I would like to be subtle about this, but that would be wrong. The 2010s were a dire decade.
It wasn't just Tory rule that made them so. But they massively assisted the process.
Austerity was wholly unnecessary. Brexit resulted. That was the consequence of too many people suffering.
Under Miliband Labour wimped along in obsequious acquiescence with the austerity narrative. Corbyn resulted.
And yes, I know it can be said I helped him get to power, but I never joined Labour despite that.
And I don't regret not doing so.
Just as I don't regret saying he should go in 2016.
But Owen Smith was not an alternative.
And Labour descended into tribalism, identity politics and irrelevance to most as it completely forget its purpose.
It was not alone in doing so. Capitalism literally ran out of time, ideas and (as QE evidenced) money. But around the globe parties on the left failed to offer alternatives.
Most instead obsessed about identity issues of little consequence to most people and about which nothing could be achieved without power. At the same time they becoming increasingly fixated on concepts of socialism based on material constructs of well-being and notions of class that have long been dead and now appear patronising.
The consequence is apparent: Labour vacted the arena of political plausibility.
The Tories were driven right by English nationalists whose populist agendas have filled the void where hope should have been.
And so we end the decade with political power being given to those most likely to abuse it.
And in response Rebecca Long-Bailey wants to give us more of the same from Labour.
Very politely, I say no to that. I have had enough of Labour's failure.
I have had enough of what has appropriately been described as its student politics.
I am bored by the politics of those that came back in from exile where Militant and the SWP belonged.
And in saying so I stress that nothing has changed my view that we need a radical alternative to what I believe will be a Tory disaster, however Brexit pans out.
But I know that the detail I am interested in, whether it be in tax, monetary policy, the control of central banking, or fiscal policy as managed through modern monetary theory, accounting reform or whatever else, are not issues of any concern to most people. And nor are most other interests of people on the left, including the fate of Palestine, of much interest to many in this country. All that these things, important (even vital) as they are, provide are bear traps. That is, they're gifts to the media anxious to prevent the left winning, ever.
Why when the left knows the media hates it why does it continually gift it ammunition? I wish I knew the answer.
Just as I wish I knew the answer as to why the left will not build coalitions.
And coalition building is all the left can do now. The absurd nonsense heard so often from some on the left of late that if only there was Lexit then Corbyn would be swept to power and a new socialist era would emerge was delusional, at best. Only a tiny number in the UK ever shared that hope, however fervently that few did.
Instead the reality is that the ground level left, from some in the LibDems (and yes, some are on the left as I see it), to the Greens and some (maybe most) in PC and the SNP, as well as what, I am sure, is a majority of Labour members, want cooperation wherever possible to achieve common dreams.
What common dreams? I name some.
A Green New Deal, with its implicit promise of better housing, better transport, local secure jobs with union rights and training for the long term as well as an end to energy poverty, and survival.
Electoral reform to deliver real representative democracy, including House of Lords reform, an end to arbitrary executive power and real devolvement of responsibility to localities and even countries, but with appropriate balances provided to make sure that this does not increase regional inequality, as it could so easily do.
Proper regulation of large companies to prevent monopoly abuse, exploitation of workforces, the end to zero hours and the proper holding to account of companies in particular so that they pay their fair share.
Better public services, including health, social care, education, and access to legal protection for all so that society and the justice it should provide on both criminal and civil issues is seen as something available to all again.
Safe pensions, built around secure savings arrangements which will guarantee security in old age.
And the reinforcement of the view that community really matters, in all its connotations, including those that the left has refused to listen to on issues such as defence.
That is more than enough of a platform for a government on the left. And I believe it would be possible to get 95% of those who are on the left to support a coalition of interests to achieve such a goal, even when it would be apparent as a result that no one would end up getting precisely what they wanted.
Where will the objections come from? I'd suggest Labour, most likely. And from its factions, including some of the cults around some of the unions, in particular.
We have a new decade coming. The left has a choice to make. It can recall that it exists for the majority of people.
Or it can remain as a petty political force intended to satisfy those who have brought it to its current state, where it has abandoned all relationship with and responsibility towards those it set out to represent, but who it ignored for so long, and from both its left and right wings.
The Left could refine its purpose.
It could define itself around issues.
It could build narratives that make sense, such as the GND.
And it could consign factionalism to history.
Or it can just play politics still and consign us all to far-right rule.
That is the key choice that I think will shape the 2020s.
