It is less than a year since I put the following quote from my 2011 book, ‘The Courageous State' on this blog, but having noted this morning the apparent complete inability of our leading politicians to take action to back a ban on arms sales to Israel it seems appropriate to do so again.
Seeking to compare the politicians we had at that time, and still have, with the courageous politicians that I thought and still think that we need, I said:
Cameron and Osborne, with their allies Nick Clegg and Danny Alexander ....have become the apotheosis of something that has been thirty years in the making: they are the personification of what I call the cowardly state. The cowardly state in the UK is the creation of Margaret Thatcher, although its US version is of course the creation of Ronald Reagan. It was these two politicians who swept neoliberalism into the political arena in 1979 and 1980 respectively following the first neoliberal revolution in Chile in 1973 that saw the overthrow of the democratically elected Allende government by General Pinochet. Since then its progress has been continual: now it forms the consensus of thinking across the political divide within the UK, Europe and the US.
The economic crisis we are now facing is the legacy of Thatcher and Reagan because they introduced into government the neoliberal idea that whatever a politician does, however well-intentioned that action might be, they will always make matters worse in the economy. This is because government is never able, according to neoliberal thinking, to outperform the market, which will always, it says, allocate resources better and so increase human well-being more than government can.
That thinking is the reason why we have ended up with cowardly government. That is why in August 2011, when we had riots on streets of London we also had Conservative politicians on holiday, reluctant to return because they were quite sure that nothing they could do and no action they could take would make any difference to the outcome of the situation. What began as an economic idea has now swept across government as a whole: we have got a class of politicians who think that the only useful function for the power that they hold is to dismantle the state they have been elected to govern while transferring as many of its functions as possible to unelected businesses that have bankrolled their path to power.
Using this logic, we now have politicians who cannot decide an obviously ethical and legally required action for four reasons.
Firstly, they are fearful that they might upset those in the arms market.
Secondly, they live in fear of Israel and are quite unable to form any coherent view about what to do about it, so obsessed with tropes are they.
Thirdly, they hide behind excuses and legal opinions rather than make up their own minds.
Fourth, they do not want to act because that might indicate that the state does have the power to intervene to do something appropriate, and that goes against everything that they believe in.
What a sorry state we are in.
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:
Given that Israel has succeeded in radicalising an entire generation of Palestinians, I might suggest that calling for a ceasefire, even if its a bit late now, is as much in the best interests of Israel as the Palestinians
This is about the deaths of aid workers this week. British based arms makers didn’t cause that, but you want them to be punished. We want or should want Israel to be able to defend itself against an enemy that thinks it has no right to exist. If there are perfect weapons systems and no targeting mistakes that would be awesome
They were targeted depsite having notfied their intentions and being in an area declared free of Hamas.
I am sorry – but that meanms those who targeted them cannot be trusted with weapons.
And this is not about Israel per se – it is about the current government of Israel. Please do not be anti-Semitic in your commentary here.
“We want or should want Israel to be able to defend itself against an enemy that thinks it has no right to exist.”
Not at the cost of destroying civilians who the Israeli government thinks have no right to exist.
The notion of “perfect weapons systems and no targeting mistakes ” belies the question of what national defence ought to be about ?
Israel, following their US masters, have used what is euphemistically described as “extra judicial killing” as a tactic for decades..
Basically it is state approved assassination, and a form of terrorism that uses ‘perfect weapons’ in this way is a war crime.
Had Syria or Lebanon the means or effective retaliation there is no way that the Israeli war machine would have attempted to strike at individuals they have decided are their enemies in the last few weeks in these two countries, using the “I don’t like you” criterion as justification, with the civilian murders that are associated with this kind of targeting ignored.
There is no such thing as a perfect weapons system, and it is a concept in justifying military intervention that needs to be resisted.
If there is an international rule of law, then it applies to everyone.
We have rightly condemned Russian assassinations abroad and the Israeli version of Novichok diplomacy is equally appalling.
I believe that both UK and the USA should cease all arms shipments to Israel, and should tell the Netanyahu government that the recommencement of any future arms sales will be contingent on Israel obeying international law – which they do not, and are, in my view, unlikely to do in the foreseeable future. nd
Don’t call me anti-semitic – the Palestinians are semites too!
If I drove my car at speed into a child, I would rightly be banned from driving and have my vehicles confiscated. Is that unfair to the oil companies and the car manufacturers? Should I be allowed to continue driving to protect their profits?
