4 ms·

This reminded me of an article in The Economist published last year, April 2025: "Zombie politics: how Dead Man dominates British politics"[1] Two prescient p

This reminded me of an article in The Economist published last year, April 2025: "Zombie politics: how Dead Man dominates British politics"[1] Two prescient paragraphs related to today's news: If British politicians worship voters who are no longer among the living, it is natural that they do the same to a version of the British economy that has long departed. “There are people in this country who love to talk down our manufacturing,” said Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, while speaking in Jaguar Land Rover’s (JLR) factory in Birmingham. During the 1970s, one in four people worked in manufacturing, like Sir Keir’s dad, who died in 2018. Now fewer than one in ten do. Manufacturing, a small part of the economy, plays a big role in politics everywhere. Britain is no exception. A speech at a JLR plant has become a rite of passage for any leading politician in recent years. Dead Man’s old job comes first for Britain’s politicos. The lives of workers in Britain’s services economy come second. True, manufacturing’s weak performance after the financial crisis is one reason for Britain’s woeful productivity growth. Yet politicians cling on to a primitive vision of it. “He made things with his hands,” said Sir Keir of his father. That modern manufacturing requires oodles of educated workers is ignored. Living graduates play little role in political discourse beyond politicians moaning that there are too many of them. After all, Dead Man did not attend university. Why should his grandchildren bother? [1] https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/04/09/zombie-politics-how-dead-man-dominates-british-politics https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/04/09/zombie-politics...