I'd love to think that the left could rise to the challenge and build consensual politics for the benefit of people.
I live in hope. But there's scant evidence to support it right now.
Happy new year.
Happy new decade.
May we survive it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Agreed, agreed and agreed some more. If more on the left took the time to gain a basic understanding of what a deficit actually is, the media can stop hitting them over the head with ‘but how can we afford it’? Then we can get on with some serious societal planning for all of our futures.
I’m expecting another round of the Blairite cop-out which basically amounts to “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.”
If progressive politicians aren’t prepared to fight from a principled philosophical position they are not going to gain support. Warren Mosler uses the phrase ‘Public Purpose’. I like that.
Unless politicians are prepared to understand and shout from the roof tops, and every other platform they have at their disposal that the national economy is the business of politics not banking we’re in for a long and dismal decade.
Priti Patel got away scot free with an interview in a foodbank where she maintained that the parlous state of the economy was not the fault of the government. There’s a politician who doesn’t understand her own proper function, nor the function of government.
Is it not time to once & for all stop going on incessantly about Blairites vs Corbynites and start dealing with the reality of where we’re at now and what can be done to provide a concerted and further the cause of real progressive politics ? This continual in-fighting can only lead to more disaster and an ‘opposition’ effectively banished to the political wilderness.
I agree with you
For ‘a concerted and ….’ I meant to say ‘ concerted action to further the cause …’
Richard: maybe you should ban the words ‘Blairite’ & ‘Corbynite’ (and any other ‘ites’!) from this blog 🙂
Surely people (including members of the PLP) deserve to be judged on their own merits rather than classifying them as unthinking disciples of sime past guru? This seems be a speciality of the labour party – I can’t think of any recent examples in the Tory party, despite its probably even greater divisions.
It’s an interesting idea
Read Wee Ginger Dug yesterday in framing and the use of language https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2019/12/29/scottish-democracy-can-never-be-illegal/
100% agree. All part of the tribalism that holds the left back. Obsessing about personalities and using language that just does not engage the bulk of the population.
It also repeats the mistake of knocking the longest period that Labour have been in government and not crediting their real successes. That way just leads to more failures.
The ONLY positive to come out of this decade in my opinion is the ressurgent politicisation of a younger generation and independent internet spaces – such as yours.
The consolidation of power, money and influence in the period of 90’s to now had managed to induce apathy and individualism above SOCIETY.
The old political and msm structures became too compromised and gamed to deliver anything else – until the miracle of 2015, which has survived strangulation at birth and is still kicking!
The Great Consolidation of Thatcherism led us into selling our sons and daughters and their childrens futures into a throwback, mearly pre-war class divide. Oiled by ever more sophisticated perception management and degradation of thought – the great dumbing down.
It is a problem for us first worlders – who on the whole have had a life ‘better’ than nine-tenth of the rest of humanity – like the proverbial boiling frog in the pan of mass media intensification – are led to the ‘I’m alright Jack – as long as I can have my summer and winter breaks and soma of tv, gambling, booze …religion or worse’.
Thatcherism led directly to here. From the madness of the public funds being the same as the household purse, to no such thing as society – which is transmogrified Into ‘no such thing as Socialism’
(which WE grew up under!).
Only the new grassroots politicised generation joining us and a range of oasis’s of expert knowledge such as you and this site to sustain and coalesce us, can save us.
Thank you Professor for that and a happy new year to you, yours and fellow thirsty travellers who stop here in our quest.
And to you
And thanks for your comments
And to all others who comment and add value by doing so. I appreciate it.
“Where will the objections come from? I’d suggest Labour, most likely. And from its factions, including some of the cults around some of the unions, in particular.”
Spot on. Welcome to the 19th century.
Which is why this decade will be lost at the outset unless the coming Labour leadership election fails to chuck Labour’s holy of holies into the dustbin (where it belongs): The outdated, almost religiously fanatical, idea that it and it alone represents the working man.
From there flows Labour’s shameful support of FPTP (so that we only get ‘pure’ Labour socialism when Labour gains power) and rejection of alliances (with ‘impure’ other parties).
Time to end the cult of Labour exceptionalism.
I’m unsure about this whole piece. Some may see it as self-serving denial of reality (to preserve your own sense of self-worth) to attempt to rewrite recent history is such a blatant manner. Some may just read it as plain ignorance on your part;
Richard; “I’d love to think that the left could rise to the challenge and build consensual politics for the benefit of people.”
