I put this on Twitter last night:
All those years of austerity. The NHS in ruins as a result. The absence of any effective climate policy in his era. And the media make a fuss about this peaceful gesture? I think some people need to get a sense of perspective . https://t.co/VxrPPOs57R
— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) July 8, 2023
I note that the media would have it that they are really shocked about this. Rachel Reeves has condemned Just Stop Oil, again. But what really happened?
A person of about my age decided to mark the wedding of a man who did untold damage to the economy, and who denied funding to the NHS that has resulted in the early deaths of vast numbers of people, and who essentially refused to engage with climate change issues. She did so respectfully. She dressed appropriately. She scattered some confettis, as is commonplace on such occasions. And, very peacefully and without threatening anyone, she made her point. You could almost describe this as a near perfect peaceful protest.
And my argument is that she had the right to make that peaceful protest. Osborne chose public life. He has benefitted enormously from it. It is why he can live in Bruton with the ‘celebs'. He wanted the celebrity of a showpiece wedding. He wanted the media attention. In that case a non-violent, extremely peaceful and wholly appropriate protestor was entitled to make clear that he has profited by denying people the services that they need and by denying us the climate change policy that we required for so long, which he would have nothing to do with.
Of course those of a conservative inclination, including the Labour leadership (who were represented by Yvette Cooper at the wedding), have condemned this. They don't want to spend on climate change and wring their hands on climate change. Balancing the books is their priority.
But they are wrong. Balancing the books is not our priority. Sustaining people, life and and the planet should be our priority. Everything else is incidental to that, and Just Stop Oil are saying that. If they persist with these types of protest that harm no one, damage nothing, and simply draw attention to the issue then Just Stop Oil are following in a wholly appropriate tradition of protest which was the only thing that delivered almost every social change from which we now benefit.
It's time the politicians opposed to our well-being stopped condemning Just Stop Oil protests. It is time that they took note. I can live in hope.
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:
It has become a commonplace to condemn successive Conservative governments for dereliction of responsibility in respect of climate change.
Sadly, it seems we can do the same to Labour before they even have the responsibility!
Are we to be condemned to more economic illiteracy under Reeves and wilful blindness about the climate under Starmer?
It won’t need tactical voting to depose the Tory shower from the shires this time round. But we could use it to aim for a hung parliament (UK), with tactical voting for the LibDems and the Greens, and for Plaid Cymru and the SNP in the colonies. The objective should be PR and new elections.
This goes against the grain, but what follows attempts to make some sense of the “vile-liebore” position on climate (as for Gidiot: small regard and contempt).
The Indy (and The Murdoch) wrote up the “I hate tree huggers” Starmer rant. The “I hate tree huggers” needs to be prefaced by ““He was more interested in creating sustainable new jobs to replace jobs in old sectors that were being lost.”.
We know for a fact that some of the unions (+ Rolls-Royce) have been lobbying for nukes, big uns & little uns (SMRs). The big uns (a la Hinkley Pointless) employ lots of people but this is a one-off. SMRs might be a bit more interesting and could offer prospects for both heat & elec to cities, depending on cost (note the caveats). Employment might not be bad for SMRs. Set against this, PV and wind (and the various bios) coupled to electrolysers, have well-defined employment profiles & if the gov pulled its head out of its arse, could even mean a PV cell & panel mfu in the UK (not even on the horizon at the moment). In the case of energy efficiency: this breaks down into: thermal rennovation using insulation materials mfued now in the Uk (Rockwool have a massive plant in South Wales – for example – could expand – could employ more – what’s not to like?), heat pumps (not made in UK @ the moment) and fuel cells (ditto). Plus of course the effort to install all the kit (& the lack of people to undertake this – a gov responsibility Rach’!!)). From an objective point of view – this would seem to be a target-rich environment from the PoV of well paid employment, and thus delivering on Starmers desires.
The amusing parts of the above are that gov’ “investment” needs to be present at quite a few points to catalyse action – very little to do with tree hugging – & a great deal to do with real-world economics leading to people employed on fair wages. This begs a couple of questions: did Starmer dislike the style of Milliband’s presentation? Was the emphasis wrong? Was Starmer having a bad hair day? What accounts for the negative reaction
In the case of Rockwool, would be possible to de-carb much of the process – & one could do this via the usual off-shore wind (self-funding) & electrolyser (bit less so) combo. One could do this (subject to head pulling out of arse) easily within the life of a vile-liebore parliament (1GW of off-shore can be & has been built within one year – kit on quay to full commissioning – if liebore ask me nicely I can intro them to the people in Orsted that do this sort of thing – daily).
Last thought – & on a lighter note – like many I have seen the trailer for Barbie – & doubtless in the fullness of time I will have to take the ersazt-grandsprog to see it. Why not replace Reeves with Barbie (with a script written by Hollywood) I guarantee the results would not be worse than what seems to be looming: an escaped & partially educated/doctrinaire village idiot, leaving the open question: why would anybody in their right mind elect the woman?
Very good
What on earth were Labour Leadership people doing at Osbournes Wedding ?