raverbashing 3mo ago
This sounds good until you run out of steel and out of sellers as well
- mr_toad 3mo ago
  Half of all steel in the UK is imported anyway, and there are many places to obtain it. Unless the UK goes to war with most of the world at the same time, it’s not going to have trouble getting steel.
  - pydry 3mo ago
    If there is a large war, those countries will prioritize domestic consumption and the UK will immediately stop being able to produce weapons. Domestic steel production is an essential element of being sovereign, as opposed to being the handpuppet of a larger power (like the US).
    - 0x3f 3mo ago
      > If there is a large war, those countries will prioritize domestic consumption and the UK will immediately stop being able to produce weapons. Same with the iron we'd need to make our own steel. And a current glut just makes it even cheaper for us to stockpile, vs spending on votes by propping up a failing industry.
    - RandomLensman 3mo ago
      I don't see how the UK could generally be self-sufficient in any large war.
      - nradov 3mo ago
        It certainly wasn't self-sufficient in the last two large wars.
        t0mpr1c3 3mo ago
        Britain's last two territorial conflicts involved the Falklands, and Icelandic fishing ships in the neighborhood of Rockall. I don't recall that third party assistance was required in either dispute, thank you very much. The US the other hand is always asking for other countries to bail it out of some mess or other.
        nradov 3mo ago
        Did you miss the word "large"? And the UK required significant US assistance during the Falkland Islands war, so apparently you're quite ignorant about history. https://time.com/archive/6882618/just-how-much-did-the-u-s-help/ https://time.com/archive/6882618/just-how-much-did-the-u-s-h...
derektank 3mo ago
It’s only possible for Dead Man valorizing politicians to be elected because much of the electorate worships the same. They all have parents too, naturally.
- traceroute66 3mo ago
  > much of the electorate worships the same. They all have parents too, naturally. Well, yes. But not many of them worship the generation who were mostly responsible for voting in favour of Brexit (60% support among those aged 65 and over at the time of the vote).
  - 0x3f 3mo ago
    I think they do, actually. They just have a disconnect about it. But e.g. removing the triple lock is unpopular not just among those of an age to be affected by it.
    - pjc50 3mo ago
      The triple lock actually benefits everyone not currently retired, just .. not until they actually retire.
      - 0x3f 3mo ago
        Only if you assume it's sustainable until you personally die. But that seems in constant question even now.
        pjc50 3mo ago
        This is true, but .. for all retirement planning, you kind of have to assume no-collapse. It's also incoherent to say "the government pays too much attention to retirees" and "I expect to be defrauded by the government when I retire, along with my entire generation, and to be powerless to stop this" at the same time.
flir 3mo ago
Fishing holds similar role in the UK and France (at least). Tiny components of the overall economy, giant patriotic feels. I still think some manufacturing is simply strategic, and you should maintain a capability even at a (financial) loss though.
- traceroute66 3mo ago
  > Fishing holds similar role in the UK Indeed and ironically most British people refuse to eat the species commonly found in UK waters, e.g. mackerel etc. Because the Brits are so fussy, most fish eaten in the UK has always been imported, e.g. Icelandic cod. And the fact the UK fishermen were die-hard pro-Brexit is odd given they should have been aware that the majority of their regular catch was sold to EU buyers.
  - flir 3mo ago
    > most fish eaten in the UK has always been imported, e.g. Icelandic cod. Not always (Cod Wars). And our herring catch was once its own industry. > And the fact the UK fishermen were die-hard pro-Brexit is odd given they should have been aware that the majority of their regular catch was sold to EU buyers. They thought they'd have a monopoly on those fishing grounds post-Brexit.
    - nephihaha 3mo ago
      The problem for them wasn't the sales, it was the catches. The EU was good for farmers, not so good for fisheries. The EU fishing rules meant multiple countries could fish the same grounds meaning overfishing. The UK was much stricter on net sizes than Spain was.
      - Chu4eeno 3mo ago
        > The EU was good for farmers, not so good for fisheries. It was good for industrial farming, not the farmers themselves, one of the big reasons for Norway refusing to join was the impact it would have on farmers.
nialv7 3mo ago
what a bizarre article, completely disconnected from reality. in what world is manufacturing, a sector that has been neglected for decades at this point, having any sway on politics in Britain. why does The Economist have so much disdain of manufacturing and people who work in it? look at China, look at their manufacturing industry and what they are able to do with it. then look at the UK, who is struggling to build Hinkley Point C, or HS2 (projected to be the most expensive high-speed rail in the world btw). The Economist is an absolute f*ing joke.
- pjc50 3mo ago
  The point is that manufacturing is a relatively small part of both the economy and the job market; AND the popular view of manufacturing (large plant staffed by a large number of men being the dominant employer of a nearby town or city) doesn't look anything like the reality of modern manufacturing (small run boutique high value stuff like satellites and turbines, highly automated and professionalized, relatively small number of employees). This leads to stupid decisions like gutting the university sector, which is a major export industry.
  - lysace 3mo ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jul/14/university-job-cuts-humanities-social-sciences https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jul/14/university... Thousands of university job cuts in humanities and social sciences are creating widespread cold spots for languages, classics and theology degrees, the British Academy has warned. [...] The subjects with the biggest staff cuts were social work (-9%), English and classics (both -8%), anthropology (-7%) and linguistics (-6%).
    - pjc50 3mo ago
      https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/town-and-gown/universities-as-international-exporters/ https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/town-and-gown/univers... "Universities brought in an estimated £24 billion to the UK economy from abroad in 2022. They provide services (education) to international students who bring money to the institutions from abroad through international fees. These students also bring money to the local economy by spending on goods and services while they are studying" (presumably there's an attempt to imply that those are bad courses in some way, but you haven't shown your working)
jmyeet 3mo ago
The Economist is a neoliberal dish rag. There is a completely made up number that is an increasingly large portion of GDP in OECD nations and that number is imputed rent [1]. This is a fictional number that owner-occupiers "pay" themselves to live in their own houses. So as housing prices go up, so does imputed rent. House prices have increasingly become the best vehicle for investment funds because the returns are esentially protected. But none of that produces anything. The UK in particular has been described as buy-to-let economy. It doesn't have to be this way. If you limit property speculation then capital will find something else productive to do, like manufacturing. Dish rags like The Economist present it as inevitable that Western nations become financialized. It's simply not true. Look at Germany. Also look at the fact that Germany greatly limits the collaterialization and speculation on property. That's not an accident. [1]: https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/02/14/10-or-gdp-is-made-up-it-simply-does-not-exist-in-the-real-world/#gsc.tab=0 https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/02/14/10-or-gdp-is-...
- greyw 3mo ago
  In Switzerland this fictional imputed rent is actually extremly real. We have to pay taxes as if it was earned income. So you live in your fully owned flat, pretend to rent it to yourself and then pay income taxes on that amount. The point is your government can make this "fake" value very real. Luckily we recently voted to abolish this tax so it will be gone in some years. This tax was introduced as an emergency measure in ww1.
KaiserPro 3mo ago
I mean yes, that makes sense. But, the issue is about capacity. Steel and metals generally are a core part of the UK economy. Yes we could just buy it all in from outside, but when geopoltics intervenes it leaves us high and dry (see natural gas, chemical production, wire making, transformer making, etc etc) If we end up in a war, which seems fairly reasonable, then we need to have access to a manufacturing, not only prototypes, but large scale manufacturing. we need not only the machines, but the people, experience and pipelines to keep that working.

