Yesterday was interesting, although not necessarily in ways that anyone might desire.
We watched the credibility (at least) of the Royal Family collapsing in real time.
Reform got its first MP, and maybe not its last of this parliament.
The Tories largest donor, who is reported to have been considerably enriched by Tory healthcare related contracts, is also reported to have made racist (and what would appear to be violent) comments about Diane Abbott MP.
Indian PM Modi decided to make it harder for Moslems to become Indian.
The far-right won significant influence in the Portuguese general election.
The Republicans sought to make clear that they are willing to gift Ukraine to Russia, presumably to gain Putin's support for Trump's election campaign.
And Michael Gove is planning a new definition of extremism, which is most definitely what a deeply divided UK does not need.
I posted this on Twitter last night:
Can the centre hold?
Do we even know where it is anymore?
I wish I knew the answer to that.
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:
Finally the Guardian starts to have some fight in it:-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/12/keir-starmer-labour-poor-sick-disabled-tory
Sadly Frances Ryan in the following extract fails to recognise that her own paper persistently parrots the old chestnut “there is no Magic Money Tree” that Starmer and Sunak do:-
“We see this again when Labour parrots the government’s economic language. In response to the budget, Starmer declared “the national credit card is maxed out” while Reeves opted for the old chestnut, “There’s no magic money tree.” Adopting such framing is not just economically illiterate, it fences Labour in for how a future government can raise funds and spend them. Before you know it, Reeves is announcing that – now that Hunt has taken her non-dom tax revenue policy – she intends to pay for the NHS and school breakfasts through (wait for it) “future savings to public spending”. Who needs a wealth tax when you can squeeze councils facing bankruptcy?”
She has got it
Thank you and well said, both.
Ryan, Richard’s old friend Larry Elliott and Aditya Chakrabortty fulfill the role of John Prescott and, decreasingly, Angela Rayner, a pretence of progress at essentially neoliberal organisations.
There are some wealthy hacks at the Grauniad group*. One has a property empire in his wife’s name. I hope she manages it as he was no good at the Observer and Industrial Society. These types certainly don’t want to pay more, hence the character assassination of Corbyn.
*The group is owned by banks and investment firms by way of the Cayman islands after a debt for equity swap circa 2008.
I admit I can find nothing to substantiate your claim about the ownership of the Guardian or that the suggestion you make took place. It seems that the Scott Trust is the independent owner.
There was a deal in Autotrader in 2008 as I recall but the Group did not change hands. Might you elaborate?
I think that may be a little unfair to Prescott. We worked on several of his initiatives in the Blair years, with a sense that we were actually making a difference. But let’s hope the new generation prove equally able to get things done while nobody is looking.
Thank you, Richard.
The GMG invested in new printing works and format, Berliner, for the Guardian and Observer, funded by a loan from a syndicate involving Lloyd’s, as lead arranger, BNP Paribas and HSBC.
Due to financial difficulties, the Scott Trust, which provided the firewall between the journalists and owners, was dissolved / restructured into the Scott Trust Limited, so a limited liability company and no longer a trust, and representatives from the lenders joined the board.
One of the new directors represented HSBC, although he also led an enquiry into Barclays some years later, and, amongst other things, got whistleblower reports into misselling and money laundering at HSBC, where I used to work, spiked.
There were two good articles about that from around the time and both written by serious independent journalists, but I can’t find them. There are references to the authors, Nafeez Ahmed and Jonathan Cook, wrote online, but not the articles themselves.
Thanks
I might do some asking
The “centre” has been drifting rightward ever since the dodgy dossier. The pace of its journey has been accelerating. Our political car is being driven by Thelma and Louise.
Erm..”what centre?”