What a ridiculous argument.
“Doublethink is a process of indoctrination in which subjects are expected to simultaneously accept two conflicting beliefs as truth, often at odds with their own memory or sense of reality” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
“Fourth, they do not want to act because that might indicate that the state does have the power to intervene to do something appropriate, and that goes against everything that they believe in.”
The exact opposite of this was of course Maoism which believed “private sector marketism,” if you can coin such a term, was the spawn of the devil and all this despite millions dying of starvation in Mao’s enforced collectivisation of agriculture (a man made famine). Mao of course whipped up a witch hunt against those who criticised his economic policies with his so called Cultural Revolution where large numbers were again forced to die!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/03/netflix-3-body-problem-trauma-china-liu-cixin-tv-cultural-revolution
So now in the West we have Monetary Maoism with virtually all political parties taken over by Monetary Maoists, a cult if ever there was one and derived as you say Richard from Libertarian politicians like Margaret Thatcher who had this to say in a 1983 speech:-
“One of the great debates of our time is about how much of your money should be spent by the State and how much you should keep to spend on your family. Let us never forget this fundamental truth: the State has no source of money other than money which people earn themselves. If the State wishes to spend more it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more. It is no good thinking that someone else will pay—that “someone else” is you. There is no such thing as public money; there is only taxpayers’ money.”
https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/105454
Libertarianism refuses to die in the UK despite its horrendous effects in the UK. It’s been reincarnated in the form of the Starmer Party as its first version the Conservative Party rightly faces electoral destruction!
Yes, Schofield, I’ve read that quote and other similars several times. It has to be one of, and certainly as regards money, the most pernicious lie(s) in UK politics. It has done immeasurable harm wherever you look. Obviously in political thought, if there is any anymore, where virtually every politician regards it as an unassailable axiom, in journalism where journalists seemingly afraid to upset their billionaire offshore bosses refuse to educate themselves and call out this lie and accept that “there is no money” and that the government can only borrow or tax, the BBC where political and economic editors are more concerned with getting close to power and fed scoops than doing proper holding to account and questioning their platitudes and of course in the voting public whose ignorance you regularly highlight.
We need better politicians and better journalism to educate the public.
In some sense, Thatcher was on to something…. but drew the wrong conclusions.
Her “there is no such thing as society” soundbite is often taken out of context and her point (partly) was that “society” is made up of individuals; without individual action nothing happens. This is self-evidently true but individuals need to be motivated and organised. Her solution was “the market” and the 40 year experiment conducted since 1980 has bought us to here. It has had some successes but failed on the most important issues.
So, the question remains the same one that Thatcher tried to address – how do we motivate and organise individuals to deliver things we want?
Now, the State’s track record of delivery is mixed (not uniformly bad as some neoliberals would have) but where “the market” has manifestly failed (eg. Water) it can surely do better; where it has succeeded (would the innovation in Telecoms happened under a State monopoly?) then let it continue.
However, it still comes back to individuals deciding to mandate the State to do things. To do that they need to know what is possible… and the range of possibilities open to us is being restricted by vested interests – TINA needs to be challenged at every turn.
Agreed
The mixed economy is what we do and will live in
Frank and honest recognition of that is what is required
One of the curious things about the quotation from Margaret Thatcher is that it gives no account of the origin of the money she is talking about. It is almost as if it magically appears by being earned.
Thanks Mr Schofield, I’m on the lookout for phrases that will resonate with the electorate – this is definitely one of them:
“do you remember how MaoTseTung killed all those people through starvation in the 1950s and 60s because of collectivisation of farming – a truly stupid idea”
voter: “yessss”…..
“well Camoron’s and Osborne’s austerity after 2010 was a form of maoism – they claimed the state had no money – if you like monetary maoism – & that killed lots of people as well & that’s why you can’t get a doctors appointment or a dentists or why you might have to sit on a hospital trolley for 5 hours before being seen”
voter “oohhh”
“and Labour are offering the same as the Tories – no additional doctors, no additioanl dentists but they have said there would be some cushions on the hospital trolleys”
Something on those lines.
Of course Mrs Innes goes into more detail.
Mike, I like the idea, but I think Mao as an example will fail. The answer to the first question, of a huge number of people, will be euther No or Who?
What has Neoliberalism delivered in Britain, I’ll just take one characteristic – STRESS, MORE STRESS and I’ll leave you to fill in the adjectives.
