There have been a number of comments here of late asking what people can do to promote the issues of concern discussed on this blog.
I am reluctant to take on yet more piles of work right now because the next few months already look to be enormously busy for me, but I also want to find new ways to interact and respond.
Two ideas have come up. One is to have web streaming and Q&A sessions, maybe on a theme. These would have to be in the evening for most people to be able to attend. They might also need to be heavily controlled to prevent serious trolling, which would otherwise render them utterly useless. That would involve some serious work by someone other than me, because you cannot both present and run the software to manage such issues at the same time. Questions might, then, have to be submitted in writing during the session rather than live to camera - but many people might prefer that anyway, and it could improve access to those who really do not or cannot be on screen.
The other option I have thought of is to draft letters capable of being sent to MPs, newspapers and others to share on here. In general, these are always best if they are tailored slightly by the person sending them, but they do have a campaigning role.
So, some questions:
Would live Q&A sessions be of use?
- I don't know: try it (44%, 131 Votes)
- Yes, whatever the format and even if questions could only be asked online (17%, 52 Votes)
- No (16%, 47 Votes)
- Only if they addressed pre-agreed themes (13%, 39 Votes)
- Yes (10%, 29 Votes)
- Only if live interaction was permitted (1%, 3 Votes)
Total Voters: 301
Loading ...And:
Would model texts for letters for MPs and local media be useful if published here?
- Yes (56%, 175 Votes)
- Try it, and let's see (26%, 81 Votes)
- Only if very specific points are made (10%, 31 Votes)
- No (5%, 15 Votes)
- Only if on decidedly topical issues (4%, 11 Votes)
Total Voters: 313
Loading ...Only one vote is allowed in each poll: you have to pick the best answer. If you don't like them, just make a comment instead.
And I am promising nothing: all I am saying is I am exploring ideas right now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!
Feargal Sharkey I hear is organising a march to London over the water scandal in October I think.
My intention is to be on that if it happens.
This blog will be major source of new ideas to share if it happens.
I immediately thought of strength coach Dan John who does a question and answer format on his podcasts – it works very well. It gives him room to showcase his extensive knowledge and avoids any potential problems which might arise due to him having to speak directly with anyone. This is a format which could work for you, I imagine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oba8hzd6cg4 I love that opening sequence too 🙂
Not a theme I like, but the format is interesting…
MPs receiving lots of near-identical letters are likely to ignore them. I have written a forceful letter to my LibDem MP & included link to your blog in case he’s not already following you.
I have no interest in live Q&A. How is it live if Q’s all written (as I imagine they’d have to be)? (And evenings no good for me.) Your blog & videos are so clear anyway.
Thanks
I being underwhelmed by the reaction so far
But that is what I needed to know
I’m always being asked by greenpeace, friends of the earth, shelter etc to write to my MP about one of their current campaign issues. The point here is they are organising a campaign where constituents letters are part of a multi channel lobbying strategy, and they have organised their resources so as to be able to conduct these campaigns. I like the idea of writing to my MP about the issues raised in your blog, but as others have noted it may be ignored and their attention drawn to other campaigns with more media exposure.
Noted
I’ve been writing to my local MP for many years now and more often than not I’ve received an email back just towing the party line. However, on certain issues where public anger/dismay has built up I’ve received a personalized response where he actually engaged with my concerns. On a few occasions he actually voted against the government to show constituents he was listening to them. This was a run of the mill back bencher who was intellectually lazy on most issues.
Just a couple of observations about drafting letters/emails to MPs, what I think we are up against and the obstacles that need to be overcome.
In response from various campaign groups, I have over the last couple of years sent several emails to my Labour MP. Mostly I don’t tailor them any more, because it’s easier not to and because I don’t know how seriously he takes them, if he even sees them. I suspect he doesn’t. He’s an average backbench career politician who will not rock the boat, deferring to the party to do his thinking. Even as an active CLP executive member (but not on the right side), our views were dismissed. With few exceptions it’s party first, a product of the whip system, which paralyses MPs who don’t want to lose their ticket for the gravy train.
