Tim doesn’t hold the same opinions as the cockwomble and isn’t that happy that the Raven is now associated with this.

Ah, I thought Tim had moved on. I’ve seen that video now. This is it:

Tim Perry, who runs @theravenofbath with Rod Humphris, said his views do not reflect the pub’s pic.twitter.com/Hoo7lG9GR1

— Stephen Sumner (@StephenSumner15) April 19, 2021

It as a bit odd that the the people revelling in this nonsense were either the usual Momentum Cult member lefty lot

Oh give over. Your imagined image of ‘momentum cult lefty’ is a complete fiction. You wail about lefties calling everyone a tory (with just a hint of he who doth protest too much), and then in the same breath/sentence say everyone to the left of Nick Clegg is a ‘fruitloop’. FFS man go and join the liberal democrats and get it over with, you’ll feel much better once you’re officially ‘out’.

If there was a LP ‘vision’ it would be easier to share and have shared leadership with different emphases. But a shared leadership is much more difficult to direct and control, so we’re left with the harried Starmer stumbling to deliver a stellar performance in a pub.
All of this patronising carp about ‘lefty’ this and that made me try to think of a decent bit of analysis or theory from one of these rightwing Labour types. The only ‘centrist’ stuff I could come up with on pressure groups, elections and social capital is from the US or Europe. If your role is to defend the status quo then you don’t really need a theory or strategy since you only need to be reactive.

Daz – Mate, you may want to recalibrate your irony filter 😀

lefties calling everyone a tory

Dazh, go and have a look at the replies to Starmer… it’s mostly this. ^^^

FFS man go and join the liberal democrats and get it over with

Or this. ^^^

stumbling to deliver a stellar performance in a pub

Nah, some people just want to jump on any problem that Mr Boring comes across, because they don’t want Labour to be for all, they want Labour to be for them. He handled it just fine, and he was right to firmly disagree with someone complaining about kids being allowed to wear masks in school during a pandemic.

Binners, do try your best to make clear statements that can be examined and evaluated. Just name name one book or article.

Name name a book or article outlining “centrism”… why? All politicians are proposing different versions of a mixed economy. Starmer is proposing one that is “left wing”, he is not a centrist, or if he is, so are all the other modern day politicians.

If you’re keen on categories… social democratic… but don’t start using such terms if you want to carry the “anti-political thinking” voters with you… and there are a hell of a lot of them these days. Sticking your flag in a political dogma, even a highly flexible one such as that, doesn’t look like the path to government these days. Great for the political anoraks, but those people need to let go a bit, and realise it’s not all about them.

Binners, do try your best to make clear statements that can be examined and evaluated. Just name name one book or article.

If you’re looking for sensible, real-world economic arguments than I personally find Will Hutton has been the most sensible voice on the issue for decades now.

I absolutely agree with Kelvin that the days of political ideologies are dead. Note how the Torys from David Cameron onwards were more than happy to nick labour policies, wholesale, and re-badge them as their own

I know that it’s apparently the sin that dare not speak its name but ‘being a nicer version of the Tories’ is spat out with contempt, but you could also argue (but never do) that the tories are just a nastier version of labour.

because they don’t want Labour to be for all

Are you seriously suggesting Starmer’s ‘mission’ is to create a labour ‘for all’? All he’s doing is creating a labour he thinks will put him in power, and failing miserably at it. What’s amusing is that you’re all getting very animated about labour v tory and Starmer v Johnson when there’s almost no difference between them. It really is all a load of bollox. Here’s some Crass as an antedote 🙂

when there’s almost no difference between them

> sigh <

> sigh <

Even binners agrees. He appears to be catching on..

“I know that it’s apparently the sin that dare not speak its name but ‘being a nicer version of the Tories’ is spat out with contempt, but you could also argue (but never do) that the tories are just a nastier version of labour.”

If you’re looking for sensible, real-world economic arguments than I personally find Will Hutton has been the most sensible voice on the issue for decades now.

Have you actually read any Hutton books? They’re the most self-indulgent academic dross imaginable. I tried a couple of times and never got past the first chapters. Also I seem to remember he’s a huge supporter of Heathrow expansion, completely ignoring the ‘real world’ problem of climate crisis, and the very opposite of ‘sensible’.

So its the most self-indulgent academic dross imaginable, you’ve gathered from the half a chapter that you bothered reading?

Have you actually read any Hutton books?

Yes. Hence my comment. Maybe you should try again?

Maybe you should try again?