In the late 1950s and through the 1960s there was some sort of consensus between the two parties – with the tories having accepted the post-45 “political settlement.” We are now in a situation where LINO have accepted root & branch the post-1979 “political settlement” – or experiment – which in large part confirms Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom” – but in reverse. There is increasing serfdom caused largely by a retreat of gov’ from “the commanding heights” of what govs should be doing, coupled to a growth in authoritariansim and fascism. There is no centre – just a rabble of lying, gurning politicos, some vying to survive, others licking their chops at the chance of power. Even so called “moderates” defend the indefensible – Warsi interviewed by O’Brien talking up the 3rd worst PM in modern history Cam moron. I walked past him in the House of Lords – a vaccum has personality compared to matey.
Outcomes: Taking one trivial example. Dentists. The shortage in the UK are well documented (ditto, nurses, doctors, engineers – but oddly not bankers). Belgium. Partner @ dentist. Dentist in his 60s. “When I graduated we were training 600 dentists per year – now the gov has decided that only 100 become dentists”. It is difficult to find a dentist – even private. Costs gov money to train dentists & the ECB has set 3% debt level on all Euro-zone countries (based on the same set of rationales that the old fool/fraud Hayak cooked up). Detect a pattern? Shortage for the serfs – no shortage for the rich – see below.
On the other hand – there is no shortage of the rich or things for the rich – indeed luxury is a “growth industry” ref LHMV share price and this – https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/maasai_evictions_sign_61 – luxury safaris for the “London-set” – & evictions for the Maasai. People sleeping on the streets of London (next to hyper expensive property) ditto Brussels. There is no centre.
Thanks for posting the link to this important Petition; please check it out and sign.
We’re living in a reprise of Europe in the 1920s-30s, that Yeats’ poem is widely seen as predicting. The shock of war and revolution (in Russia – but for Yeats also in Ireland), rampant social inequality and division produced by unrestrained capitalism, which led in the end to fascism, another world war, holocaust. It took the shock of this to make most people understand that capitalism in that unmitigated form is not sustainable, and for ‘western’ democracies to build welfare states with 90% marginal tax rates and a Keynesian international settlement. Tellingly, they imposed on Germany the ‘mitbestimmung’ system – worker participation in corporate governance – precisely to curtail the extreme social division that had led to disaster.
But as we all know, that consensus was broken in the 1970s-80s, and the new consensus of neoliberalism cohered the political centre and right, allowing again rampant social inequality and division – with the added existential crisis of climate-ecological breakdown. In the 30s, the political centre – the establishment, the status-quo, instead of moving to the left and facilitating a peaceful transition to the big-state, highly-taxed-and-regulated economies that came anyway post-war-and-holocaust, broke right, and facilitated fascism – the fascists were not elected, they won some support and representation, but it was the establishment, in fear of the radical left, that actually put them into power in Italy, Germany, Austria, etc – or by failing to defend democracy against armed coup (Spain). So here we are again – the centre, because there are no non-radical solutions to the polycrisis we are facing, is breaking to the right – when the only real solutions are to the left.
There’s an excellent article by Frances Ryan in the Graun today calling out the current Labour leadership for parroting the Tory talking points.
It’s just a pity that we’re not seeing more commentators doing the same. It would be nice if Starmer and/or Reeves could be properly taken to task in a televised interview with a competent and knowledgeable interviewer. I suspect the chances of that happening are slim.
Thanks
Starmer and Reeves are clearly too arrogant to understand the need to be accountable to the people they purport to serve. You saw this only awhile ago with Starmer perverting the conventions of Parliament to save face over the Gaza/Israel conflict where upto that point he thought he was getting away with his pro-Zionist policy!
“the current Labour leadership for parroting the Tory talking points.”
Pet Shop Owner: “Lovely parrot the LINO blue – great plumage”
Customer: “this parrot is dead”
Ower: No ‘ees not, ‘ees just restin after a long squawk with oligarchs”
Customer: “‘ees dead – the only reason ‘ees upright is cos ‘ees stuffed with right whingers & you’ve nailed I’m to the perch”
etc.
Nice reprise of Cleese’s dead parrot sketch. I enjoyed it. And, it was ‘on the money’, as it were.