When he responds to my emails, his position never shifts from the party line. Always a standard response, written by a party apparatchik based on the message from the central party. What I’m saying is they are not a personal view. In fact, I’ve seen the same response to an issue from several MPs across different constituencies. They are always unsatisfactory, usually miss the point, and simply reiterate why the government are right (and by implication we are wrong and should suck it up). I think that unless it’s a huge issue that would generate a lot of responses in each constituency, we are too thinly spread to make any real impact. Some MPs don’t even bother to respond to mass emails, so in some respects I am lucky to get the occasional reply. So, it could be a lot of work for little impact. A combination of emailing MPs, backed up with emails to the local press could be more effective, but that puts us at the mercy of the editors. Can you get around this? I don’t know, maybe some brainstorming could come up with an answer.
Sorry to sound so negative, but I just wanted to make you aware that in my experience, most MPs disregard their constituents. It could be with your growing profile and with others also pushing the same narrative for economic change, you could make a difference. You can but try and FWIW, I would like to be part of any campaigns you lead.
I am familiar with this, and maybe others are too as there seems to be little enthusiasm here
I wouldn’t expect anything but Party boilerplate in response, but it’s still worth letting MPs (or their offices) know that there is concerted, coherent dissent from would-be supporters.
That has been my experience too. No reply unless topic in the news, and reply clearly written by party central.
Yes, replies will consistently be repetition of the party line, so using the same repetition technique to get short sharp persuasive concepts into the briefing summaries of the office staff will produce change. Marketing a concept is repetition of an idea. If it’s a sensible useable advantageous concept that could be used and repeated often enough by as many individuals as possible it will eventually be taken on.
Repetition is the weapon used by the likes of farage, Johnson and trump to get antisocial change. We should be using the same weapon to get better equitable outcomes.
Being a bit of a stick-in-the-mud, I like to get familiar with things and then keep them as a constant. The current format works for me, as it gives me time to think. (age induced brain cell slowing!).
So I have voted no to both. However, I do recognise that everyone is different and some will undoubtedly prefer different formats and to try something different. The topics chosen largely come from what is happening in the world. this is part of the attraction. The different formats would have to be planned for, and that would remove some of the feeling of things being topical.
Now going out and this will give time for more thought…. [perhaps of doubtful value!!]
I once helped run a campaign for a Labour general election campaign. Pre-Starmer.
An MP who kept their true leanings to themself.
I setup a campaigning website, and with that managed the email inbox.
Hundreds of emails were received, most of the copy-pasta variety. Few were read. Almost non received a response and were acted upon.
The copy-pasta ones were all ignored.
Despite that, I have written to my new Labour MP twice so far. Once expressing views on active travel. Once expressing views based very much on this blog (and on other sources).
No reply to the first. The second I wouldnt expect a reply to, but I’ve not allowed sufficient time as yet.
On one hand, I think writing to MPs now is pointless. On the other, in a representative democracy, other than sign petitions, protest and support campaigns in other largely ignored ways, what are we meant to do?
I am not sure what value web streaming/Q-A sessions would add. I think people who are comitted enough to make time to attend them are already committed enough to take the time themselves to try and hold our politicians to account.
I don’t think those who are inactive, who are the people who perhaps need inspiring, are likely to take part?
That said, maybe it is still worth a shot. You have a community following. Perhaps you could entrust some members of this community to produce template letters and/or help organise the streaming/Q&A sessions?
To be hinest, the interest being shown is too small to justify the effort, I think
First part of that comment should have been:
“I once helped run a campaign for a Labour general election candidate. Pre-Starmer.
A candidate who kept their true leanings to themself.”
Apologies.
With the Blog, Social Media, Youtube you have to be one of the hardest working content creators.
I am a speed reader and find a spoken message takes too muck time.
I’m definitely a “let’s try it and see”.
I seem to read the suggestion of writing to one’s MP fairly often. Although I’d have to add to question 2 – please delete if inappropriate. It’s simply that in my own personal case, I know before putting a finger on my keyboard that it would be a complete waste of time.
Not for the usual reasons but because my MP is Stephen Flynn. Yes, he whose ceasefire motion was knobbled by a certain (now) PM and Mr Speaker. So I doubt there’s much he isn’t already aware of and obviously has the proverbial snowball’s of being listened to. Despite how closely ‘they’ work with the Scottish Government”…
Do MPs read their mail? I doubt it. They have people to do that for them and a Party to provide the replies.