Richard; “And Labour descended into tribalism, identity politics and irrelevance to most as it completely forget its purpose.”
Richard; “Why when the left knows the media hates it why does it continually gift it ammunition? I wish I knew the answer.”
The answers are quite simple; The Left will not build consensual politics because too many people think they should be the author of the key policy unit document and will fight against any impetus which does not have their name at the top as lead author. That includes you and the applauding few here but not only those. They are people who would rather avoid power and the success of society moving in the direction they seek in favour of being ‘the One’ who is lauded for causing it to do so. It guarantees tribalism and factions working against each other. It guarantees that for every initiative that is adopted, even if aimed in the right direction, will only have a few supporters and many, many others who will fight against it. Always, not just now.
Faced for this last decade with a right-wing government you fought tooth-and-nail to avoid supporting any alternative likely to wrest power from their grubby hands. In favour always of ‘something else’, a mirage just over the horizon. Anything but the successful movement in existence.
Given a chance, multiple chances in fact over the last 4 years, to take practical steps in the direction you keep saying you wish to take our society towards, you argue for everyone else to stop supporting it. You even provide the ammunition in terms of headlines and posts which the media will and did use against the direction in which you keep saying you wish society would move. You fed the hyenas.
You provided reasons and cover for the media to broadcast in order to fool the unwitting into thinking that supporting their best interests, as imperfectly as that may have been led, was worse than enabling a set of fascists.
So ‘You’. You handed them the next decade. You and more like you and the commenters here, you all played a significant part in that result.
No need to anguish any longer; carry on with your task of defining the way ahead while ignoring the opportunities you just axed. You’ll be fine; a professional person, well-insulated from the cold winds which will sting in the next 10 years. But please save us all from the hollow booming of pretending to care for those less fortunate; you had a chance to do something for them and chose the opposite.
I am sure you think there is a logic to what you have written, but I can’t see it
And as a matter of fact I do not demand my name anywhere, so what you claim is simply wrong
And as for what I did not do by choosing the opposite, I genuinely have not a clue. What are you actually accusing me of?
If you mean it was not supporting Corbyn, then I plead guilty. Let’s ignore the fact that some say he would not have got into power without me, and that I have to live with that. Then let’s note I did not adopt him, but that he adopted me. And let’s be clear that I have never had time for the far left – and many around Corbyn propose the oppression that I have objected to since university days and which people in this country emphatically do not want – as democracy reveals. And then you accuse me of what? Pointing this out? I again plead guilty.
I loathe the patronising fools in the left who think they can tell people what they want – like you, by the look of it
They’re the people who have driven Labour to unelectability
And they are the people who most helped us get a right-wing populist government
I want a government that is for people – not fantasists or capitalists
You clearly would rather play in your sandpit
It’s time Labour got rid of such people again. Kinnock was right on that
We might survive this decade but we’ve no chance of surviving the next. With populist politicians telling us what we want to hear rather than what we need to know and with business leaders telling us that the only route to true happiness is to produce, consume and pollute more and more and more, climate change will kill us all.
The Labour party is of no use. It has been taken over by those obsessed with polishing their own self-righteousness and who would rather not be in power as they know that having to face and make difficult decisions would tarnish their self-image.
Your contribution to shifting the ground in economic thinking has been truly impressive and something for which we all owe you a debt of gratitude, but I have always found it odd that whilst calling for a broad coalition of progressive parties you persistently denigrate those within the Labour Party with whom you disagree, rather than welcoming what you can.
Even with the possible decline in influence of the traditional media the Tories bottomless pit of dark money, moral bankruptcy and the collusion of Facebook and their ilk have turned this country into one enormous rotten borough. It is indicative that the first moves Boris has made are to pay his debts and consolidate his grip (ban BDS movement, limit judges autonomy, identity checks for voting etc.)
Coalitions require compromise and at national level neither the Green nor Liberal leadership seemed prepared to offer it either. Perhaps you can set the pace?
I can talk, as I do, usually not noted here
Pot calling kettle black. Labour exceptionalism is the problem eating away at our democracy. It can be fixed, but only if Labour is honest enough to look inward at its own shortcomings that have not only let the entire progressive movement down, but, even more to the point, have let the entire country down.
