Labour and Ukip suffer as Tories make big gains

[The Romulan Republic]

No doubt he's still celebrated his successful campaign to cripple the UK.

A "fuck it" option is a very good way to put it. And in choosing so, they have only further harmed their own interests, along with a great many other peoples'.

Well, what we need is a strong progressive option, one that favours fair trade over free trade but welcomes international cooperation on crises that require a global response, and which welcomes diversity and immigration. Bernie Sanders offered something close to that in the US primary, and his defeat in the primary is one of the biggest missed opportunities, I suspect, in recent times. Hopefully progressives in America will continue to build on that, with or without another Bernie candidacy, rather than giving up and opting for cynical and self-destructive actions.

Unfortunately, if there is a basis for a comparable movement in the UK right now, I am unaware of it.

Edit: I had thought that Corbyn might fill the role of a "British Bernie Sanders" at first, but from what I've seen, he is both more extreme in his views, and less effective a politician.

But the point is many progressive have been extremely complacent for a very long time. There is a tendency by parties like New Labour to take their support for granted, and assuming that the blue-collar workers from the northern region will somehow always vote for Labour.

And? What of it? You keep repeating this, or variations on it, as though it somehow disproves anything I have said.

Does the progressive Left need to adopt a stronger position? Yes. Does that change the fact that policies like Brexit do not solve the problems of the working class, just give them a convenient scapegoat? No.

Corbyn belongs to the Bennites of the Labour party, which is something quite tainted in modern British politics. Although Tony Benn himself would probably be favour of Brexit, although for a different reason.

Labour desperately needs to rebuild their image as a party that could represent the many voters that felt alienated by immigration. There are simply way too many people that find it difficult to connect to a foreign culture and do fear diversity.

In other words, yes, its about bigotry, not simply the inadequacies of the Left or the capitalist economy.

Together with a situation where many of those people also happen to have massive difficulty finding jobs in a global economy, you have a perfect recipe for the destruction of the current pro-globalists left-wing movement.

There needs to be a way which can offer no one gets left behind by a globalist economy, or at the least reduce the number of people being left behind massively in the next few years.

Well, you probably know my view: We need Basic Income.

That's a very fringe position in most of the English-speaking world, but it has to be pushed aggressively now, or we're likely to soon find ourselves in a position where their are vast swathes of the population who have no jobs, no income, and are expected to fend for themselves. And from such circumstances are revolutions and dictatorships (and World Wars) born.

[ray245]

And? What of it? You keep repeating this, or variations on it, as though it somehow disproves anything I have said.

I'm not disproving what you said.

Does the progressive Left need to adopt a stronger position? Yes. Does that change the fact that policies like Brexit do not solve the problems of the working class, just give them a convenient scapegoat? No.

I think Brexit is a convenient scapegoat. But I think that there are people who would rather suffer economically than to welcome immigrants. ( See Japan as an example.)

In other words, yes, its about bigotry, not simply the inadequacies of the Left or the capitalist economy.

It's far easier to become a bigot if you don't see the benefits of globalisation that everyone else is harping about. That's the point I'm making.

Well, you probably know my view: We need Basic Income.

That's a very fringe position in most of the English-speaking world, but it has to be pushed aggressively now, or we're likely to soon find ourselves in a position where their are vast swathes of the population who have no jobs, no income, and are expected to fend for themselves. And from such circumstances are revolutions and dictatorships (and World Wars) born.

I'm not sure you can find enough traction for basic income. It's a little pointless to have basic income in a global, competitive environment. Unless basic income is somehow universal in every country, it will not work.

[The Romulan Republic]

And? What of it? You keep repeating this, or variations on it, as though it somehow disproves anything I have said.

I'm not disproving what you said.

Does the progressive Left need to adopt a stronger position? Yes. Does that change the fact that policies like Brexit do not solve the problems of the working class, just give them a convenient scapegoat? No.

I think Brexit is a convenient scapegoat. But I think that there are people who would rather suffer economically than to welcome immigrants. ( See Japan as an example.)

In other words, yes, its about bigotry, not simply the inadequacies of the Left or the capitalist economy.

It's far easier to become a bigot if you don't see the benefits of globalisation that everyone else is harping about. That's the point I'm making.

Well, you probably know my view: We need Basic Income.

That's a very fringe position in most of the English-speaking world, but it has to be pushed aggressively now, or we're likely to soon find ourselves in a position where their are vast swathes of the population who have no jobs, no income, and are expected to fend for themselves. And from such circumstances are revolutions and dictatorships (and World Wars) born.

