I was asked this question on the blog this morning:
I agree that the power here lies with Europe to formulate a coordinated, strong response. But my question for you and other readers is: what is the most effective, tangible first step for ordinary citizens in the UK and across Europe to pressure our own governments to adopt this kind of “politics of care” strategy and stand up to these threats, rather than offering the weak platitudes we've seen so far? Where does the public pressure need to be focused?
This was my response (lightly re-edited for use here):
The first step is to stop treating this as theatre and start treating it as a contest over political and geographic power and resources. Current neoliberal platitudes flourish precisely because they cost nothing. A politics of care only emerges when elected politicians believe their survival depends upon it.
So public pressure has to be aimed where it bites on consent, money, and legitimacy. In practical terms, that means three early priorities.
First, force political clarity. Citizens should demand that their MPs and MEPs (where relevant) state, explicitly, whether they support practical European defensive independence, including coordinated procurement, energy security, digital resilience, and the fiscal capacity to fund it, and not just by standing with allies, but through concrete commitments. The point is to remove the option of hiding behind slogans.
Second, a focus on financial leverage is needed. Most European governments are still mentally captured by bond-market mythology. So the pressure point is the insistence that defence and resilience must not come at the cost of care, and that Europe should be willing to use the tools available, which are coordinated central bank action, public banking, capital controls if required, and the taxation of surplus wealth. In other words, there can be no resort to austerity.
Third, organise locally but target nationally. The effective pressure does not come from online rage. It comes from coordinated constituent action, including letters, surgeries, party motions, union engagement, local press comment and letters, and relentless repetition of the same demand that security includes care. If enough marginal-seat MPs hear that their voters will not trade hospitals for missiles, the political calculus changes.
The public pressure needs to be focused on one message, which is that Europe must become power-ready without becoming cruel. That is the dividing line, I think we need to emphasise.
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!
this poem keeps coming back to me. The Dane-geld ( money paid to the Danes during the 10th and 11th centuries, not to invade us
Not a reference to modern Denmark but the principle.
It ends
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
5
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:–
6
“We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!”
Agreed
Simply said – If we don’t stand up to bullying and blackmail, we will be destroyed.
If everyone in the UK sent a present with a value >$100 to a US individual, then thanks to the tariffs, that person would face a hefty tax bill, something of the order of one to three billion dollars.
Wotsit face has a big birthday in June!
In all seriousness, I am writing to MP and MSPs, about solidarity with Europe and choosing the politics of care at this opportune moment.
Thank you, Richard.
There’s a US machine ready to be mobilised to oppose any loosening of the Atlantic alliance. Most European politicians are Atlanticist. In the UK, once Heseltine resigned over Westland, the Atlanticists were in the ascendancy. It was the same at the Foreign Office. The Arabists were driven out by zionists. That same machine got France’s industry minister Arnaud Montebourg fired for resisting the sale of Alsthom to General Electric and the prosecution of some of Alsthom’s executives.
A clear out of the US machine is needed. That must be a public campaign.
Europe will also have to overcome its distaste and start treating the BRICS, Mercosur, African Union, ASEAN etc. as equals and pay more than lip service to multipolarity, including reform of the UN.
Part 2
What Colonel Smithers said
Thank you, Marc.
I had a longer comment that had to be split. I don’t know what happened to part 1.
I don’t have it!
Well said.
There is another problem. The US military is already reacting.
https://united24media.com/latest-news/us-fast-tracks-new-tank-killer-weapon-to-europe-to-counter-russian-armor-15136
This is not, as the article claims to “counter russian armour” (begging the question “what russian armour”). Furthermore, drones are quite capable of handling Russian armour (with they advantage of the operators being mobile.
But
The USA has very very little drone tech and even fewer people that can use it. This deployment is against European armour.
NB 1. The deployment of the mine is exclusively to US forces in Europe.
NB 2. The Poles & Baltics have well developed mines etc plus they benefit from Ukranian drone experience.
NB 3: The US military has shown that it will follow whatever the Commander-in-Chief (=Mango Mussolini) says.
It is reported in the Guardian that Putin has been invited to sit on the Board of Peace which will rule Gaza. Also the leaders of Argentina and Paraguay , the only two South American states to vote with the US against Palestinian statehood.
I can only suppose Trump thinks Putin may respond with ‘a deal’ and strengthen his claim for the Nobel Prize.
We are watching a farce.
Sorry Richard Me again
CNN reports LUKASHENKO has been invited. The last old fashioned Dictator in Europe.
And ORBAN who runs him close.