I note he hasn’t really written anything on economics post-2008, which makes him somewhat irrelevant as there’s been something of a revolution since then in how it all works. I’m more interested in more current, forward looking material than his outdated third way bollox.

He writes in the Observer every Sunday.

Is last Sunday not current enough?

And its interesting you dismiss it as ‘outdated third way bollox’ when by your own admission you’ve not actually read any of it.

Just to recap: your economic theory of choice involves re-educating the countries population as to the existence of money trees?

If you’re looking for sensible, real-world economic arguments than I personally find Will Hutton has been the most sensible voice on the issue for decades now.

“Sensible” in what way?

sensible
/ˈsɛnsɪb(ə)l/

adjective
1. done or chosen in accordance with wisdom or prudence; likely to be of benefit.

“I cannot believe that it is sensible to spend so much”

I read his observer articles. He’s still firmly rooted in the 1990s. FFS, he thinks we should expand airport capacity, that tells you all you need to know.

your economic theory of choice involves re-educating the countries population as to the existence of money trees?

Money trees exist and they work, they’re called central banks. Since 2008 the banking system works differently to how it did before. Boris has recognised this and is taking full advantage. Biden has recognised this and is taking full advantage. Starmer and labour, as duly advised by Hutton and other Keynesians are still stuck in the 20th century, and hopelessly out of date.

sensible
/ˈsɛnsɪb(ə)l/

adjective
1. done or chosen in accordance with wisdom or prudence; likely to be of benefit.

“I cannot believe that it is sensible to spend so much”

It’d be helpful if you could set out why you believe him to be sensible.

It’d be helpful if you could set out why you believe him to be sensible.

Indeed. Applying 80 year old political and economic theories to a system which has undergone radical change in the last decade (let alone the preceding 40 years) doesn’t seem very sensible to me.

It’d be helpful if you could set out why you believe him to be sensible.

Are you sure you need that kind of help? Can’t you finish the argument over whether nasty is better than nice? (If you don’t think nice is better then you’re either a baddie or very sophisticated and up to date indeed in your thinking.)

Are you sure you need that kind of help? Can’t you finish the argument over whether nasty is better than nice? (If you don’t think nice is better then you’re either a baddie or very sophisticated and up to date indeed in your thinking.)

It’s surprising to me that the answer to your first question isn’t obvious. Anyway.

Would I like to know why someone believes that a particular set of economic theories are sensible? Yes.

It’s surprising to me that the answer to your first question isn’t obvious.

Just to recap: your economic theory of choice involves re-educating the countries population as to the existence of money trees?

Give over.

There is a better frame work for creating more employment, and a fairer society with mechanisms already in place – with evidence to back it up – and that’s your best line of attack? .

Tell me what the economic miracle of Centrists’ diluted neolibralism is going to provide? Apart from a failed trickle-down market crapo model that is falling apart in front of our very eyes – which you effectively support by not grasping it’s right wing roots.

Centrism is doomed because it’s based on neolibralism. It has no ideas of its own.

Centrism is doomed because it’s based on neolibralism.

If neoliberal economics is this supposedly disastrous system, which is inherently wrong, can you fill me in on why people of this country have consistently voted for it for 4 decades, and continue to do so? By a bigger majority than ever?

Seems not many people agree with you. They were offered an alternative at the last election and it was blown a pretty whole-hearted raspberry by the electorate, who opted to stick with the neoliberal model by a massive majority.

So outside your left-wing fantasy la-la-land, where everyone rejects it because you don’t like it, we have to work with the uncomfortable reality that to get yourself elected you’re going to have to offer an economic model that the electorate regards as palatable.

So thats going to be some form of neoliberalism, of which there are many. Whether you like that or not.

The Tory’s offer a completely unregulated, red-in-tooth-and-claw model, where the winner takes all. Labour must accept that neoliberalism is the only game in town now and offer a more progressive and more equitable version of it.

Otherwise it might as well just make placards and sign petitions in opposition for ever.

I know you lot hate the idea, but thats the reality. You’ve all been railing against the prevailing economic model for decades yet there it still is. I bet if we revisit this thread in another 3 decades, you lot wil still be gnashing your teeth about it, yet there it will still be in some form or another.

Best deal with the world as it is, rather than as you’d like it to be

can you fill me in on why people of this country have consistently voted for it for 4 decades, and continue to do so? By a bigger majority than ever?

