5 ms·

In the UK I would say that the Iraq war, the credit crisis, and Brexit hollowed out politics and we were left with populists – Corbyn on the left, Johnson in th

In the UK I would say that the Iraq war, the credit crisis, and Brexit hollowed out politics and we were left with populists – Corbyn on the left, Johnson in the right – and a great loss of trust in the political process. There’s a shakeup happening right now (Corbyn gone and Johnson likely to follow) but it’s way too early to tell how long it will take for faith to be restored. Maybe it’s just my politics, but it seems to me that whatever your politics, the lack of a functioning middle leaves us all worse off. I know a number of Americans that feel the same, though whether there are enough of them to make a difference I don’t know.

makomk 5y ago
I can't see faith in politics returning in the UK unless the successor to Johnson gets very lucky. The trouble is, right now we're facing a major cost of living and energy crisis that's the direct result of policies which had bipartisan support from the entire mainstream establishment, such as pushing for renweables in a way that actually just makes us highly dependent on natural gas whilst blocking any new natural gas sources in the UK or funded by the UK finance industry that could make up for the decline of the current ones, and trying to stop Covid without regard to the cost to the economy (which most people wrongly understood to just mean big corporations and the super-wealthy). Also, a lot of pressure on Johnson comes from the press and opposition claiming that any competent leader should be able to achieve things that are likely impossible and that no-one else in the Western world has, like solve the cost of living crisis, prevent large numbers of people from dying of Covid, and stop new Covid variants from coming into existence by vaccinating the world. It's amazing how many people falsely think the UK has the worst Covid deaths per capita in Europe rather than middle of the pack, just because all the headlines carefully cherry-pick whatever narrow figure makes the UK look worse. Then there's all the endless articles about how much other European countries are doing to protect people from high energy costs which mysteriously neglect to compare how much they're actually paying for power. And of course, the current vaccines can't stop new variants both because they don't stop Covid spreading nearly enough and because most of the unvaccinated global population already has natural immunity anyway, plus the UK doesn't have a pharmaceutical industry big enough to supply the world (we're not an empire anymore!) Any successor to Johnson will have expectations placed on them that they couldn't possibly live up to, which is probably why no-one is keen to try and take his place. There's also been a lot of attacks on the government lately for "wasting" money by buying more PPE than ended up being used in the end. Imagine trying to do any kind of emergency planning when the political climate is like that.
- pasabagi 5y ago
  > worst Covid deaths per capita I think the point is that the countries that have worse deaths-per-capita are poor (eastern european states), conspicuously dysfunctional (Belgium), or both dysfunctional and unlucky (Italy). The UK was positioned to do well (it's an island, has a national health service, very low vaccine hesitancy, had lots of warning), and yet did badly both on deaths and the economy. The story of the UK and covid was one of unforced errors, not of an impossible challenge. PS: probably most importantly, the UK has a relatively young population (median age 40, vs Italy at 46, Germany at 49, etc).
  - makomk 5y ago
    One of those Eastern European states - the Czech Republic - was actually the big European success story everyone in the UK press pointed to as proof that the UK should've been able to do better if we had competent leaders. They ended up with the worst Covid deaths per capita in Europe until their neighbours overtook them, and yet I'm sure they still contribute to the belief the UK failed. In reality it seems like they were the ones who got lucky early on and had the chance to do well but failed to take advantage of that, with issues like poor vaccine uptake there. On the other hand, the cities which got hit next after Italy were New York and London, both of which had lots of travel from Milan due to Fashion Week right around the time there was massive undetected community spread there. That's definitely unlucky.
    - pasabagi 5y ago
      Well, that's the other thing: there was a time when the UK did have top-tier per-capita death rates, so that's where the idea came from that the UK was 'number one'. In regards to CR, you would expect the Czech republic to do worse than the UK. They have an older population, somewhat poor state, and a horrible vaccination rate (63%). The continuing perception also probably comes down to the personality of Boris Johnson. You can't go around shaking hands, calling it 'kung flu', party through the lockdowns, then expect people to see you as an ideal leader in an emergency situation.
      - 5y ago
turbinerneiter 5y ago
I think it is very interesting that you think the lack of middle is the problem. From my left-leaning view, the middle is exactly the problem. E.g. "the third way" that the Democrats, Labour and SPD in Germany were following. Or Blair going into Iraq based on lies. The financial crisis. To me, all these are a result of the middle. The leftist parties didn't do what they were supposed to do - oppose wars, regulate economy to ensure stability and fairness. To me, the middle means that whatever we vote for, whoever is in charge, nothing really changes. Every time left parties manage to win an election, they start to compromise and don't actually do the things they promised. If the left is unhappy that everything is to right, and the right is unhappy that everything is to left and the middle thinks it doesn't even exist, then I don't know what the hell is broken. Modern governments just seem to fail at being a positive factor in peoples live. It's all crumbling, it's all cost overrun, it's all compromise that is worse than both competing ideas. I often feel like all the tings that were done during my parents time are just deemed impossible now. Like NASA used to be able to put people on the Moon, and now they don't even have a manned platform anymore.
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
Brexit did not result in populists. It is the result of populists latching on to the greatest intraparty political divide in generations. It's unambiguously, purely a populist position, wilfully divorced from data and focussing on sovereignty and self-determination and Britishness. It never made a technocratic case for itself at all, and in general the core Brexiteers excelled in avoiding making a technocratic case -- it was always going to be hard Brexit because every technocratic argument was successfully shot down as appeasement. Every single major sales pitch for Brexit was populist in nature; no convincing sales pitch for good governance, economic success or long term growth was ever made. It's always about being free of Them, which is an essentially populist position.
- asplake 5y ago
  The hollowing out created the conditions for it, and another wave of politicians have gone, continuing the process
YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
> There’s a shakeup happening right now (Corbyn gone and Johnson likely to follow) but it’s way too early to tell how long it will take for faith to be restored. I was unemployed for 9 months (which drained me of my savings), couldn't visit my grandmother because of the instability created by the repeated lock-downs and uncertainty. It almost financially ruined me. I can't afford to fix my car, I had to get into more debt to just get my hot water running. At the same time politicians, media personalities and the like went out boozing, sleeping with their mistresses and doing exactly what they like. Everyone of them should be thrown in jail for what they have done. There shouldn't be any trust put in the political process. I hope it won't be restored ever. People shouldn't trust any politician at all nor the democratic process. Time after time these people have failed the people (all the political parties) spectacularly. The system itself selects for the very people that you don't want. > Maybe it’s just my politics, but it seems to me that whatever your politics, the lack of a functioning middle leaves us all worse off. The "functioning" middle is what has led us to this place. There is a famous quote from Noam Chomsky which is apt: > The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. The idea functioning middle is sold to people because most people believe in being reasonable and fair minded. This unfortunately is misleading. What it really means is "business as usual". Business as usual brought up the Iraq war, endless wars in the middle east, financial crisis after financial crisis where everyday people get shafted. I don't want to be represented by any of them. You also don't really get to choose who you get represented by anyway. You get a very small say in who represents you. If I wanted someone to represent me, I would hire someone myself.
denton-scratch 5y ago
Corbyn's no populist. He's often described as a populist; but in fact he is and always[0] has been on the left wing of Labour, a centrist party. Socialism != populism. [0] He's been a Labour backbencher since 1983, and his policies didn't change much over the intervening years.

