteristics of Fascism’ – ttps://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
What’s not to like?
(While your initial response, Richard, was the right one – I just couldn’t resist the temptation 😉 )
This is the right link https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
See also Umberto Eco’s definition of ur-facsim
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
Rings horribly true…
True
Horribly so
Rejection of superficial technological advancement
Viewing the development of Western culture as a descent into depravity
Cult of action for action’s sake
‘Disagreement is treason’
Fear of Difference
Obsession with a plot and hyping of an enemy threat
Casting their enemies as too strong or too weak
Holding themselves as the interpreter of the popular view
Given the regular calls for the restriction of personal freedoms and increasing state intrusion into individual’s lives in the name of ‘justice’ on this blog, I wonder whether a little personal reflection on elements of Eco’s list might be in order for us all ?
Might you suggest what restrictions on freedom I call for? And what state intrusion I demand?
Please tell
Mr Stafford,
If you scroll further down the link supplied, with its useful summarisation of various interpretations of fascism by eminent intellectuals, you would find this telling observation by a master practitioner of democratic politics, Franklin Delano Roosevelt:
“The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”
As a working definition it is simple, it has utility, and – whether or not it defines the essence of ‘fascism’ – it has an uncomfortably disconcerting modern resonance for us all.
Agreed
@ “Aldridge Prior”
“Given the regular calls for the restriction of personal freedoms and increasing state intrusion into individual’s lives in the name of ‘justice’ on this blog
That’s a very inventive interpretation of the messages from this blog. Allow me to present an alternative.
This blog rejects Anarchy.
Because let’s be honest, when you say “restriction of personal freedoms”, that’s just a simplistic dog-whistle to all neolib, laissez-faire types who shun all regulation and authority. You think you’re above the law. There can be no other way of looking at it – you don’t want your personal freedoms restricted… so you want to be able to do what you want, when you want, without limit or consequence.
That kind of unbridled, narcissistic contempt for responsibility belongs only to badly behaved children. Grow up.
Might you suggest what restrictions on freedom I call for? And what state intrusion I demand?
That’s a serious question right ?
(On the subject of taxing or limiting the breeding of pets)
‘It is an interesting — and necessary idea — that has occurred to me’
(On the use of resources to enable economic growth)
‘Tax is one option. Rationing is another .In some cases this may well be necessary
And rations woul;d not be transferable’
(On future economic activity within the green new deal)
‘Fourth, because what people want (jobs, a pay rise, security, action on climate change, affordable health care) can only be supplied by the state’
(On MMT and pensions)
‘the simple fact is that the vast majority of what the state does appears to me to be of much greater value to society than much of what large companies do’
(On the green new deal)
‘If the Green New Deal is to happen advertising has to be constrained’
‘advertising aimed at children. That I would like to ban’
‘a cut in consumption of useless items that we could all do without’
‘Tax has to be used to counter the harmful externalities created by the market’
You are aware that we face a climate emergency?
And that we need fair ways to ensure we can all survive?
And that the market has no such fair mechanism?
These are not constraints at all – they are about ensuring freedom for all to survive
But maybe that’s not your objective?
Thank you for that John D. It has the merit of being brief
It also extends to totalitarianism of the Left as well as the Right. Both use the cover of ‘party’ to cover the reality of control by a much smaller group.
Looking at the changes in party vote totals between the 2015and and 2017 general elections and between the 2017 election and what these polling estimates suggest confirms your assertion that all of this staggering.
In round numbers the total electorate increased by just less than 1.5 million between 2015 and 2017. A slightly higher turnout in 2017 (69.8% over 68.6%) meant that there were around 1.5 million extra votes cast. Compared to 2015 Labour and the Tories received almost 6 million additonal votes between them. UKIP had a net loss of 3.3 million and the SNP and Greens lost almost a million between them. So these losses and the additional voters came close to the net additions by Labour and the Tories.
Applying the YouGov/Times polling estimates to an estimated lower turnout of approx 53% (this means around 7.4 million fewer votes cast in the Euro election compared to 2017) suggests that Labour and the Tories will experience a net loss of almost 20.6 million votes between them (9.7 and 11.9 million resp.). In net terms, the Lib Dems and Greens should add around 4.6 million votes. The Brexit Party will grab 9 million votes while ChangeUK could net almost a million.
The big questions come the next general election are: how many of the switchers will return to their previous folds (as many did in 2017)? where will those who are sitting this one out go? and will any of these parties making big gains overcome the almost insuperable barrier that FPTP presents. It is true that Brexit is presenting both scale and momentum, but it has neither substance nor a deep-rooted and widespread organisational heft.