I used to think of myself as a middle of the road, centrist kind of person. Happy with a mixed economy of nationalised public services and private enterprise. Happy that EU integration made travel easier and brought a wider range of food and other goods into the UK. Pleased that my brother was able to live and work in an EU country with minimum paperwork or hassle. Pleased that refugees came here because we made them welcome.
I haven’t changed my views but now I seem to be an extremist.
Join the club
Moi aussi. as I’ve posted before, 1970 Wilson supporter, middle of the road Labour, not keen on the authoritarian/doctrinaire Militant types, democratic socialist. I am now actually on the Prevent list twice (socialism, green causes) and soon thrice (pro-Palestine stalls, marches). My last weapons training was with an Enfield .303 in the grammar school CCF, so not much use in uprisings, and I’ve got dodgy knees.
I was reflecting on the state of the nation during my morning commute, and as I navigated the pothole chicanes, decided that neoliberalism since the mid 70s has destroyed the fabric of the nation. The only good bit is that all generations largely reject racism (unlike the casual 70s stuff), homophobia is largely defunct, and the war on misogyny is raging. There is a little hope, yet.
Richard, would you say that neoliberalism inevitably creates the conditions for fascism to arise?
Yes
It is inherently opposed to democracy
It really isn’t.
Perhaps you don’t understand it or perhaps it’s simply that you have to lie to try and promote your own beliefs.
Are you the Goebels of the 21st century, hoping to lie enough so that enough people will eventually believe you?
An interesting claim.
What am I lying about?
Yeats is a great poet and very quotable but his enthusiasm for the Irish blue shirts and Fascism in General poses the eternal question of where you draw the line between the artist and the Art
This poem comes from an era before that
Wanting to put some optimisim in the conversation – the growth of higher education in every western country – the masses rather than tiny elites – and across the world, wasn’t a feature of the struggles of the 1930s.
Mass higher education doesn’t automatically make caring liberal socialists, but it leads to a more educated population. Certainly in Britain the more educated tend to be more liberal and left wing, and the growth of higher education is going to play a bigger factor in elections in the future (see professor Rob Ford’s research report from UK in a Changing Europe), making it harder for Tories in the future to win (especially as they will likely embrace the far right even further in the near future – if that’s still possible, having gone far down that road already).
I do share the alarm and pessimism of the general conversation though!
When one is already through the looking glass, the concept of “the centre” is no more than an illusion through which one has alreay passed!
Cue the hypocrisy inversion of the day. Starmer’s Labour who have pilloried Daine Abbott and suspended her for months are now condemning the Tories for accepting £10 million from someone who has pilloried Daine Abbott! Where is Lewis Carroll when we need him?
Interesting to note the reportage we’re encountering with this Hester story.
The BBC leads with, “According to the Guardian”, Hester made the comments back in 2019. Seems to be strange wording given that the same report immediately notes that Hester admits saying the words but uses the good old, “Those racist and sexist things I said weren’t really racist and sexist, I was just trying to be rude” argument beloved of modern-day Tories.
I realise that acknowledging the source of a report is good journalism, but surely noting that the Guardian revealed this information rather than saying “According to” would be more accurate. If I was going to be cynical (and I am), this wording is seeking to distract from the story to some degree. A lot of right-wing voters wouldn’t believe the sky was blue if they read it in the Guardian so it seems to be a way of casting doubt on what has actually been admitted, let alone consider whether the defence is in any way acceptable!
I wonder which particular journalist/manager made this choice? I can’t think it could be made by sheer ineptitude alone.
I’m certainly not a BBC apologist, but I believe a representative of Hester has stated that his subsequent apologies do not mean he accepts that those comments were uttered. I can understand the BBC’s reticence.
That’s not what the BBC are now saying
This is Britain today.
From today, care workers entering the UK on Health and Care Worker visas can no longer bring dependants.
This is part of our plan to deliver the biggest ever cut in migration.
With a big poster with BANNED written on it.
https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1767128405944791395
UK Home Office = Fascist.
If opposing this gets me locked up, bring it on.
At least when I’m locked up as an extremist I won’t be paying a Tory landlord anymore.