Please check out these two excellent articles…
“Why does Labour like first-past-the-post? No other socialist party supports it”…
“To stop the Tories, Labour has to embrace proportional representation”
Thanks Stephen, I see we’re in total agreement on this. How can anyone with even the semblance of intelligence not see this? This, for example………..
“Could we have done it better — yes, but only if Labour had been willing to talk. That lesson needs to become part of the Labour Party DNA in the next five years of opposition. Boris Johnson will push through boundary changes and voter ID suppression (US style), plus Labour have lost Scotland and that may become permanent if independence goes ahead. It all means it will be even harder for Labour to win next time.”
I suppose it’s possible that Johnson and his worthless Brexiter rabble will make such a mess of everything that, despite all the above, Labour will get elected next time, under this rotten system. Trouble is, I don’t trust them to deliver PR at all. Your quotation is utterly sickening. Other progressives step aside time after time to try to get a progressive government elected, but the arrogant Labour fools will have none of it. As a result, they don’t deserve anybody’s vote, any more than the Tories. The two main UK parties are as bad as each other. Labour are not a solution to anything I see now: they’re part of the problem.
I think the only hope now for progressive politics in the UK, or indeed a real democracy, is an independent Scotland. The Scots at least have rejected the Tories and Labour, Labour in fact more than the Tories. They’ve seen through Labour’s claim to be a progressive party, and decisively rejected them.
“Labour are not a solution to anything I see now: they’re part of the problem.”
So true and in a sense Labour absolutely deserved to be swept aside in Scotland & in ‘The North’.
But if that’s not bad enough for Labour’s future, humanity is now in it’s ‘last chance’ decade. A weak democracy such as we have, just won’t cut it – as fighting the twin climate & ecological emergencies will require a sustained, almost never-ending multi-decadal battle to even begin to tackle them.
So will Labour seize the moment & re-invent itself as the focal point of a ‘grand progressive alliance’ that will as, job No. 1, fix our broken democracy, so it is has the necessary resilience & capacity to save ourselves?
Or will it get bogged down in passing minutae, such as Brexit or ‘how can we win back the north’?
Excellent analysis Richard. We are in a truly awful situation now in the UK. And, as you say, “I have had enough of Labour’s failure.”
To be fair, it’s not just Labour’s fault that the appalling Tories are still in power and their crazy Brexit is going to be pushed through. Jo Swinson was the fool who gifted Johnson the election he wanted, and her tribalism in refusing to coordinate a tactical campaign with Labour to deny a Tory majority was just as bad as Labour’s tribalism.
But ultimately, why have the right got away with pushing through Brexit, and why has Johnson got an 80 seat majority, which he’ll use to cement executive power and gerrymander the voting system so that it’s even more rigged in the Tories’ favour?
Because, as you point out, Labour are useless. Their failure to effectively oppose the hard right con-trick of Brexit, and point out that it will most severely effect its own supporters who voted for it, was a disgrace. A failure not just on the hard left’s side of the party, but also acquiesers from the moderate side like Caroline Flint; who, in any case, lost her seat. Good riddance.
And then, worst of all, is Labour’s refusal to even contemplate electoral reform. Every time some idiot says the country now supports Johnson’s Brexit, I want to scream “IT’S THE “£$£$££* VOTING SYSTEM, STUPID!!” If we’d had PR we’d have a hung Parliament still, and those of us who fought for another referendum could have hope. The first requirement for progressive politics is a proper voting system, and here again, Labour has utterly failed. To me, this is Blair’s greatest failure. The dropping of electoral reform by New Labour when, for once, FPTP worked in their favour, has been a disaster for the left. The Tories have been in power since 2010, and probably now until hell freezes over, only due to this rotten system.
And both Labour moderates and the left are to blame. Corbyn’s lot are just as anti PR as the moderates. All we get from Labour is idiot tribalism, and the arrogant insistence that all progressives should vote for them as otherwise the progressive vote is split. WHICH IS LABOUR’S OWN FAULT FOR NOT REPLACING FPTP WITH PR!!!!! AAAAAAAARRRGGGH!
As I’m in a Tory safe seat, I’m effectively disenfranchised. The only vote of mine that resulted in someone I voted for being elected was in this year’s European Parliament elections. And now that’s going to be taken away from me.
My tactical vote for Labour this election was, as usual, pointless. Enough. Unless we get PR in future (fat chance!) or I vote with my feet and move to a country with PR, I’m never voting again. The Labour party; the best ally the Tories could hope for.