raverbashing 3mo ago

This sounds good until you run out of steel and out of sellers as well

mr_toad 3mo ago
Half of all steel in the UK is imported anyway, and there are many places to obtain it. Unless the UK goes to war with most of the world at the same time, it’s not going to have trouble getting steel.
- pydry 3mo ago
  If there is a large war, those countries will prioritize domestic consumption and the UK will immediately stop being able to produce weapons. Domestic steel production is an essential element of being sovereign, as opposed to being the handpuppet of a larger power (like the US).
  - 0x3f 3mo ago
    > If there is a large war, those countries will prioritize domestic consumption and the UK will immediately stop being able to produce weapons. Same with the iron we'd need to make our own steel. And a current glut just makes it even cheaper for us to stockpile, vs spending on votes by propping up a failing industry.
  - RandomLensman 3mo ago
    I don't see how the UK could generally be self-sufficient in any large war.
    - nradov 3mo ago
      It certainly wasn't self-sufficient in the last two large wars.
      - t0mpr1c3 3mo ago
        Britain's last two territorial conflicts involved the Falklands, and Icelandic fishing ships in the neighborhood of Rockall. I don't recall that third party assistance was required in either dispute, thank you very much. The US the other hand is always asking for other countries to bail it out of some mess or other.
        nradov 3mo ago
        Did you miss the word "large"? And the UK required significant US assistance during the Falkland Islands war, so apparently you're quite ignorant about history. https://time.com/archive/6882618/just-how-much-did-the-u-s-help/ https://time.com/archive/6882618/just-how-much-did-the-u-s-h...

derektank 3mo ago

It’s only possible for Dead Man valorizing politicians to be elected because much of the electorate worships the same. They all have parents too, naturally.

traceroute66 3mo ago
> much of the electorate worships the same. They all have parents too, naturally. Well, yes. But not many of them worship the generation who were mostly responsible for voting in favour of Brexit (60% support among those aged 65 and over at the time of the vote).
- 0x3f 3mo ago
  I think they do, actually. They just have a disconnect about it. But e.g. removing the triple lock is unpopular not just among those of an age to be affected by it.
  - pjc50 3mo ago
    The triple lock actually benefits everyone not currently retired, just .. not until they actually retire.
    - 0x3f 3mo ago
      Only if you assume it's sustainable until you personally die. But that seems in constant question even now.
      - pjc50 3mo ago
        This is true, but .. for all retirement planning, you kind of have to assume no-collapse. It's also incoherent to say "the government pays too much attention to retirees" and "I expect to be defrauded by the government when I retire, along with my entire generation, and to be powerless to stop this" at the same time.

flir 3mo ago

Fishing holds similar role in the UK and France (at least). Tiny components of the overall economy, giant patriotic feels. I still think some manufacturing is simply strategic, and you should maintain a capability even at a (financial) loss though.