That will be primarily because 80% of the voters couldn’t even spell economics combined with the fact they have been told for their whole life that managing a countries economy is the same sort of thing as their own bank balance so you can only spend what you have or get a nasty loan.

So shall we berate them all for it then? The ignorant bastards!

Or force them into re-education camps where comrade commandant Daz can inform them about money trees and why their perceptions of economics are all wrong?

Sounds like a definite election-winning manifesto, this

If neoliberal economics is this supposedly disastrous system, which is inherently wrong

And there we have it. Binners suppors neoliberal economics. The system that has resulted in an entire generation being locked out of the housing market, billionaire plutocrats, corporate monopolies, and wholesale homelessness and reliance on food banks. And yet he’s a member of the labour party. I rest my case. 😉

On a point of order, people have never voted ‘for’ neoliberalism, as they’ve never been given a choice. It’s been forced on them by forces beyond the control of political parties, and despite your paranoid fantasies about lefty trots in 2019, they have never been offered an alternaitve. Until now that is, because following 2008 and now covid it’s finally beginning to change. But you seem to want to keep it the same, which is very bizarre.

And there we have it. Binners suppors neoliberal economics.

I’ve not expressed an opinion one way or another. I’ve just acknowledged reality

You should try it instead of inhabiting some weird alternative reality where the population are crying out for radical economic alternatives. They’re not.

On a point of order, people have never voted ‘for’ neoliberalism, as they’ve never been given a choice.

So… again… if this system is so terrible and largely despised and there would surely be a guaranteed route to power by offering the alternative that everyone is clearly crying out for, no?

I know that you’d never countenance this thought but a lot of people are quite happy with something that closely resembles the present system. You can scream at them that they’re wrong, but they’ll just shrug and order something new and shiny off Amazon. You can tell them tales of environmental catastrophe and they’ll tell you that its fine because they do their recycling

At the risk of being repetitive: Best deal with the world as it is, rather than as you’d like it to be

I’ve not expressed an opinion one way or another.

Indeed:

It’d be helpful if you could set out why you believe him to be sensible.

It’s really simple. We’re pretty much lumbered with one form of neoliberalism or another as that is what people vote for. You might not like it, but there it is.

I’d just like a better, more equal, less rapacious version of it that seeks to address the problems and injustices inherent in the current system. As has been often advocated by people like Will Hutton.

I always think that its surely not too much to ask for, but apparently it is.

The right don’t want to provide it, for obvious reasons, and its just been dismissed by our resident lefties as ‘outdated third way bollox’

So here I am… stuck in the middle with you

This is perhaps the most depressing thread on STW.

Note how the Torys from David Cameron onwards were more than happy to nick labour policies, wholesale, and re-badge them as their own

You might want to try thinking through the implications of that a bit more.

This is perhaps the most depressing thread on STW.

It certainly is.
It’s like some horribly bleak Blue Jam sketch that just plays in an endless loop.

This is perhaps the most depressing thread on STW.

Something to agree on at last.

Nah, some people just want to jump on any problem that Mr Boring comes across, because they don’t want Labour to be for all, they want Labour to be for them. He handled it just fine, and he was right to firmly disagree with someone complaining about kids being allowed to wear masks in school during a pandemic.

Probably the most important part of understanding Labours problems set out here, the pandering to identity politics driven by grifters on their own hobby horse is creating a narrowing appeal.

Labour needs to have a broad appeal and to convince enough voters that it’s going to make a better job of keeping them healthier, wealthier, and safer than anyone else. Identity politics satisfies no-one, the pressure groups are never satisfied and the rest think you’ve othered them.

the pandering to identity politics driven by grifters on their own hobby horse is creating a narrowing appeal.

And yet the tories are all about identity politics so it doesnt really add up.

We’re pretty much lumbered with one form of neoliberalism or another as that is what people vote for. You might not like it, but there it is.

You really think that the present government is pursuing neoliberal economics?

This is perhaps the most depressing thread on STW.

+1

The perfect example of its participants being trapped in the same political cycle, desperate to break out, but doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past (and Monty Python references) to infinity.

neoliberal economics

Another junk term, that has been used to mean many, often contradictory, ideas. Everyone is proposing current neoliberal economics to a degree (if by which you mean free trade and international movement of capital and workers connected to market needs and trends). Just as everyone is proposing regulation, market control, protectionism, subsidies, price caps, tax breaks, penalty taxes, government procurement and state ownership, to some degree. No one is really for or against any of this, just arguing about where to use these tools, how much to use them, and who to use them for.