I'm not sure you can find enough traction for basic income. It's a little pointless to have basic income in a global, competitive environment. Unless basic income is somehow universal in every country, it will not work.

How so? Its simply another form of welfare/social safety net, albeit a broader, more comprehensive one. Indeed, part of its appeal is that it would cut red tape by rendering certain existing programs redundant. Of course, those who could get jobs would still have an incentive to do so, as they would likely want more than a basic income, and besides, sitting around doing nothing all the time gets boring. But if done properly, they would no longer be dependent on having to slave for minimum wage at a job they hate for fear of starving or ending up homeless or (in the US at least) dying of a treatable medical condition.

As to traction... well, its been tried in one or two countries in Europe, I believe, and some parts of Canada have experimented, or are considering experimenting, with it.

That's actually what got me to get off my ass and volunteer for a campaign for the first time in my life- the Green Party here support it as part of their platform (and Greens actually get elected sometimes here).

I expect that support will grow as more and more jobs get automated away and people find that no, getting rid of the immigrants doesn't solve that problem. But we need to start pushing it strongly now, so we're not building support from scratch when it becomes a crisis.

[ray245]

How so? Its simply another form of welfare/social safety net, albeit a broader, more comprehensive one. Indeed, part of its appeal is that it would cut red tape by rendering certain existing programs redundant. Of course, those who could get jobs would still have an incentive to do so, as they would likely want more than a basic income, and besides, sitting around doing nothing all the time gets boring. But if done properly, they would no longer be dependent on having to slave for minimum wage at a job they hate for fear of starving or ending up homeless or (in the US at least) dying of a treatable medical condition.

As to traction... well, its been tried in one or two countries in Europe, I believe, and some parts of Canada have experimented, or are considering experimenting, with it.

That's actually what got me to get off my ass and volunteer for a campaign for the first time in my life- the Green Party here support it as part of their platform (and Greens actually get elected sometimes here).

I expect that support will grow as more and more jobs get automated away and people find that no, getting rid of the immigrants doesn't solve that problem. But we need to start pushing it strongly now, so we're not building support from scratch when it becomes a crisis.

That is if your economy is competitive against others. It's still not going to stop companies from moving overseas to countries that have lower taxes ( and less social/welfare spending).

Moreover, you aren't really solving the problem of actually finding jobs for the people that do have difficulties in a globalized world. Sure, their life might not be too difficult with a basic income, but that does not mean they would have the ability to find jobs as a blue-collared worker in manufacturing. Cost of living and cost of operations is still going to be different around the world. It's still cheaper for companies to relocate.

[Zaune]

I'm actually becoming steadily more and more convinced that the vast majority of English people are just naturally small-minded petty bigots who want to drive anyone who doesn't meet their arbitrary definition of 'normal' into the sea, and see anyone who's unable to work through infirmity or simple bad luck forced to beg for change in the gutter as a warning to the rest, and that the most important thing the education system should teach you is to know your place.

[Dartzap]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

Sorry TRR but your rampent ignorance of politics beyond your shore is showing here.

Your politics is sane? really? Who won the popular vote over there, exactly?

Geert Wilders has the 2nd largest party in the Dutch parliament purely on his islamaphobic policies, Le Pen is probably coming second in the French presidential election based on xenophobia , the Austrian's nearly ended up with a xenophobic president last year as well.

UKIP, the BNP, National Front etc have got literally nothing going on in the democratic process on a domestic level. The Maybot 3000 has not yet started shooting immigrants out of cannons mounted on the white cliffs, last I checked anyway. She's been consistent in her Home Office work by discriminating against everyone equally. Pretty much the same in the current position.

If you want your mind truly boggled,the Tories managed to get more local councillors in bloody Scotland, even now.

[Crazedwraith]

Your politics is sane? really? Who won the popular vote over there, exactly?

Umm... Clinton?

[Dartzap]

Ding! Correct answer! Which nations upper house just decided to eviscerate health care affordability?

Why are Republicans still getting votes?!

Sanity. My. Arse

[Tribble]

Also bear in mind that the Conservatives are doing exactly what they said they would do. They held a referendum, and abided by the results. Why are people assuming that they are going to be punished for that?

Brexit didn't just come out of the blue, and as I have noted before its seeds were sown quite awhile ago. It's a good example of the backlash that can eventually happen when governments flat out ignore / lie to the public and plow ahead with their agenda without really consulting anyone.