@ sickoftaxdodgers
How I agree with you on the PR/FPTP issue, and Blair’s failure. I’ve blogged this before, and hope you will allow me to say this again: I’m a member of the Labour Party now, and rejoined, in 2007, once Blair had gone, having resigned on an issue of conscience, after the 2001 GE from the Party I’d joined in 1988.
My issue was exactly Blair’s kicking of the Jenkins Report into the long grass, an action I believed to be both
a) pusillanimous (given the clear necessity for a change from FPTP in the interests of real democracy, and also with his then command of the political scene, Blair could easily have proposed, and won, a Referendum on the issue. Instead, he listened to the dinosaurs.)
b) unconstitutional, since, once such an issue was out in the public domain, ONLY the electorate at large could make a decision, and not a single (even if ruling) Party, and certainly not one man, even if PM.
The chickens came home to roost in 2005, when Blair “won” his 3rd GE “victory” (incidentally, polling fewer votes, at 9,552,436, than Corbyn’s Labour Party in 2019, which polled 10,269,076).
Given that Blair got a 60+ seat majority on 35% of a 61% turnout, or 22% of the total electorate, is it any wonder the Tories declared war on our electoral system, and decided to adopt the Republican Party route of gerrymandering (reduction in constituencies) and voter suppression (voter ID and Electoral Register manipulation) rather than adopting PR, which would give non-Tory Parties a real chance.
Blair and the Labour Party, should have seen the writing on the wall, and pushed ahead with real PR, for fear they would be hit by the same thing in return – as has, indeed, now happened, when the Conservatives gained an 80 seat majority on just 44% of votes cast. I don’t have the turnout figure to be able to check the %age of the total electorate, but even if it was 75%, that equates to 33% of the total electorate.
Here’s the ERS view on the 2019 GE: https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/latest-news-and-research/media-centre/press-releases/general-election-how-the-2019-election-results-could-have-looked-with-proportional-representation/
I rejoined in 2007, in the (alas, misguided) belief that Gordon Brown was more open to PR. IN 2010 he should certainly have included a Manifesto Commitment to full PR, via STV, as I have come to see Jenkins’s AV+ as flawed. Who knows, GB might have won; he would certainly have had more chance of keeping the Lib-Dems on side.
Another lost opportunity by Labour, which must now learn to be part of a Progressive Alliance – one that COULD have won far more GE’s in the last 50 years. I don’t necessarily hold with all the flak fired at Labour in this, and other, posts on this Blog, but on this point – the need to forge progressive alliances – all I can say is I wish they’d done so a generation ago.
Thanks Andrew
Exactly Andrew. This is Labour’s biggest failure, and its an inexcusable one for me, since it disenfranchises me. Blair had such a command of the political scene in the firest years of New Labour that he could have just gone ahead and changed the system to PR; he didn’t need a referendum, he should have just done it.
Instead, he was cowardly, and took the short sighted path of political expediency and kept this rotten system. As we now see, a disaster for all progressives. And Corbyn’s bunch are no better. They care far more about the Iraq war than this betrayal of the progressive vote. If anything, they are even more obdurate and bone headed than the Labour moderates in their tribalism.
How can Labour actually say they are a progressive party when they support an utterly regressive voting system? One that, moreover, favours the regressive anti-democratic Tory party 90% of the time? Stupid and self defeating beyond belief.
Labour prefer to fight other progressive parties, and themselves, more than the right, it seems to me.
Well said sickoftaxdodgers.
Labour should hang their heads in shame.
Sorry to be nitpicky Richard but just a couple of quibbles:
1. “I have had enough of Labour’s failure. I have had enough of what has appropriately been described as its student politics.”
That “student politics” thing. Unwittingly and without malice you have bought straight into a well-known ageist cliche that attempts to dismiss the popularity of progressive causes among younger people.
2.. “All that these things, important (even vital) as they are, provide are bear traps. That is, they’re gifts to the media anxious to prevent the left winning, ever. Why when the left knows the media hates it why does it continually gift it ammunition? I wish I knew the answer.”
Because people don’t want the dropkicks in the media to be dictating their conversations perhaps. That would be gifting them power they don’t deserve. And if “the media” are the almighty force that some would have us believe then why were they relatively ineffective in 2017? Hint: because no virtually one under 40 actually reads that shit anyway.