makomk 5y ago

I can't see faith in politics returning in the UK unless the successor to Johnson gets very lucky. The trouble is, right now we're facing a major cost of living and energy crisis that's the direct result of policies which had bipartisan support from the entire mainstream establishment, such as pushing for renweables in a way that actually just makes us highly dependent on natural gas whilst blocking any new natural gas sources in the UK or funded by the UK finance industry that could make up for the decline of the current ones, and trying to stop Covid without regard to the cost to the economy (which most people wrongly understood to just mean big corporations and the super-wealthy). Also, a lot of pressure on Johnson comes from the press and opposition claiming that any competent leader should be able to achieve things that are likely impossible and that no-one else in the Western world has, like solve the cost of living crisis, prevent large numbers of people from dying of Covid, and stop new Covid variants from coming into existence by vaccinating the world. It's amazing how many people falsely think the UK has the worst Covid deaths per capita in Europe rather than middle of the pack, just because all the headlines carefully cherry-pick whatever narrow figure makes the UK look worse. Then there's all the endless articles about how much other European countries are doing to protect people from high energy costs which mysteriously neglect to compare how much they're actually paying for power. And of course, the current vaccines can't stop new variants both because they don't stop Covid spreading nearly enough and because most of the unvaccinated global population already has natural immunity anyway, plus the UK doesn't have a pharmaceutical industry big enough to supply the world (we're not an empire anymore!) Any successor to Johnson will have expectations placed on them that they couldn't possibly live up to, which is probably why no-one is keen to try and take his place. There's also been a lot of attacks on the government lately for "wasting" money by buying more PPE than ended up being used in the end. Imagine trying to do any kind of emergency planning when the political climate is like that.

