Tag: labour-party

Myths vs. Reality

We live in a world of contradictions. What am I thanking about? The current febrile immigration debate has all the hallmarks of magical thinking. Here we are surrounded by water, living in an economically active favourable part of the world and yet public concern is directed at “others”.

I’ve no problem with the current British Government berating the past Government for not fixing a problem. It’s normal for a governing party in the first couple of years of their term of office to point the finger of blame. It’s easy. Painting a picture of past failure makes the road ahead clearer. It’s easier to start from a point of low expectations.

However, it seems it’s not the resurgence of the Conservative Party that the Labour Party are concerned about. Today, such a prospect would be like the reincarnation of a squirrel that had been run-over by a 42-ton truck driven by the electorate.

The announcement of the day is setting an ambition to squeeze immigration. Recent local elections have shown that this banner flies well with those who vote in local elections. Because the opinion polls give bizarre indications too, the questionable assumption is that if a General Election was called by an irrational Prime Minister there’d be a surge in far right-wing voting.

We have new kids on the block. They are not at all new even if the have a new name. It’s an Orwellian name. Because an ultra-conservative party isn’t in the business of newness as much as they are stirring up ancient antagonism.

Anyway, the Reform Party are the current snake oil salesman selling their easy solutions to difficult problems. They were once named; Referendum, UKIP and Brexit Party. All proponents of magical thinking and with a poor track record.

The story goes like this. Stop overseas immigration and make the hordes of economically inactive people of Britan take-up the vacancies that would result. When Reform voters hear this narrative, they don’t think it applies to them. They believe there’s a mythical group of lazy people who need to be forced back to work and off overly generous State benefits.

In this public debate it’s as well to look at the numbers[1]. Reform voters are predominantly of 50-years and older and the economically inactive are predominantly 50-years and over[2]. Thus, I say, we live in a world of contradictions.

COVID did see a large number of people take, or be forced into early retirement. Those who have experienced a lifetime of their terms and conditions of employment being degraded took the opportunity to do something else. Often that included voluntary work or caring roles. Reform have concocted plans to pressure people back into conventional employment. These plans are uncosted and not cheap. Lots of government funded incentives and training, for example. In the real world, funding must come from somewhere. That’s likely to be from the privatisation of health services and cancelled benefits. In this scenario don’t expect to get a state pension until well past 70 years

[1] https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN07119/SN07119.pdf

[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/economic-labour-market-status-of-individuals-aged-50-and-over-trends-over-time-september-2023/economic-labour-market-status-of-individuals-aged-50-and-over-trends-over-time-september-2023

Pragmatism in British Politics

Pragmatism has long been a part of British life. Idealism too but to a lesser extent. That said, the shelves of literary works probably tip in the balance of idealism. There’s always an “insightful” quote to pull of the shelf and plonk into a speech or scribblings like this.

There’s a comfort in putting important decisions down to known facts and up-to-date realities. This way of working tends to favour short-term action based on weighing-up the here and now. What’s best for us where we stand at this moment? How much money have we got?

If you are an ardent socialist or committed liberal or dyed-in-the-wool right-winger, then pragmatism can make your flesh crawl. It leads to the question – what do you really believe in? Intellectual prowess is challenged by a call to make it up as we go along.

Pragmatism encourages hypocrisy. Now, that might be phrased as an uncomfortable negative. The truth is that no successful organisation has ever escaped a great deal of honest hypocrisy. Positions on even the most hard-fought issues do change. That’s not a negative. Just a couple of minutes surveying the history of the last half century, more than proves the case.

So, when I hear the UK Prime Minister (PM) talk of “ruthless pragmatism” I do wince a bit. It’s not that pragmatism per-se is an evil. No way. Mere survival in any political landscape and someone must react to the here and now in a way that doesn’t sink the ship.

PM Keir Starmer talking on Europe[1] is like listening to a rich Victorian woman having on extremely tight underwear. There’s no way she can loosen it in public. Her peers would disown her. When no one is looking an immense sense of relief can be gained in shedding the constraining garments. Behind closed doors the ridiculous restraints are shed.

Frankly, UK opposition to joining youth mobility schemes[2] in Europe is a stupid as stupid can get. I mean stupid times a billion. Now, some madcap idealists might be scared that British youth might, if taught early, be influenced in ways that would last throughout their lives. Such would be their indoctrination that eventual the push on the UK to join to European Union (EU) would be overwhelming.

There’s another word beginning with “p”. Take pragmatism and replace it with paranoia. The later seems to be fashionable just now. Forget the idealist approach where at least views tend to be based on a plausible creed. Paranoia is such that no previous experience is necessary. It’s all-over social media and more and more conventional media. Pragmatism is met with disbelief. So, is it wise for Keir Starmer to make that word a number one headliner?

A philosophical political pragmatism has been long practiced in the UK. I don’t see that stopping anytime soon. But what’s to be gained by headlining it? Not a lot I’d say. In fact, it gives ammunition to the light blue swivel-eyed loons[3].

[1] https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/keir-starmer-brexit-reset-europe-b2692118.html

[2] https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/youth-mobility-schemes/

[3] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/swivelgate-david-cameron-goes-to-war-with-the-press-over-swiveleyed-loons-slur-8622277.html