Format letters? Not worth your time, I suggest.
You talked to Compass in the past. They (i.e. local groups) were very active at election time and will now be seeking progressive campaigning issues post-election. You could give another talk aimed at raising issues and producing/presenting materials that could be used by groups at local events.
Perhaps something similar for the Equality Trust?
They can ask…
I’d say yes
Look – we all know how ‘it’ – politics – works now.
We are disregarded – almost wholesale – and fed crap instead like we have seen elsewhere on this blog – the glass ceiling in this society between us and the Establishment – that is what we are rubbing up against now. And it is a very thick piece of glass.
So, we are in for a very long period of mutual contempt between the ruled and the rulers and I have no idea how this will play out.
Some get carried away – I am sick of hearing MPs bleating about how they are treated online – my view is that all though I would not address an MP in that way, I cannot help but think that they bring it on themselves.
Some MPs know what they are up to; some simply have not got a clue. And I bet others are actually not bad MPs – we wrote to the (now-ex) Tory MP in our constituency who did answer our letters to be honest. Well – it looked like she did. We’ve yet to see what the new one is like with their wafer thin majority.
But what use is your MP when you have cabinet government or sofa government? When you have ‘political advisors’ (hang on – don’t politicians advise themselves anymore?) When you have donors? The MPs are just an outer layer – a veneer.
Come on now – does Westminster think we are that stupid?
I think this mutual contempt will grow in the coming years and our only hope is that something might spring out of that because as we know, the current ‘there are no new ideas’ culture is sowing the seeds of its own destruction everyday.
Richard, you already produce articles which are prompted by comments on this blog. Rather than a live Q&A would it be worth ( time permitting!) doing follow-up youtube videos expanding or further explaining points based on feedback from your constructive youtube commentors?
There seems to be a real appetite for what you’re doing, and I suspect many lay people, like me, are playing catch-up in the subject areas you cover.
I think that a better idea
Q and A. Spreading yourself to thin with the time, effort and agro demands in it could easily take you away from other balancing aspects of your life leading to burn out defeating your impetus in what you do for decency and equity.
Your burn out would be the desired end result of the types who create this mess for their own craven need for control and/or whatever other hit they get.
Drafts of email letters, being used in concerted campaigns repetitiously by a wide variety of people could start to bite into the group think of those inhabiting other media, and the offices and filters of those in positions of power.
Best of all, It’s your concepts, the words, compelling sensibility phraseology that is hit home. Encouraging more to use them in their day to day interactions with others and creating a word of mouth dialogue.
Your work has been making a difference, more of the concepts you espouse are making their way into the broader ether of public awareness.
Don’t spread yourself to thin, that’s important.
Noted
Thanks
Having just done a broadcast when I said I was taking the day off, I know the risk
As an avid letter writer I think that the draft letter format is an excellent idea. People will post links to the draft on social media. Others who agree with the view but aren’t letter writers themselves will forward it on. While the recipients themselves won’t read all the letters. A staff member will have to check every one and record the numbers and sources, ie constituents/employees/party members/etc. that can be a very important pressure point for the recipient.
Richard,
Just as context, I met Warren, Bill, Stephanie etc at Leeds and Neil et al at the London GIMMS conference last year. I am sorry that I haven’t met you. MMTers are an ‘interesting’ bunch of people. Strikes me that most MMTers could make an fall-out argument out of a plastic bag 🙂
Your question though about ‘what do I do?’ has been taxing me for a few months.
My opinion – you experts have a habit of making things too detailed and too complex. And if it isn’t simple you just loose people and they turn off. I got into MMT from some simple truths that indeed you explain well in your videos. So it was you that got me thinking.
I think we need a few very simple, factual, obviously correct, arguments about why common expressions used in the media are totally wrong. One for each expression. Easy for us all to copy, paste and send out whenever we hear or read someone using one of those expressions.
Taxpayers’ money
The government might go bust
The markets won’t lend to us
Government spending is like a household
There is no money left
There will be others that drive us both up the wall I’m sure
Let’s create a short simple text explain that these statements are false that we can all use if and when we need it.
Happy to help with drafting / editing if you need it.
I started this week by sending this to someone:
“You’ll recognise that feeling when you know something and other people keep wilfully getting it completely wrong? I tell you this because you’ve been using a couple of expressions that are clearly incorrect.