Had a referendum been held on joining the EU* when it first formed, would the UK have done so? Although we'll never know for sure I suspect the answer would be no, which is precisely why the government decided not to consult the public and sign up. Ditto with the European Constitution / Lisbon Treaty, to the point where the government flat out lied to the public on holding a referendum on it, then once in office proceeded to ignore the promise and sign up immediately. Whether or not the EU is a good thing the way the UK entered it was bound to cause massive problems down the road.

*Note that the UK held a referendum on joining the EEC, which passed.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

The problem with the Referendum is that no-one thought to ask what form Brexit should take, so now we're in a situation where no-one has a clue what's going to happen, or just how screwed the country is going to be. All we know for certain is by the time the promised £350 million per week fails to materialise, it'll be too late to do anything about it beyond the biggest "I told you so" of all time. As I've said before, article 50 isn't the lifeboat. It's the fucking iceberg.

[Omeros]

If you want your mind truly boggled,the Tories managed to get more local councillors in bloody Scotland, even now.

True, but only because the Labour vote has collapsed and the Tories are scooping up the pro-Union vote. The SNP were still the overwhelming victors in Scotland, the Tories have 'jumped' from a bad third to a poor second.

[Tribble]

The problem with the Referendum is that no-one thought to ask what form Brexit should take, so now we're in a situation where no-one has a clue what's going to happen, or just how screwed the country is going to be. All we know for certain is by the time the promised £350 million per week fails to materialise, it'll be too late to do anything about it beyond the biggest "I told you so" of all time. As I've said before, article 50 isn't the lifeboat. It's the fucking iceberg.

Had the EEA membership been a separate option it probably would have won IMO.

Technically Article 127 of the EEA agreement may need to be invoked as well, and the EEC legislation would have to be formally repealed.

[SpottedKitty]

The SNP were still the overwhelming victors in Scotland

Well, sort of. E.g. in our city council election they gained a few seats, but in the county council lost a few. Still the same effect in both, though, No Overall Control.

[The Romulan Republic]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

Sorry TRR but your rampent ignorance of politics beyond your shore is showing here.

Now, I see no need for insults, but if that's how you want to do this...

Your politics is sane? really? Who won the popular vote over there, exactly?

Don't remind me.

But I did not call the situation in America sane. I said that it looks almost rational in comparison with Britain. Which is pretty much damning with very faint praise.

Geert Wilders has the 2nd largest party in the Dutch parliament purely on his islamaphobic policies, Le Pen is probably coming second in the French presidential election based on xenophobia , the Austrian's nearly ended up with a xenophobic president last year as well.

Which is horrible, but Brexit is based on xenophobia too and won, and the people who botched the process are now likely to get rewarded with a larger majority.

Get back to me when (God forbid) Wilders or La Pen actually wins.

Or I suppose we could just agree that they're all shit and leave it at that.

UKIP, the BNP, National Front etc have got literally nothing going on in the democratic process on a domestic level. The Maybot 3000 has not yet started shooting immigrants out of cannons mounted on the white cliffs, last I checked anyway. She's been consistent in her Home Office work by discriminating against everyone equally. Pretty much the same in the current position.

No, but the xenophobes have managed to pretty much tear their country from the EU, move Europe perceptibly close to the days of little kingdoms warring with each other, and likely ensured crippling economic retaliation from the EU and quite possibly the loss by secession of half their country.

And as far as domestic violence against immigrants is concerned, their was a large spike in hate crimes recorded following the Brexit vote... Same shit in the US after Dickless won the White House, actually.

If you want your mind truly boggled,the Tories managed to get more local councillors in bloody Scotland, even now.

You're kind of proving my point about British politics being insane.

[Tribble]

There has been a general shift towards the right wing and the rise of right wing extremism in all western countries. The UK and USA are ahead of the curve atm, but they are hardly alone here.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Looking at the BBC map of the 2015 results, it's hilarious how the SNP won all but 2 constituencies in Scotland. The Conservatives retained one of the larger areas on the border, but the sole area Labour held on to was tiny. In both of those, the SNP was a very close second. Much as I'd love to see them take all of Scotland, realistically the only way they can go is down.

[The Romulan Republic]

There has been a general shift towards the right wing and the rise of right wing extremism in all western countries. The UK and USA are ahead of the curve atm, but they are hardly alone here.

Sadly, this is largely true.

Canada appears to have avoided the worst of it so far, but with the seeming rising dissatisfaction with Trudeau, I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop here too.