The farce deepens.
Even after the PM’s news conference today, one is left feeling totally deflated. It seems to me that no matter what the issue before him, he lacks a coherent view and the first words he utters are weak, limp and defensive. He does not see the danger staring him in the face. He could not lead a dog! He is absolutely lost – he is a sham of a man. It annoys me that he is drawing a salary. It takes a person of intellect, compassion, faith, understanding and courage to lead. I am afraid he fails pathetically on all counts and consequently is “not fit for purpose”. Of course I am lobbying MP’s to strongly and actively back the democracy of an independent Greenland/Denmark against a fascist attack from Trump. I will try not to purchase US goods too. Trump has to be stopped it can be done, look at the decisive leadership shown by Canada and its PM! This is a fundamental matter, its about Freedom – another reason Starmer wont be found anywhere near the front.
It’s hard to know if we are watching farce, comedy or tragedy. There are elements of all three.
I doubt if anyone can influence Trump himself. It’s up to the US political and judicial systems to moderate or stop the actions of a man who obviously has psychological problems. In short, he is mad. That leaves UK politicians as spectators with no influence on these events. UK citizens might try to influence our politicians, but to what avail?
Events are moving rapidly, so Richard’s sound advice might come into play at any time. I hope somebody manages to put Trump back in his box very soon, preferably his own people. Will the world ever be the same again, I wonder?
“Mad” is too kind and simplistic a designation.
He’s been a pathological liar and sociopath for most of his life. Now he’s also senile.
It is crucial to remember that he’s surrounded by sociopaths and psychopaths who are rushing to enact their policy agendas before he is unable to function in office. He agrees with their agenda, but many in the US suspect he is little more than a figurehead at this point.
His pronouncements and actions are being guided more by his inner circle than by him. That doesn’t lessen the danger of the moment.
We are living in the theatre of the absurd….that’s it……
Don’t expect it to make sense
Richard’s argument cuts through the fog: Europe is facing a power confrontation, not a diplomatic misunderstanding, and the only antidote to US coercion is political clarity anchored in a politics of care. The real danger isn’t just the aggression coming from Washington — it’s the reflexive weakness of European governments still trapped in neoliberal thinking, still terrified of bond markets, still clinging to Atlanticist habits that no longer serve our security or our dignity.
Ordinary citizens aren’t powerless in this moment, but pressure has to be applied where it actually bites: consent, legitimacy, and political survival. MPs must be forced to declare whether they support genuine European defensive independence — energy, digital, industrial, and fiscal — rather than hiding behind slogans about “standing with allies”. And they must be told, relentlessly, that security cannot be built on austerity. Europe has the tools: coordinated central banking, public investment, capital controls, and fair taxation. What it lacks is courage.
That’s where organised citizens matter. Letters, surgeries, unions, local media — the unglamorous machinery of democratic pressure. If enough marginal‑seat politicians hear that voters will not trade hospitals for missiles, the calculus changes. Europe must become power‑ready without becoming cruel. That is the line worth defending.
I get the general shape of the answer in relation to the politics of care, but have to question UK arms investment as the place to start in strengthening our national security in relation to the US. The idea that we’ll have to spend more to secure our defense independently of them is, how shall we put it, quaint. Never mind that the US exploited NATO to eviscerate British arms capability while appropriating any relevant knowledge base is now beside the point. And, contrary to perceptions inherited from the Cold War era, UK security risks in the world will be hugely reduced by dissociation from US objectives. They insisted we had to have a Russia problem, that can be unwound now to the benefit of Ukraine as well. That leaves us with the big and most urgent issue, which is how to protect ourselves against Washington. Given the extent to which they permeate our security and other institutions, house cleaning must come first, joined with social and economic resilience measures focused on the care economy. Then and only then will there be space to conduct a realistic risk assessment and reinvigorate the material supports it implies. They’re not going to be mainly concerned with conventional armed conflict.
Noted. And sorry, this seems to have got lost in the system.
I can only hope that Starmer’s explanation rattles a few cages and helps people to realise that the U.S. is just too powerful as well as completely untrustworthy. Their president is nothing more than a real estate magnate. It may make some over here question the status of the U.S. being an ‘ally’ and ram home just how small we really are and that being with the U.S. will only ever mean crumbs from the top table, nothing else. I think in a strange way, Bunt’s lack of modesty, his greed, has helped to reveal the true world order in the West. That might promote change and unity elsewhere. I hope.
U.S. hegemony also helps to polarise just how damaging BREXIT has been. Putin is having a ball.