Yes. Agree with your sentiments and prognosis. And it’s going to get worse because it’s part of a wider western malaise that manifests itself differently in other nations – a list to which Estonia must now be added (https://www.politico.eu/article/estonia-tallinn-joins-the-far-right-club-martin-helme-mart-helme-kersti-kaljulaid-populism).
Without in any way negating the necessity for positive action to stem the tide of this rising neo-fascism I believe we’re looking in the wrong direction for a long-term, sustainable solution. Immediate time constraint does not permit me to elaborate further right now so I would simply suggest that we are now in what can be called ‘The Age of Complexity’ which this essay, by two Hong Kong based financial professionals, explains better than I ever could – http://www.ejinsight.com/20170613-the-global-age-of-complexity.
They mention Fritjof Capra – physicist turned ecologist – who for 20+ years has researched and written about the need for a radically different quantum / systems-based ‘knowledge’ if we are to rebuild a global society that works for everyone. We have reached the end of Newton’s elegant but mechanistically limiting interpretation of planetary life.
As I suspect you’re already familiar with his work (Caroline Lucas certainly is) forgive me for the following link, but maybe this fairly recent (2018) informal interview will be of interest to to others here and help to better understand the existential crisis that is facing us all – in which our local problems are simply a microcosm of a much bigger picture – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbKUJ6YBSf8. Ofc, Googling him will throw up many other links to his important work.
Food for thought while Rome burns?
I am familiar with his work….
Systems thinking and complexity – both anathemas to those who seek simple reductionist, linear solutions to problems. And then wonder why those solutions fail.
Both have been around for decades but few understand them in the worlds of economics and finance which so dominate how society and business work today.
I’d also suggest looking at Eric Beinhocker’s work – articles or his book the Origins of Wealth. Positive signs from Andy Haldane at the Bank of England as well.
Mr Farage may be getting the votes in the EP elections, but he will remain as impotent constitutionally in the UK as he has always been. He is not in the British Parliament. He cannot be anything more than a loudmouth braying agitator. The power to govern, to decide policy and to legislate remains with those who have been elected to the House of Commons and their adjunct, the House of Lords. Only if Mr Farage becomes a Member of the Westminster Parliament can the forces of Fasdcism win real power. And there are unfortunate lessons from history: the march on Rome in 1919,led by Signor Mussolini, forced the Italian monarch to allow and encourage a Fascist government in Italy. In 1933, the Weimar republic failed, and Hindenberg permitted the establishment of the National Socialist regime in Germany, led by you-know-who. Can we envisave a scenario in which the rump Tory party surrenders to Mr Farage’s “March on Rome”. A Weimar/Hindenberg moment where a failing democratic government system allows the formation of an authoritarian government that claims to represent the “Will of the People”? It is not inconcievable that a future impotent conservative PM successor to Mrs May, enter into an agreement with the Brexit “party”, have Mr Farage ennobled and given a seat in the House of Lords, or even see some Tory MP for a strong leaver constituency voluntarily surrender his/her seat so that Mr Farage stand as the Tory-Brexit Alliance candidate, and therby get himself at long last elected to the HofC. That would be the step towards a truly populist-fascist authoritarian regime. And it would put the Head of State of the UK in an interesting position: would the 93 year old lady in Windsor/Buckingham Palace have the power, authority, or strength of will to withstand, as Victor emmanual in Italy, or Hindenberg in Germany, the rape of the British Constitution (if there is such a thing)?
I think the Tory Party is dead
If it is, who do you see filling the void?
Who do I see filling the void left by the decay of the Tory party? What I fear and foresee is an unholy aliance between the remnant Tory party, dominated by Rees Mogg, Duncan Smith, et al, and the anti-progressive Poujadist-Fascist-Faragist party whose support among the reactionary section of the electorate is surging. It is surely not beyond the realms of possibility to have Mr Farage parachuted into a strong leave constiuency, or raised to the peerage, either way giving him a place in Parliament, whether Lords or Commons. Note that a Rees=Mogg is already in the Brexit party standing for election as an MEP.
@Mike, Chilling scenario you paint there. According to Peston, a possible future could be a Johnson PM, who claims he gets the EU to drop the NI border backstop, but if not he would then go, quote ‘full steam ahead’ with the so-called ‘no deal’ (having prepared of course).
Somehow this does not seem far fetched. All the while the general sentiment in the country is now to remain so we have the whole population, all 60 odd million of us dragged out with unknown consequences and no way to prevent it.
I can’t see that being taken lying down somehow, there will be a lot of very angry people with a grievance.
Is it worthwhile noting that the turn out might be low because many people see that this changes nothing domestically really?
A lot of people I speak to are not even bothering to vote because they do not see how it helps. I will vote just as a gesture. I could be that the Leavers are more into gestures?