pasabagi 5y ago
> worst Covid deaths per capita I think the point is that the countries that have worse deaths-per-capita are poor (eastern european states), conspicuously dysfunctional (Belgium), or both dysfunctional and unlucky (Italy). The UK was positioned to do well (it's an island, has a national health service, very low vaccine hesitancy, had lots of warning), and yet did badly both on deaths and the economy. The story of the UK and covid was one of unforced errors, not of an impossible challenge. PS: probably most importantly, the UK has a relatively young population (median age 40, vs Italy at 46, Germany at 49, etc).
- makomk 5y ago
  One of those Eastern European states - the Czech Republic - was actually the big European success story everyone in the UK press pointed to as proof that the UK should've been able to do better if we had competent leaders. They ended up with the worst Covid deaths per capita in Europe until their neighbours overtook them, and yet I'm sure they still contribute to the belief the UK failed. In reality it seems like they were the ones who got lucky early on and had the chance to do well but failed to take advantage of that, with issues like poor vaccine uptake there. On the other hand, the cities which got hit next after Italy were New York and London, both of which had lots of travel from Milan due to Fashion Week right around the time there was massive undetected community spread there. That's definitely unlucky.
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    Well, that's the other thing: there was a time when the UK did have top-tier per-capita death rates, so that's where the idea came from that the UK was 'number one'. In regards to CR, you would expect the Czech republic to do worse than the UK. They have an older population, somewhat poor state, and a horrible vaccination rate (63%). The continuing perception also probably comes down to the personality of Boris Johnson. You can't go around shaking hands, calling it 'kung flu', party through the lockdowns, then expect people to see you as an ideal leader in an emergency situation.
    - 5y ago

turbinerneiter 5y ago

I think it is very interesting that you think the lack of middle is the problem. From my left-leaning view, the middle is exactly the problem. E.g. "the third way" that the Democrats, Labour and SPD in Germany were following. Or Blair going into Iraq based on lies. The financial crisis. To me, all these are a result of the middle. The leftist parties didn't do what they were supposed to do - oppose wars, regulate economy to ensure stability and fairness. To me, the middle means that whatever we vote for, whoever is in charge, nothing really changes. Every time left parties manage to win an election, they start to compromise and don't actually do the things they promised. If the left is unhappy that everything is to right, and the right is unhappy that everything is to left and the middle thinks it doesn't even exist, then I don't know what the hell is broken. Modern governments just seem to fail at being a positive factor in peoples live. It's all crumbling, it's all cost overrun, it's all compromise that is worse than both competing ideas. I often feel like all the tings that were done during my parents time are just deemed impossible now. Like NASA used to be able to put people on the Moon, and now they don't even have a manned platform anymore.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

Brexit did not result in populists. It is the result of populists latching on to the greatest intraparty political divide in generations. It's unambiguously, purely a populist position, wilfully divorced from data and focussing on sovereignty and self-determination and Britishness. It never made a technocratic case for itself at all, and in general the core Brexiteers excelled in avoiding making a technocratic case -- it was always going to be hard Brexit because every technocratic argument was successfully shot down as appeasement. Every single major sales pitch for Brexit was populist in nature; no convincing sales pitch for good governance, economic success or long term growth was ever made. It's always about being free of Them, which is an essentially populist position.

asplake 5y ago
The hollowing out created the conditions for it, and another wave of politicians have gone, continuing the process

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago

> There’s a shakeup happening right now (Corbyn gone and Johnson likely to follow) but it’s way too early to tell how long it will take for faith to be restored. I was unemployed for 9 months (which drained me of my savings), couldn't visit my grandmother because of the instability created by the repeated lock-downs and uncertainty. It almost financially ruined me. I can't afford to fix my car, I had to get into more debt to just get my hot water running. At the same time politicians, media personalities and the like went out boozing, sleeping with their mistresses and doing exactly what they like. Everyone of them should be thrown in jail for what they have done. There shouldn't be any trust put in the political process. I hope it won't be restored ever. People shouldn't trust any politician at all nor the democratic process. Time after time these people have failed the people (all the political parties) spectacularly. The system itself selects for the very people that you don't want. > Maybe it’s just my politics, but it seems to me that whatever your politics, the lack of a functioning middle leaves us all worse off. The "functioning" middle is what has led us to this place. There is a famous quote from Noam Chomsky which is apt: > The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. The idea functioning middle is sold to people because most people believe in being reasonable and fair minded. This unfortunately is misleading. What it really means is "business as usual". Business as usual brought up the Iraq war, endless wars in the middle east, financial crisis after financial crisis where everyday people get shafted. I don't want to be represented by any of them. You also don't really get to choose who you get represented by anyway. You get a very small say in who represents you. If I wanted someone to represent me, I would hire someone myself.

denton-scratch 5y ago

Corbyn's no populist. He's often described as a populist; but in fact he is and always[0] has been on the left wing of Labour, a centrist party. Socialism != populism. [0] He's been a Labour backbencher since 1983, and his policies didn't change much over the intervening years.