I was sent this picture last night. It is of a letter in the Morning Star newspaper.
I do not always agree with the Morning Star, as I do not with any other paper I can think of, but they are welcome to use my infographics. So are others.
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!
What about ‘Taking the battle to a potential allies camp’ and sending them the infographics and encouraging them to use them?
Time…
Next stop, Novara Media?
They deeply dislike MMT.
I deeply dislike Novara Media.
I do like The Morning Star.
Novara Media, Aaron Bastani in particular, deeply dislike the Triple Lock. He mentions it in virtually every show he does and many of his tweets – that’s the definition of an obsession and one which I find quite weird. It seems to be deeply personal to him.
NM are good on some issues but they are, to be frank, a very middle class graduate-orientated outlet. You never hear any working class voices on there.
Indeed some people have asked about Bastani’s connections to the intelligence services-linked politics department at Royal Holloway
https://workerspartybritain.org/2022/09/27/bastani-novara-media-no-alternative/
I don’t believe in twenty years time – once they’ve got themselves on the housing ladder – many of these guys will call themselves socialist.
Well done Brendan! Nice one.
The letters in economic matters which are published in the Morning Star always provoke interesting replies, particularly those from writers of the “traditional” Marxist variety. They forget that Marx himself thought and wrote from a perspective of ever changing circumstances, the essence of Hegel’s dialectic and the dialectical method, which influenced his work so much. They have clearly not heard of the great Michael Hudson, who is very much worth reading. This contrasts strongly with the mainstream press, where debates and arguments in such matters are discouraged because they all part of the neoliberal consensus.
However, back on track, it’s good to see Richard’s valuable work is reaching a wider audience.
Thanks, Karl for sending this to me.
If this publication is in any way connected to my forwarding of your article on, “How to beat the bond markets” to seven of Andy Burnham’s near-field associates, on the 3rd September, with a polite request that they bring these economic alternatives to his attention then perhaps as a concept such communication has merit.
Of course it may have nothing to do with that communication but anything is worth a try at this point.
I agree, we need to try
As an ex-communist (not since 1979), it’s nice to see these connections being made. Good luck to you Richard. I very much appreciate your rigorous and scientific approach to all this, as I imagine Marx himself might. I wonder what you might have to say about class, class relations and class conflict – does that analysis have anything to offer in the current setting?
I think class analysis still has a great deal to offer, although I would not adopt Marx’s analysis without amendment.
Economic power is very unevenly distributed. Those who own substantial wealth, control companies, dominate finance, own land or receive significant economic rents have interests that can differ fundamentally from those who depend primarily upon their labour for income.
Neoliberalism has intensified that division by weakening trade unions, increasing the power of finance, privatising public assets and shifting income and wealth upwards.
Where I would differ from traditional Marxist analysis is in treating class as the sole or necessarily overriding explanation of social relations. Power also operates through gender, race, institutions, geography and access to knowledge, amongst other things.
But ownership still matters enormously. In fact, one of neoliberalism’s great achievements was to persuade us that class had ceased to matter just as wealth and economic power were becoming increasingly concentrated.
So I think the analysis remains highly relevant. What we need is a twenty-first-century understanding of economic power rather than one imported unchanged from the nineteenth.
Thank you Richard. I can identify with this, class as being significant in the pursuit of answers to the current mess we’re in, and yet not without updating and amending Marx’s analysis to take account of current circumstances. I’ve just begun reading “Marxism after Marx”, written by David McLellan, my professor and tutor at Kent University when I studied there from 1969-73. I’ll see where reading it takes me …
Enjoy…..