The centre cannot hold if
‘The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.’
I’ll make a plea for anarchy.
It is anything but random disorder.
Anarchy is basically highly devolved democracy with engaged individual decision making at all levels.
It is the self determination of a participatory democracy, which seeks to weld collectivism and individualism. By contrast, almost all dystopias are highly centralised and authoritarian, if not totalitarian, and probably in the service of a tiny elite.
There is a paradox in representative democracy in the inherent laziness and disempowerment in simply signing off one’s personal authority by ticking a box every few years.
Representative democracy then captures collective power and concentrates it in the hands of those least suitable and often least capable of administering it., and often for sectional interests.
Leave it to us, we’ll look after you.. Aye, right.
Which is more democratic.. Finland with 300+ local authorities, or Scotland with 32 ?
Whose citizens are more prosperous, happier and more involved in determining their own futures. ?
Even the centralised and neoliberal EU recognised the principle of decisions being made at the most highly devolved level possible – unfortunately that dire word ‘subsidiarity’ merely box ticked the need for people to have agency and self determination whilst then permitting further centralising power and control by the technocracy.
I once taught at a large secondary school with a ‘democratic head’. (in a red wall seat btw)
Decisions were validated at staff meetings by all staff and everyone had a power of veto.
We once had a vote by the 80 odd staff just on the date of the next meeting held up because one member of staff couldn’t make it. There was no issue, we simply arranged a different date.
No one questioned the right of that teacher to request a different option.. and so consensus was reached. No majoritarian compromise was necessary.
It is no accident that Sen’s definition of poverty is lack of agency – also implicit in Rawls.
Nor is it a surprise that the helplessness of the dispossessed often leads to the ultimately self destructive reaction of them seeking ‘strong leaders’ – the chimera of the benign dictator.
Although “I want my country back” is currently a rallying cry for those willing fascistic control in England, it can also be a genuine cry for self empowerment.. and not necessarily with pitchforks.
One of the reasons for the reaction against “experts” i.e. technical expertise in social media, and more widely, is that inchoate push back against being told what to do, even when genuine technical expertise serves us all.
If you want a job doing well, do it yourself, applies as equally to government as any other skillset, but probably not brain surgery, though trepanning was undertaken by native Americans.
And as the paradox of freedom applies, then the only pragmatic way of organising decision making has to be through consensus – a set of learned skills, but also a way of thinking in problem solving.
A collective institutional framework that is built on empowerment and devolved decision making is essential for the success in the political economy of MMT and sustainable development.
How decisions are made, how processes work, and what are the everyday checks and balances are as crucial as well as how inflation is controlled.
Designing such a highly devolved institutional framework does not rely on some nebulous withering away of the state, it requires a collective discussion on the underlying acceptance of collective societal goals, and how both individual and communal rights, responsibilities and decision making and implementation might take place, in largely urban societies with a macroeconomic structure that facilitates.
Rant over….. thank you for your indulgence.
I hear what you say, but Finland is not anarchist, just better governed.
Duncan MacInnes heralds the spread of higher education as optimistic for the future. As soon as it became evident that graduates tend to be relatively active well-informed democrats so the politicians moved to ensure their dependency on scarce employment:
“English students graduate with the highest debt in the world, yet graduate salaries flatlined as the UK economy weakened through austerity and, subsequently, Brexit.”
and school leavers are channelled into outdated degree provision:
“Moreover, an unintended consequence of the 2012 reforms has been to drive out diversity of provision. Full-time, often residential, three-year undergraduate provision has become yet more deeply established as the norm, driven by a funding regime in which it is difficult for students to borrow for other forms of provision (e.g. part-time).”
The high cost of living policy deters applicants and squeezes study time for those who do enrol:
“For more teaching-intensive universities, student maintenance is the priority. Living costs are putting students off applying and leading increasing numbers to work more hours during term time, to the detriment of their studies.”
However, the author merely argues that we need to adapt to the humiliating of the neoliberal financialised funding model, not that we need to organise to resist and change it.