One personal example – trains. Two family members just travelled around Europe by train for a few weeks using a Euro traveller month ticket, to eventually visit family in southern Italy. Despite language difficulties it was largely plain sailing with transport and even very comfortable with clean and fast travel most of the time. [There were even train strikes encountered whilst travelling in the EU].
On return to London I booked, using my phone, a single from London to our home – for one. Immediately stress came about because the train booked (and others visible) was the only one allowable to travel on, not clearly visible on the phone app. I could not find where to book a cheap open single in the online info maze; the app led me to the basket. This is deliberate policy/psychology from the railways, and copied extensively in other business. Neoliberalism = an atomised railway system with some grifter characteristics.
We, the public, now own/shoulder the responsibly of not being able to interpret website ‘Terms and conditions’ = Stress, especially if you’re old and/or infirm and/or poor.
I often hear, as a response “You should have …..!”. This resounds in my memory as my old mum was told this when she was 92, travelling to my sister’s some years ago.
I hate single train related tickets
As you say – they deliver massive stress and trying to find the open ticket is a nightmare – except at the ticket offices I like to use
But.. But… The train companies, in their infinite generosity, offer a special discount of up to 50% to disabled people who travel round trip in their wheelchair… or not! Of course once they get rid of all the ticket offices it will no longer be available as you cannot book it online. You also have to hope that someone will be there to let you off the train, which is not guaranteed! I rarely take trains due to this uncertainty. But it’s cheaper right? Wrong… the conditions for benefiting for this fake discount are deviously calculated to actually cost more than if you paid for the cheapest available option and didn’t spend the entire journey trapped in your wheelchair.
I discovered I could only get that 50% discount on the expensive ‘anytime’ ticket, 50% on a day return from London to Edenbridge, where my mother is buried, will cost £15.70; but, an ‘Off peak’ day return is only £15.10. Discount on an ‘Anytime’ single is 34%. This is just an example of the callous disregard for the public that permeates all major businesses and services in this country. Despite us paying the highest train fares in Europe, the chronic lack of infrastructure investment in UK rail, is yet another disgraceful example of national failure. This really sinks in when you try to plan a journey over on the continent: Paris to the Spanish border in one of their fast trains, roughly 4 and a half hours. Another world is possible.
Ronald Reagan said, ‘The nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” ‘
Let the sheer horror of that sink in.
Today’s supreme thoughtcrime is to think that ‘there is money’ to fix NHS etc. Starmer and Reeves are the leaders of Labour’s thought police, rooting out from the Party anyone who might harbour such a thought
Three former Supreme Court Judges and 600 ‘legal experts’ call for an end to arms sales to Israel.
That must be unprecedented.
Two months ago we read 800 officials in the US, EU and UK signed a letter saying, among other things, we were in danger of complicity in war crimes. That WAS unprecedented.
It begs the question why are they being ignored? And who has enough influence to persuade a government to ignore is professional advice? I don’t think it is just about a shared opinion. Obviously the American influence is such that the British govt. does not want to differ too much. But I would speculate we have to look at party donors and those wielding financial power. This could, I concede, easily slip into traditional anti-Jewish tropes about money and bankers.
I would think it goes beyond any ethnic group, and we have seen how the leaders of the Reform and Liberal Jewish communities have also called for ceasefires.
To me it indicates powerful interests which try to direct our politics without being visible to scrutiny and challenge. They need to be exposed and changes made if we are to have a proper democracy. It must be possible.
A geopolitical post – may I? I’ll try to keep it short.
If it is not obvious to all that the only time an issue becomes noticed by the ‘masses’ it is because the mass media news broadcasters looking the viewers in the eye, emote it straight into a button push , knee jerk , emotional response.
It is what the Barbies and Ken’s of the media are chosen and trained to do. The masses then collectively echo the opinion regardless of whatever the ‘truth’ maybe.
That is what was unleashed and perfected since the 80’s and the takeover of the airwaves and print media by a very few controlling interests. The Allende coup is the original NineEleven unleashed by our establishment, that in fact indicts our governments of the 70’s too.
Murdochs arrival and monopolisation of our media was not an entrepreneurial happenstance – nor was his support of Thatcherism and reactionary populism in the Western media since that ‘he’ extended in much western media. Lol, even called it ‘News International’.