You’ll have friends who work in the Treasury. Check this with them – and if it substantively wrong, then let me know.
In the UK, once Parliament has approved any government spending (there are various ways it does that) the BoE legally must create that money into the economy (effectively by increasing the governments line of credit ‘to be paid back from future tax revenues’ and crediting the bank accounts of the spending’s recipients) when instructed to by the Treasury. They always do this by creating new money. On any day, tax revenues that come into the Treasury effectively reduce the balance of that line of credit. It’s potentially a bit of a philosophical point but the government spending always had to have come before the payment of tax – otherwise there would be no ‘money’ to pay your tax with. Again a bit of a philosophical point when our bank balances are 1s and 0s in a computer but historically physical money used to pay tax has generally been destroyed once received, and definitely wasn’t used to created some pot for spending. Since the BoE was created, the government has always had to have a debt (overdraft / line of credit) – that government debt being the sum of all GBP currently in existence ie our ‘private’ wealth.
There are at least two obvious sequiturs from these UK monetary operations.
1) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TAXPAYERS’ MONEY. All government spending is ‘new government money’. There is no pot of received tax payments that the government looks at to see if it can afford to spend. The government can spend whatever Parliament has approved. And Government spending always comes first, before tax receipts. Tax receipts money can be regarded effectively destroyed when paid.
In talking about government spending, ’Taxpayers money’ is a completely meaningless term, and if used is at best disingenuous and very misleading.
2) IT IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT TO EVER SUGGEST ’THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT’
Legally, if Parliament approves government spending, it is ILLEGAL for the BoE not to create that (new) money when instructed to. It is impossible for there ever to be ’no money left’ unless Parliament decides that there isn’t (by refusing government requests for spending which in our system would cause the government to fall) or by undoing three hundred years of UK monetary regulation.
There’s ’no money left’ will always be factually incorrect in our monetary system.
PLEASE, PLEASE. Never use these terms again. And once you’ve checked this stuff out, you’ll perhaps start to listen to some ‘informed commentators’ in a very different way!
I find it quite weird to be lectured about things I don’t do
You seem to be new here. Have you read anything I have written?
Hi Richard,
Lectured? Surely not. My post was very deliberately worded to share a personal observation and a personal opinion.
And yes, I’ve read quite a bit of what you’ve written. Some of it is quite good 🙂
Instead of a template for people to use how about a short succinct briefing on key issues which in bullet points highlights key data/statistics/issues? People can use this anyway they like: to help them write to MPs, write a letter to their local paper etc. It overcomes the tendency of people to merely copy and paste and send it off which some MPs/media can find off putting.
Do these go in the glossary?
Letters would need to make a super simple point without getting into the complexities or paradigm shifts.
For Example, a letter could focus on what worked in the past so well. During WW2 Canada and America GDP doubled in six years, doing much of what this blog advocates – The wartime economy invested more in productive capacity, and less in consumption.
The finance pattern was similar to Covid funding but without interest on reserves.
Inflation was held down with controls and rationing. And post war debt was reduced by constraining interest rates. I think there were effective taxes too – like excess profit taxes.
This time such policies would be about reducing inequality and poverty, improving infrastructure and production and good paying jobs, improving health and education, and helping to keep the planet sustainable.
The best letters are short
Is there any mileage in *not* lecturing the journalists/ MPs?
Carefully-crafted FoI requests to the right organisation – establishing the powers of government and the BoE etc that can be distributed to our nongovernmental MP’s and journalists?
Asking for explanations of / citations for the statements made by the politicians of our MP’s party, making them provide the justification and establishing a dialogue?
How can we encapsulate the tenets of MMT in under 200 words (300-word limit on letters to newspapers with 100 words of intro)?
By the way, I think JMWW wasn’t lecturing you in the last half of their reply. I think it was (all of that part) the text of a reply he made to someone else.
Ok
Maybe I misread it
It felt like a misreading to me – and I have to read a great many commends here, sometimes quite quickly. If I sometimes make a mistake, I apologise
Anne Cruise – smart ideas!
And you are right – it was indeed the text of a reply to someone else. And Richard, no problem. I did look to see if I could ident that bit, but couldn’t see how to. It’s not obvious without that.