I hope that the EU investigates Farage’s opaqueness about his funds and hopefully they will disbar him from standing along with his fellow travellers.
To me this is a skirmish. The real battles are yet to come.
“The people with the extreme views on this matter, Brexiteers and Remainers both…”
So now “remain with the staus quo ” is an “extreme view” ? I’ve heard the Shakespearian cliche “…A plague on both your houses” so often used for righeous political point scoring and thought I was immune, but no…NOT wanting to needlessly renogotiate and rewrite ALL your international trade agreements, quotas, duty, standards travel rules, etc is now an “extreme” position.
In light of this one wonders what Labours idea of “moderate” is… but of course it doesn’t matter any more. In not presenting a clear cut policy for a confirmatory vote Corbyn has stuffed the UK without even becoming prime minister.
http://blog.spicker.uk/the-special-rapporteur-condemns-the-british-governments-ideological-destruction-of-the-welfare-state/
There is a link to the pdf in this blog. It makes for some really shameful reading.
I know that Labour has not been brilliant but really, this is all about the Tory party to be honest who have normalised cruelty and the extreme right wing who have muddied the political waters.
Agreed
Robin/Richard – you are right – Umberto Eco nails it.
I read his definition of Fascism and it sounded like contemporary England.
But also: ‘Fascism is a system of thought’ (not just a system of Government – chilling – Mussolini).
And: (Fascism) ‘A socialism emancipated from democracy’ (Maurras – Wow!).
And: (Fascism) ‘A socialism emancipated from democracy’ (Maurras )
Definitely fits Richards totalitarian outlook with a command economy forcing out private enterprise and choice
Which is really rather bizarre
I am a practising chartered accountant and a director of private sector companies who is dedicated to a mixed economy
Making stuff up is not an argument
Not according to your bio
“hold a practicing certificate as a chartered accountant but makes almost no income as a result of doing so now, and is a director of Progressive Pulse Limited and Finance for the Future LLP, neither of which trade. “
I am also a partner in Tax Research LLP and a director of Cambridge Econometrics.
So this is just a ridiculous claim on your part
But, since you made the whole claim up to suit your own prejudices that is hardly suprising
‘Bernie Slaven’
This is a family blog so I will try to be nice.
Your assertion that Richard wants to have a command economy that forces out the private sector is absolute clap trap. As long as I have been here (God – how long is it now?) he has advocated a mixed economy but one with a sufficient amount of regulation and oversight to ensure that economic output is shared more fairly.
You are either here to (1) Cause trouble, (2) Lie or (3) You’re just jumping to conclusions.
I hope it is (1) and (3). Because otherwise you are a liar and a scoundrel – just like the Chair of the BREXIT party last night telling all and sundry that the only reason why the Scunthorpe steel works was closing was because of EU carbon taxes (failing to note the effect on BREXIT of orders and the fact that the Entrepreneurial Venture Capital group who now run the plant makes millions out of providing services that it charges to the steelworks and has wasted profits on a number of failed buy outs in other sectors).
I’m sick of liars Bernie. So cut it out. Now.
Thanks
Bernie is wasting our time
And I am sure he’s not even called Bernie
But I do appreciate your comment
The Labour Party’s membership have had enough and are fighting back and intend to assert their authority at this years conference in September. I doubt that they will fall for the use of imprecise language a second time.
The following conference motion will shortly be doing the rounds and will be presented at this years conference.
(This is the full text of the conference motion)
Stop Brexit, transform Britain
The real division in society is not between those who voted Leave and Remain, but between the many and the few. Brexit is poisoning politics and stopping us from addressing the issues that matter to people. We need a general election to deliver a radical Labour government.
If the UK leaves the EU, Brexit does not end. Instead, we face years of negotiations and trade deals that deregulate our economy in the interests of the few, making it much harder to deliver our radical manifesto.
Brexit is a Tory project, and Labour opposes it. It would mean a victory for the nationalist right, and is a threat to our rights, jobs, NHS, public services and the fight against climate change.
We will answer insecurity and exploitation with hope and solidarity to bring the country together. We will rebuild communities with investment, expand common ownership, boost wages and union rights, and challenge the narratives of the nationalist right. Free movement is a workers’ right which we will defend.
The Leave vote is more than three years old, and there is no clear democratic mandate for any Brexit settlement. The democratic imperative now is for the people to have the final say. Labour will back Remain in that public vote.
Labour is an internationalist party, with a duty to challenge the far right. We will campaign for a Europe-wide Green New Deal, levelling up of wages, democratising European institutions, ending Fortress Europe, and an international strategy to tax the rich and corporations.
Good luck