From now on BTW, I will refer to Donald as ‘President Bunt’ – if I have to refer to him at all. You might think that is silly, but it sums exactly what I think of him, but also the strange systems that enabled to get where he is.
I must admit to feeling very numb about things. Any time I think things can’t get more surreal — they do.
I’m shocked at European leaders’ dithering. Astonished that despots are being fuelled and provided with power and authority – and the likely impact on ‘normal folk’ all over the world…..
Many sensible people are considering ‘what is the correct strategic response to this threat’. Maybe it reflects how I’m feeling – but I’m thinking — what is it that despots really really hate? Being laughed at. Spitting Image, Private Eye, Hogarth — were effective. So while ‘grown-ups’ consider the strategy —- I was thinking: Wouldn’t it be great if Billions of Normal people from all over the world made a point of laughing at them – particularly the orange one. Millions of post cards arriving at the white house from all over the world recognising him for his second hand award or for having extremely small ‘things’ / hands. Congratulate him for his brilliance in delaying the revelations of possible paedophilia. Send him awards for getting trivial tests correct — prizes can be tatt – but shiny. Award for the person we’d most like to spend time with, because he seems soooo full of joy …. Liar award, Cheat at golf (well documented) — there must be loads. Maybe photos of Jane Godley holding a sign …..
But a global campaign of laughing at him — that would definitely annoy him and make normal people smile!
Thank you for another post pointing the way to action, not just bewilderment and outrage.
I have a question on ‘How are we going to pay for it?’ with regard to improving the independence of UK and European military defences.
When we speak to our political representatives and write letters to the newspapers….
What is the correct way to think about the finances?
I have read on this blog that military spending is not thought to have a multiplier effect that matches more constructive peaceful government spending.
Does that mean that it has potentially more ‘pure’ inflationary potential in that it does not ‘stimulate’ much trickle through growth in the rest of the economy?
And does that mean it is important on this type of military spending to insist on taxing wealth and considering capital controls to pay for it in the way you outline?
As in, is it more important to raise tax against the potential inflationary effect of military spending than for other kinds of government spending?
This issue is on my agenda.
Might this wait a day or two?
Of course! 🙂
I am exploring the House of Commons and Lords Library documents in this …
Someone there called Martin Beck appears to recommend borrowing rather than taxes on 14th OCT 2025. He does not, anywhere that I can see in his text, offer or refer to evidence that this is the better choice….
This seems quite important…. I look forward to reading about this when you get around to replying or posting about it.
No rush obviously….
Many Thanks.
Actually… found something here…. I will read this and see if it answers the question…
International Economics
Volume 179, October 2024, 100535
International Economics
What is it good for? On the inflationary effects of military conflicts☆
Ulrich Eydam, Florian Leupold
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2110701724000581
Great caring comments but our politicians are not up for a fight for their country or the kind of radical change with all its many intended and unintended consequences suggested by some here.
Colonel Smithers point about the US control machine is well made.
UK defence & security is embedded within the larger US and NATO setups.
Disengaging from the US while in contact is almost unthinkable for our military & security people, it will be easily spotted & puts themselves & in some instances their families at risk.
Britain is not free to act.
So with our politicians, military & security people captured Starmer’s response makes a lot more sense. It is a fearful response dressed up as standing up to aggression.
UK policymakers probably believe they might be faced with betraying Greenlanders or Ukrainians at some point while hoping that some sort of appeasment act will enable them to avoid both. Playing for time till US elections changes Trump’s focus is also in the mix too so procrastination while pretending to negotiate will be seen as effective too.
Meanwhile no actions to plan for disengaging with the US will be undertaken. If it was spoken or written down it would be detected & the individual responsible dealt with. The US is embedded here.
For Starmer such actions would be unthinkable.
This is what a vassal status looks like.
UK has been similar to Belarus for years but our media kept pretending orherwise. The British Public fooled.
Some of them & some thinkers/media commentariat now see things clearly with the US and quite rightly feel ashamed and bewildered even angry.
The search for a way out has begun for some but our “establishment/elites” still feel the ideal solution is more appeasment while carrying on with the govt’s stated domestic programmes as if all is normal. No doubt our media circus will oblige.
More humiliations to come for the UK and states before appeasement turns to resistance.
Can expect our politicians to show their true colours?
Farage and Reform have the most to lose in any strong move from appeasement to resistance. Greens perhaps the most to gain if they are seen to move away from previous anti defence rhetoric.
This is a moment to choose: vassal state or not?
Either way, there is going to be a big price to pay. That is unavoidable.