Now if that last comment was an ageist cliche that is meant to dismiss the popularity of conservative politics among older people then so be it. Mine isn’t a catchphrase or value judgement it is a statistically provable fact. 🙂
I know a thing or two about student politics
I have done for a long time
My point is that the student politics that I refer to has almost no appeal to most students. They are inclined to progressive causes and I am delighted that is the case. But they have no time for extremism. and that is what I am referring to. It is because extremists still control much of student political debate that most are alienated from it. Labour remains in that zone. I am not patronising the young. I am condemning a particular form of sectarian and alienating political thinking.
And I get your point on the media. But if the left is to beat the media it has to be savvy. Right now it is anything but. and yet the left still keep moaning about losing when they do all they can to make sure that happens. That as my point.
Yeah real student politics are always silly, everywhere and arguably meant to be. That’s not what I meant though. I was referring to a more current use of the term “student politics” as a broad and dismissive catchphrase used by the right-wing commentariat to express their resentment of younger peoples’ preference for progressive politics. They are not talking about actual student politics.
Unfortunately the term has been stolen and re-adapted for other purposes which is something to be wary of (depending on the context of the conversation of course). As a cliche it is known but it hasn’t caught on in a huge way. It will probably wear off with time.
Surely the willingness of so many to accept the “fake news/views” of the right stems from poor parenting, the inadequacy of Co-Regulation leading to lack of Self-Regulation a main component of which is the confidence to think independently and critically:-
http://www.behaviourmatters.org.uk/emotions-matter-helping-children-to-self-regulate/
I would add the poor parenting stretches right across society with high levels of wealth resulting in some parents still shunting their children off to boarding school when their developing brains are still highly in need of Co-Regulation. Hence the story (whether true or false) that membership of the Bullingdon Club involved burning a £50 note in front of a homeless person. If false it nevertheless has a ring of truth as far as portraying attitude. The scourge of the “feckless” Ian Duncan Smith was sent away to HMS Conway Boarding Scholl at the age of 14. Adolescence is regarded by psychologists as a critical age for Co-Regulation!
Nobody wants to be a prophet of doom, but the next decade will be ‘challenging’ to say the least. Not only will government have to deal with the social impact of its economic policies from the past decade (incl. Brexit) but will also be facing new, bigger, global threats – not least the inevitable clash between the prevailing capitalist orthodoxy v. urgent policies required to protect the environment.
Most pundits predict another global recession at some point -https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2019/10/28/here-are-the-countries-on-the-brink-of-recession-going-into-2020). Yesterday I listened to an American trader who thought we’re heading for a decade of 70s-style stagflation, although I wasn’t entirely convinced by his argument.
There is growing unrest of one kind or another on every Continent -https://theconversation.com/2019-was-a-year-of-global-unrest-spurred-by-anger-at-rising-inequality-and-2020-is-likely-to-be-worse-128384. It is against such a backcloth of uncertainty & instability that people are more readily seduced by reactionary forces promising ‘stability’ and a return to ‘law & order’. I think that’s going to be the main story of the forthcoming decade.
Achieving permanent, progressive change for the greater good of society at large has always been a long, painful process. Plus ça change. However, the struggle has become even more challenging with the continuing consolidation of media power in the US, UK, Australia, et al. And it’s difficult to see how that can be reversed or at least more stringently regulated under right-wing governments.
So, the $64,000 question is – what to do in order to turn your excellent progressive manifesto into functional reality? The answer has to be ‘co-operation’ at all levels of society from the bottom up to the top down. This necessitates the subjugation of political egos and a disciplined effort to reach common cause with the various disparate groups that constitute opposition to a re-emergent right-wing oligarchy/hegemony.
Because “it’s the economy, stupid” the first step must be formal agreement on the principles of modern monetary macro-economics. That is the essential framework to enable all other policy decisions. While it’s not going to happen overnight maybe external threats will hasten the need to come together. Who knows? Of course, PR would change the political landscape overnight, but that’s not going to happen any time soon, either.
Anyhow, thank you Richard for being such a persistent torch-bearer for what might be termed ‘practical progressivism’ and for the educational dimension to your blogging – all of which is greatly appreciated. And thanks for patiently engaging with the wide spectrum of posters’ opinions – even the obvious trolls. Regular readers know the level of effort you relentlessly put in every day, in spite of all your other family & professional commitments. It’s a veritable tour de force.
Wishing you and everyone here a very happy & healthy New Year.