The plethora of satellite and cable channels were not a liberation but a massive number of new fence posts to put the controlling news and ‘entertainment’ barb(ie)wires around our reactions to actual events and actions against the majority of humanity, by the very few – that includes most of us and what happens on our doorsteps and homes too. What our spouses and children think, what our friends and neighbours and associates believe. It is what our recent history over the last 20 years has all been about and led up to. We have been Pavlovianly (ahem) conditioned…
That crushed bodies and shot innocents, bombed and burnt children, many orphaned that a whole new acronym has been created for them – by the tens of thousands and totally destroyed amenities and infrastructure – hasn’t incited the human emotional reaction that this murder of a few westerners by the mass media is frankly incongruous. Nauseating even. As is the total ignorance of the mass starvation that is now underway there.
It is not just weapons supply that should be stopped. Sanctions ought to have been deployed weeks ago as the hospitals and camps were bombed – doctors and nurses executed in cold blood as were unarmed civilians. It is all on the internet in tens of thousands of uncensored videos captured by the suffering dying masses. If you don’t believe me just go find it. I personally don’t.
Yet if anyone even deviates from the daily message we are expected to swallow – the sheepdogs instantly bark and growl us into our lanes.
Thank goodness there are still Internet presences which can still acknowledge the unfiltered truth – but the barbed wire is daily closing in on the freedom of thought and expression here too.
The Guardian has at last picked up on how the Israelis have been using AI in ‘selecting’ targets which in practice has meant an utter disregard for civilian casualties.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/03/israel-gaza-ai-database-hamas-airstrikes?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
The Israeli NGO +972 reported this back in November when it became obvious that the level of civilian casualties was far beyond any such conflict.
Deliberate decisions were made that it was acceptable to kill large number of civilians and this was built into the AI algorithm. The data it uses is also highly questionable. Accountability for those decisions goes to the top of the Israeli military. The killings are not accidents- they are entirely deliberate, as the head of World Kitchens has said about the aid workers. The Israeli military have unequivocally broken humanitarian law and are guilty of war crimes on a large scale. Egged on by the dehumanisation of Palestinians that is now all too common in Israeli politics, military and society.
Their defence is further weakened by Israeli soldiers confirming that they pretty much have carte Blanche to shoot whoever they want. And others gloating on social media (see +972 again) about what they are up to. The endless lying of Israeli spokesman is increasingly being called out. Especial credit to Channel 4 and Krishnan Guru-Murthy. The idea that their investigations will be either transparent or independent is utterly laughable as history shows.
As far Israel’s enemies wanting to eliminate Israel, that is precisely what Israeli ministers and others say they want to do to the Palestinians. And have been busy doing for the last 75 years. Alienating many of those who would historically supported them.
Israel has become a rogue state and needs to be treated as such unto it changes. That starts as a minimum with banning any weapons other than those that are purely defensive. At the same time, every effort needs to be made to tackle genuine anti-semitism. Jewish groups and leaders who unquestioningly support Israel’s brutality in the name of ‘defence’ are not helping that cause.
The IDF has now explained how they came to murder aid workers this week. Whether one believes their explanation or not there is one thing that is crysytal clear from their report:
The IDF and, presumably, the Israeli government, sees killing a potential Hamas fighter as more important than safeguarding the lives of innocent bystanders, in complete opposition to the normal attitude of a civilised country – that it is better that 100 guilty men are found innocent than that 1 innocent man is found guilty.
Should we, as a country, support a country that takes this barbaric attitude?
I am sick of hearing that Israel has the right to defend itself. They are the occupiers!. Any person born in an occupied land has the right, even the duty to defend itself from their barbaric occupiers. Children who experience every day the horrors visited on them ; murder, torture, treated like animals. No rights. Semi starvation. I could go on. After a life of misery they will become radicalised. It doesn’t matter where in the world this callousness takes place. Resistance will grow. Hamas is NOT a terrorist organisation. It is no different from resistance movements in history. What is the difference between Hamas and the Jewish groups who fought the British mandate in Palestine when I was a child. Irgun, the Stern Gang, Lahti. They assassinated British high officials. Blew up the King David Hotel. Executed British squadies by hanging them on piano wire. A particularly sadistic way of killing . Learned from the Nazis who used the method on those who took part in the July Plot to kill Hitler. During British colonial rule dozens of occupied people rose up and violently attempted to free themselves. Those groups were repressed in savage ways. The atrocities committed by British colonials are now well known.