Know thy enemy ?
after
ALL THE HARM HIS PARTY HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST 13 YEARS
In my view, they’re all on the same team. Why wouldn’t they be there?
Exactly. Labour is in the throes of neoliberalism and the best you can hope for is neoliberalism with a slightly kinder face. Should they dare use government to invest in the social fabric, to spend in the cause of social justice, to invest in the infrastructure needed to address the climate crisis, the Murdoch and right wing press will hound then out office.
I’m not sure if Yvette Cooper was there to represent the Labour Party she was certainly there to represent her partner Ed Balls the Labour Party quisling who’s supposedly big pals with George Osborne these days according to the Guardian although it all amounts to the same thing to me in terms of representation symbolism:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/06/george-osborne-podcast-austerity-ed-balls
Yvette Cooper was pretty radical in her opposition to my thinking in 2015. Her belief was that I was a proponent of hyper inflation
Cooper is a huge disappointment in my view.
There are women everywhere – Kelton, Mazzucato, Kendzior and Mattei who fly the progressive economic flag better than many women in Laboured.
Truth if ever it was that it is not gender that is going to save the world I’m afraid. It’s got to be the reassertion of state sovereignty in solving human problems.
I have found it a common reaction of people I have told that there is no limit to the amount of money a government can create is the imagine that I am recommending that the government actually does create money without limit — hence the hyperinflation.
Pointing out that a government has the power to as much money as it wishes is merely to point out a fact. What the government does with this power is another matter, but nothing is gained by pretending it does not have this power.
Agreed
She and her partner Ed Balls constipated with shallow thinking Sado-Monetarism! Sadly though shallow thinking also wins the day with Old Blighty’s Luddite voters. See my posts on Sado-Monetarism on Peter May’s blog:-
http://www.progressivepulse.org/economics/promising-a-lack-of-fulfillment
Ah yes, Cooper – the ‘imaginary wheelchair woman’… this from 2010 or thereabouts ““Tens of thousands of claimants facing losing their benefit on review, or on being transferred from incapacity benefit, as plans to make the employment and support allowance (ESA) medical much harder to pass are approved by the secretary of state for work and pensions, Yvette Cooper.
The shock plans for ‘simplifying’ the work capability assessment, drawn up by a DWP working group, include docking points from amputees who can lift and carry with their stumps. Claimants with speech problems who can write a sign saying, for example, ‘The office is on fire!’ will score no points for speech and deaf claimants who can read the sign will lose all their points for hearing.
Meanwhile, for ‘health and safety reasons’ all points scored for problems with bending and kneeling are to be abolished and claimants who have difficulty walking can be assessed using imaginary wheelchairs.
Claimants who have difficulty standing for any length of time will, under the plans, also have to show they have equal difficulty sitting, and vice versa, in order to score any points. And no matter how bad their problems with standing and sitting, they will not score enough points to be awarded ESA.
In addition, almost half of the 41 mental health descriptors for which points can be scored are being removed from the new ‘simpler’ test, greatly reducing the chances of being found incapable of work due to such things as poor memory, confusion, depression and anxiety.
There are some improvements to the test under the plans, including exemptions for people likely to be starting chemotherapy and more mental health grounds for being admitted to the support group. But the changes are overwhelmingly about pushing tens of thousands more people onto JSA.
If all this sounds like a sick and rather belated April Fools joke to you, we’re not surprised. But the proposals are genuine and have already been officially agreed by Yvette Cooper, the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.”
https://cultureandpolitics.org/2016/09/25/yvette-cooper-imaginary-wheelchair-woman/
Cooper’s soon going to be reminded some of us, we survivors, have got long memories.
Bernard – it’s a response to our childhood conditioning where we’re taught that printing/creating new money= hyperinflation full stop. We aren’t given a full explanation which would make it clear that what happened in the Weimar was an extreme example, possibly the most extreme in recent (ish) times, and is taken entirely out of context at that. This method of indoctrination through schooling masquerading as education is old as the hills (Proverbs 22:6: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” and of course Tacitus, Life of Agricola “§ 17. The following winter passed without disturbance, and was employed in productive matters. For, in order to familiarize a population scattered and barbarous and therefore inclined to war with rest and repose through the charms of luxury, Agricola gave private encouragement and public aid to the building of temples, courts of justice and dwelling-houses, praising the energetic, and reproving the lazy. Thus an honourable rivalry took the place of force. He likewise provided a liberal education for the sons of the chiefs, and showed such a preference for the natural powers of the Britons over the industry of the Gauls that they who lately disdained the tongue of Rome now coveted its eloquence. Hence, too, a liking sprang up for our style of dress, and the “toga” became fashionable. Step by step they were taught in things which led to vice, the lounge, the bath, the elegant banquet. All this in their ignorance, they called civilization, when it was but a part of their servitude.”
Ignoramuses that we are, we still call it civilisation.
Kate Smurthwaite’s take on Just Stop Oil.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl1_nWoutH0
Creative protest. Recent legislation will create ever more creative forms of protest. Not unlike the responses to a crackdown on school uniforms.
From the point of view of a campaigning organisation like Just Stop Oil, it is better that politicians and the press condemn them than ignore them.