John
Thanks for the kind comments
I have known for a long time that my role is to think. All models have their limitations, but I found the Myers-Briggs especially illuminating when I came across it. Finding I was an INTJ explained a great deal I had not known about myself.
I have always worked with partners who can help deliver my ideas. Literally my business partners once upon a time. The John Christensen with the TJN. And Colin Hines with the GND. And first Meesha Nehru and then Paul Monaghan with the Fair Tax Mark, and so on.
I am not the deliverer. I work with others to do that.
Here I put out ideas to use. I love working with this one who want to use them. That’s my kick from this. Well, that and having an outlet to explore the ideas in the first place.
I appreciate all who comment.
Thanks to you in that capacity.
Best for 2020 to all
Richard
For some reason the supporting hyperlinks I gave don’t appear to be active – although the threads are functional. So, just for the record, here they are again:
‘Here Are The Countries On The Brink Of Recession Going Into 2020’ – https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2019/10/28/here-are-the-countries-on-the-brink-of-recession-going-into-2020/
‘2019 was a year of global unrest, spurred by anger at rising inequality — and 2020 is likely to be worse’ – https://theconversation.com/2019-was-a-year-of-global-unrest-spurred-by-anger-at-rising-inequality-and-2020-is-likely-to-be-worse-128384
John D says:
“Most pundits predict another global recession at some point -”
That’s a given.
It doesn’t need to be, but it’s a given because politicians will accept what comes because they don’t appreciate that they are making choices.
The stupid buggers don’t seem to realise it’s stopping it, or ameliorating the downside IS their job.
I don’t know what they think their job is. I honestly don’t understand what they think we are paying them a handsome salary (and expenses) for. I really don’t.
Here is a possible way forward from George Monbiot
https://www.monbiot.com/2019/12/23/rewilding-politics/
I think that events will overtake Boris in the next 10 years. (All politicians actually) Party politics will become incressingly irrelevant. (The rambling denial of Scott Morrison is a case in point) Climate Change will keep knocking on the door. The growth model will be put under increasing strain as climate breakdown increases. Economies will find it harder to maintain growth and eventually the present system will collapse. It needs to happen under a Tory government. They won’t be able to blame it on a Labour Government. (Not that Labour would have been able to stem the tide) What comes next is the question? Socialism, Neofeudalism or all out chaos? Or non of the above.
Good question…
You raise an interesting point, JVA
I would further add that the horror GE of 2019 has some genuine silver linings which is not a universally popular observation at this point in time but anyhow, here are 3 to consider:
1. The Clear Tory Majority
No minority government, no DUP, no ex-Remainer Teresa May, and no Corbyn to blame for the calamity that Brexit will become. The Tories and their establishment muppets will wear this in pure isolation.
2. Corbyn gone
I actually like Corbyn and the overall influence that he has had but new leadership gives Labour the opportunity to start over.
3. The coming Financial Crisis (a good election to lose)
I’m not going to explain why there will be a GFC 2 or, at the very least, a serious recession. All you need to do is type “corporate debt bubble” into Google and the results should tell you everything you need to know.
That inevitable problem is likely to emerge sooner rather than later. Whoever happens to be in power at the time, anywhere, will get blamed whether they share in the blame or not. They might escape that fate if they take decisive and effective action but Boris won’t do that and his hapless colleagues won’t have a clue. Anyone that has lost a recent election will soon enough realise that it was probably a good election to lose.
I really liked Labour’s manifesto. First election I can remember where I broadly agreed with the content. However, I still don’t think it would have changed what is coming. The whole economy is heading for fundimental changed and it will be beyond party politics to fix.
I’m wholly with you on GND, about less sectarianism and on the need where we can to build coalitions, but as an analysis of Labour this seems to me way off mark and,, if I may say so, politically incoherent.
You want a GND and coalition building, but you propose (not in the piece itself but in a reply BTL) to start by expelling people who have joined or come back to Labour because it seemed to offer the hope which the GND among other things represents. So in other words, rather than build a new wider coalition, you propose instead to pull apart an existing one. And to do so by dispensing with the very people who have been open the the kind of policy shifts you have rightly been arguing for. Even you would agree I think that there is scant reason to believe that a Cooper or Kendall led Labour party would have gone in this direction.
You are right however about Labour needing to recognise that the media will always be hostile. They will. And about not giving them ammunition. It’s a lesson that the PLP could do well to learn: how often have they gone off to the tabloid press to undermine those who have been leading Labour over the last four years, and fed the narratives of the billionaire press?