traceroute66 3mo ago
> Fishing holds similar role in the UK Indeed and ironically most British people refuse to eat the species commonly found in UK waters, e.g. mackerel etc. Because the Brits are so fussy, most fish eaten in the UK has always been imported, e.g. Icelandic cod. And the fact the UK fishermen were die-hard pro-Brexit is odd given they should have been aware that the majority of their regular catch was sold to EU buyers.
- flir 3mo ago
  > most fish eaten in the UK has always been imported, e.g. Icelandic cod. Not always (Cod Wars). And our herring catch was once its own industry. > And the fact the UK fishermen were die-hard pro-Brexit is odd given they should have been aware that the majority of their regular catch was sold to EU buyers. They thought they'd have a monopoly on those fishing grounds post-Brexit.
  - nephihaha 3mo ago
    The problem for them wasn't the sales, it was the catches. The EU was good for farmers, not so good for fisheries. The EU fishing rules meant multiple countries could fish the same grounds meaning overfishing. The UK was much stricter on net sizes than Spain was.
    - Chu4eeno 3mo ago
      > The EU was good for farmers, not so good for fisheries. It was good for industrial farming, not the farmers themselves, one of the big reasons for Norway refusing to join was the impact it would have on farmers.

nialv7 3mo ago

what a bizarre article, completely disconnected from reality. in what world is manufacturing, a sector that has been neglected for decades at this point, having any sway on politics in Britain. why does The Economist have so much disdain of manufacturing and people who work in it? look at China, look at their manufacturing industry and what they are able to do with it. then look at the UK, who is struggling to build Hinkley Point C, or HS2 (projected to be the most expensive high-speed rail in the world btw). The Economist is an absolute f*ing joke.

pjc50 3mo ago
The point is that manufacturing is a relatively small part of both the economy and the job market; AND the popular view of manufacturing (large plant staffed by a large number of men being the dominant employer of a nearby town or city) doesn't look anything like the reality of modern manufacturing (small run boutique high value stuff like satellites and turbines, highly automated and professionalized, relatively small number of employees). This leads to stupid decisions like gutting the university sector, which is a major export industry.
- lysace 3mo ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jul/14/university-job-cuts-humanities-social-sciences https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jul/14/university... Thousands of university job cuts in humanities and social sciences are creating widespread cold spots for languages, classics and theology degrees, the British Academy has warned. [...] The subjects with the biggest staff cuts were social work (-9%), English and classics (both -8%), anthropology (-7%) and linguistics (-6%).
  - pjc50 3mo ago
    https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/town-and-gown/universities-as-international-exporters/ https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/town-and-gown/univers... "Universities brought in an estimated £24 billion to the UK economy from abroad in 2022. They provide services (education) to international students who bring money to the institutions from abroad through international fees. These students also bring money to the local economy by spending on goods and services while they are studying" (presumably there's an attempt to imply that those are bad courses in some way, but you haven't shown your working)

jmyeet 3mo ago

The Economist is a neoliberal dish rag. There is a completely made up number that is an increasingly large portion of GDP in OECD nations and that number is imputed rent [1]. This is a fictional number that owner-occupiers "pay" themselves to live in their own houses. So as housing prices go up, so does imputed rent. House prices have increasingly become the best vehicle for investment funds because the returns are esentially protected. But none of that produces anything. The UK in particular has been described as buy-to-let economy. It doesn't have to be this way. If you limit property speculation then capital will find something else productive to do, like manufacturing. Dish rags like The Economist present it as inevitable that Western nations become financialized. It's simply not true. Look at Germany. Also look at the fact that Germany greatly limits the collaterialization and speculation on property. That's not an accident. [1]: https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/02/14/10-or-gdp-is-made-up-it-simply-does-not-exist-in-the-real-world/#gsc.tab=0 https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/02/14/10-or-gdp-is-...

greyw 3mo ago
In Switzerland this fictional imputed rent is actually extremly real. We have to pay taxes as if it was earned income. So you live in your fully owned flat, pretend to rent it to yourself and then pay income taxes on that amount. The point is your government can make this "fake" value very real. Luckily we recently voted to abolish this tax so it will be gone in some years. This tax was introduced as an emergency measure in ww1.

KaiserPro 3mo ago

I mean yes, that makes sense. But, the issue is about capacity. Steel and metals generally are a core part of the UK economy. Yes we could just buy it all in from outside, but when geopoltics intervenes it leaves us high and dry (see natural gas, chemical production, wire making, transformer making, etc etc) If we end up in a war, which seems fairly reasonable, then we need to have access to a manufacturing, not only prototypes, but large scale manufacturing. we need not only the machines, but the people, experience and pipelines to keep that working.