There will be a certain number of people who will think “if they want to shut them up so much there must be something in what they are saying.” Yet others will have had similar thoughts themselves and are emboldened when they find out they are not alone. In addition any sort of publicity gets the issues discussed.
Might the gruesome twosome of Conservative and Labour be operating some sort of unstated econo- political cartel?
Might there be a shared submerged policy to retain and attract wealthy donors?
P. S. In 2010, when Mr. Osborne became chancellor, the National Debt was £1tn.
When he left office in2016, it was £1.5tn.
Going into Covid, it was £1.7tn.
(Private Eye)
Plenty of state money to be poured into the coffers of defence industry shareholders but the NHS, education, water and sewage nationalisation and tackling climate change can all go hang!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/09/uk-wastes-billions-defence-firms-investors-taxpayer-weapons
People will still actually vote for this corruption who ought to know better by now!
Here’s a thoroughly pathetic article from Wes Streeting today that might be worth your time replying to Richard. A complete paucity of ambition, and an entire lack of intellectual curiosity and economic knowledge are hardly a winning combination to form a new government.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/09/labour-promises-tory-mismanagement-public-finances?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
It is dire….let me see what tomorrow brings
Utterly juvenile article that tells you nothing and people will vote for this crap on the basis Tory crap is even worse!
Interesting article here which looks at amongst other things the impact of various industry’s on Health
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66142350
I sometimes get letters published in the local; press where I point out that there are significant benefits to be gained from reducing our dependence on imported fossil fuels that go far beyond Global Warming and even my late uncle, Wing Cmdr RAF (Retd) could see the strategic and economic sense of this.
The hike in energy prices as a result of war in the Ukraine simply serve to demonstrate the benefits of using domestically produced renewables compared with imported oil and gas but will anyone in power make that point.
Apologies for raking this up again
From a year ago
” Which leads to the conclusion that two writers (Hettich and Winer) have put forward that:
“it is possible to have a flat tax, or to have democracy, but not both””
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2022/10/02/is-truss-signalling-that-she-wants-flat-taxes-for-the-uk/
Is there a citation for this, please?
sprry – no idea now
I would hsve to Google it
Thanks anyway
I’ll find it……..
What a strange set of responses.
Only one person seemed to think that the Just Stop Oil Campaign was worth a mention, let alone worth stating their support.
Must be very cheering for the Tories that monitor this blog.
About living in hope.
While the values and policies of existing political parties are anathema to those concerned about the public good, many people, perhaps even a majority, will share your support of the values the confetti sprinkling lady’s actions may symbolize.
But what reasonable hopes can we carry from her example to our actions into the future?
I can recall a recent Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn, endorsing values and policies many people, perhaps even a majority, at the grass roots, supported.
A new grass roots party, unsupported by finance from established interests, campaigning on those values and policies might decimate its opponents.
Without funding it would struggle. And if you meant beat its opponents, then decimate is not the word you needed, as it means to reduce by 1/10. Which is far more achievable.
Sadly until there is PR the more parties there are, the more the big two benefit as opposition is fractured in safe seats and they will never see fit to give away their advantage. Democracy in the U.K. is doomed, if indeed it ever existed
This has been confirmed by JSO that it was not a JSO action. We are becoming so successful that we now inspire copycat actions.
You will notice that there is no JSO branding at the action. It was the media that created this stunt.
Annie, that’s great to hear; people off their own bat beiong inspired to take action against the likes of Osborne and Co. And nice to see that our mostly contemptible media, in assuming it was JSO that did this, have amplified your message.
You’ve got my admiration. It takes courage to face a hostile press and an increasingly anti-free speech government supported by a useless labour party, through resolutely non-violent protest.
Response to Heather
According to Wikipedia – current usage of the word;
“The word decimation in English is often used to refer to an extreme reduction in the number of a population or force[24] or an overall sense of destruction and ruin,” which is what I meant, and suspect it is possible given the present loathing of existing parties.
I agree that democracy hasn’t been tried yet, but as Churchill is reputed to have said of Americans “they are willing to try democracy, but only after they have tried everything else”, and so may we.
Just a couple of points.A few years ago Private Eye carried a report about Yvette Cooper seen at a meeting of the Montpellerin Society in Paris. Hayeks’ own creation. What was she doing there? We know several Labour figures have been members of the Henry Jackson Society. Another neoliberal think tank.
Secondly, we are all educated to believe democracy has existed in Britain for centuries. Actually, it is less than a century old. Yes, a Parliament has existed for a long time but that did’nt mean democracy existed. In fact, the first general election under universal suffrage when both men and women over 21 could vote was in 1929. Just eleven years before I was born. The government that sent millions of young soldiers to die in the trenches in the Great War was elected by about two thirds of the male voters.
A warning – I have been seen at the Institute for Economic Affairs – bit it does not mean I agree with them.
Mont Pelerin wasn’t just down to Hayek
Have a look at the work of Philip Mirowski for a fuller picture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Mirowski
Especially Mirowski & Plehwe (2009)
Friedman (1999) also has a very interesting passage
I have