But it’s one perhaps that you might wish to learn too. It does the left no favours when people on the left start endorsing tabloid tropes about student politics and the like. I”m a member of the Labour party, and I don’t see any of that. What I saw last month were people of all strands in the party walking the streets, often in the rain. And doing it together, with a common cause and in good humour.
Since you wear your non membership as a badge of pride, I’m assuming you won’t have been among them – though we had non members canvassing too. But those who are members may be entitled to feel that you are speaking about that which you don’t know. And even, perhaps, that you should really butt out on this one.
I know a great many who walked the streets for Labour
Most are longing to see the back of the Four Msw
Most think they have nothing to do with the politics they want
You don’t build a coalition with extremist
Wishing a very Happy New Year to everyone of goodwill. The next decade is the last in which any actions mankind makes towards the curbing of global warming may still be of positive benefit. But it’s increasingly likely that nothing will be done.
And our children and grandchildren are those who will bear the consequences.
Sorry to sound so negative. Look at Australia – look at Indonesia. Look at Brazil – look at the United States. And see why I’m close to losing any hope.
I see all your reasons
And we still need hope
Or there will literally be nothing left
Happy New Year!
Yes! Yes! Yes!
I hope for all you say, Richard.
Will this happen now?
No. I don’t see it… Yet.
May the future bring this, and not too far into this new decade happen.
We must never lose hope it will.
Agreed
And Happy New Year to you too
Thank you
Surviving a decade is a very long term plan Richard!….but happy new year to you.
There will be many more arguments, more in-fighting, more destruction, before there’s any chance sanity can be restored.
I’m naturally an optimistic realist, but the times we live in…this new (artificial) decade ….they’re a challenge to sanity. It still feels unreal.
The formal, traditional, organised left is adrift.
Kenan Malik has written some very good analyses of why that is, but as to what to do about it…suggestions only. We’re in uncharterd territory.
I agree with all you say above.
I also think the present Labour leadership is just a campaign and protest machine, good for rallies and demonstrations, good at recruiting new members, but useless at strategies leading to taking overall responsibilities for the whole country.
No matter what they think and say, the way they’ve behaved the last few years at least, has reminded me of my student days. I don’t doubt the sincerity of members and campaigners, not at all. But with respect, I’d just like them to grow up.
That takes time, experience, learning from mistakes. Admitting errors too. They’re just not doing that in any significant way. Bogged down. Navel gazing.
Intelligent, grown up, sincere and strategically effective leadership isn’t what they have, but what they need if they’re to survive. They need to recognise that, and look for it. They also need to learn that without compromise, nothing has ever progressed, in politics as in everything else.
On the subject of coalitions at ground level, I found myself canvassing for LibDems in a tight Tory seat with both Labour and Tory folk. Local coalitions can happen – there was more that united us… it’s the centre that has to change.
As to ‘student politics’, having been a student in the late 60s, I’ve thought of it as describing a politics that is mostly about protest and narrow factionalism rather than about engaging with people more widely and developing constructive policy. There’s at least some truth in the term being used to describe Corbyn and co.
That’s not meant to dismiss the role of protest (I’ve been on the marches…) or of students getting involved in politics. Students and young people were not very politically engaged during the New Labour era, partly because life was actually pretty good for them at the time. At least the grimness of the last 10 years has got them more involved again, confirmed by contacts in academia.
On a different front, I’ve had long chats with my Australian family and friends over the last few days. Some are stranded on a beach in NSW where they cannot get away. Others have lost close friends. Cars and houses destroyed. Several cut off where they live. Significant health implications from the smoke, now and in future. Australia might yet be a grim Canary in the (literal) coal mine, both for failing to tackle climate change and their right wing, xenophobic, climate denying government. The U.K. is now a member of that club of governments. What is happening the other side of the world is directly relevant to the UK, politically and environmentally.
Robin, I heard that Australia, despite being a huge continent with ample space and sunshine for the deployment of solar cells, generates 2/3 of its electricity from coal. I googled this just now, and it is apparantly even worse, at 73%.
Solar accounts for just over 5%. Jesus wept, they make us in the UK look competent. And they recently elected a right wing climate disaster denying government headed by Scott Morrison. Another useless buffoon still trying to claim that this is not evidence of a changing climate.
And now they’re reaping the whirlwind.
Just like this government and Leave voters are going to be doing with the Brexit disaster.