I will say that I take some comfort in the fact that Trump lost the popular vote, as warped as it is that he's President despite that. And it may be (if he fails to hold onto power) that his utter incompetence will go a long way towards discrediting the far Right for a time. But to be sure to make it stick, we need a stronger progressive alternative.

[streetad]

If you want your mind truly boggled,the Tories managed to get more local councillors in bloody Scotland, even now.

True, but only because the Labour vote has collapsed and the Tories are scooping up the pro-Union vote. The SNP were still the overwhelming victors in Scotland, the Tories have 'jumped' from a bad third to a poor second.

Traditional Labour voters being able to be persuaded to vote for the Tories is a seismic, unprecedented shift in Scottish politics, though. Scotland has traditionally had one of the most tribal political scenes around. One of the reasons the SNP has been able to do so well is that unionist voters are so bitterly divided.

The SNP finished about even (actually up a handful of seats due to boundary changes) compared to the last time these seats were contested in 2012, which was a breakthrough election for them. A fairly good result considering how long they have been in government but they were expecting to do much better based on their results in 2015 and 2016. They have gone backwards since those elections. They expected to be able to scoop up a big chunk of the remaining Labour vote through 24/7 Tory bashing but this did not materialise.

The Tories will be much happier with the results than the SNP. If only because it makes the Nationalist's narrative that Scottish people are uniquely more progressive than other nations and the Tories are an alien 'English party harder to push.

[His Divine Shadow]

Leftist who describe this as a culture war and "people are just more racist now" seems more like leftist who just want to wash their hands of their involvement in the thing known as globalization, which is the root cause of growing populism and nationalism. Mark Blyth goes into detail on this, and also points out an important fact, if it's just that people are more racist, you're fucked. If it's economic root causes finding the wrong scapegoats, then there's something that can be done.

http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.100 ... uklQ%3D%3D

The racism diagnosis as a “convenient truth”?

Let us assume all the studies cited actually say what the proponents of the “culture trumps economics” camp say they do. What is the relevant counterfactual here? That the economy does not matter? That 30 years of rising inequality, job insecurity and income stagnation, further em-bedded in Europe in a near-decade-long economic crisis in which lower income groups bore the brunt of the adjustment via austerity simply do not matter? That would beg a few rather obvious questions.

First, if this economic backdrop does not matter, why not? It certainly seemed to matter the last time the right came to power in Europe in the 1930s. Migration was not the issue then, unemployment was.23 Policy-wise, does that mean states today can raise inequality and unemployment to the stratosphere and not worry?

Second, when times were better for these income groups, such as during the golden ages of 1945-75 and again in the late 1990s, such sentiments seemed to be quite absent. What explains their emergence at this point? After all, in the case of Trump, the voters in fi ve states that delivered the election to Trump had previously voted for Obama – twice. It cannot be the observation phenomenon itself, since that would confuse cause and effect.

Third, why does this research only examine the right-wing reaction? This body of research seems to be rather blind to the fact that there is a left-wing version of this phenomenon that stretches from Bernie Sanders to Pablo Iglesias and back again. New Left parties and movements mobilise directly on the issues of economic insecurity and anti-elitism, yet they are decidedly anti-racist. They also appeared at much the same time as the New Right parties gained strength and have, in many cases, comparable vote shares.

Perhaps then it is worth considering what such a diag-nosis allows politically. It allows the centre-left and the centre-right parties that abandoned their traditional lower income constituents for more affluent voters in the 1990s and who built the creditor’s paradise that squeezes them today to claim that they did nothing wrong. That building the creditor’s paradise was either good policy or irrelevant, since if “they’re all just racists” – or “deplorables” as Secretary Clinton recently called such voters in the US – then the policies that parties foisted on their traditional constituencies in the 1990s and 2000s, policies that were commodificatory, insecurity-making and income-skewing, need neither further examination nor reform.

None of this denies that many European voters, and US voters for that matter, may be racist, but it does draw into question why such a diagnosis is gain-ing traction now. Nor does it need explanation that many Trump supporters were rich, for the simple fact that he was the Republican canditate. After all, rich Americans tend to vote Republican. What is more important for the argument here is that while such a diagnosis is conveni-ent for the currents incumbents on the left who are re-sponsible for a lost decade, it will prove absolutely fatal for the EU if this diagnosis is embraced.

In this article he also trashed the stats people have brought out to support culture over economics argument.

[The Romulan Republic]

"Its not about racism, its just about how bad globalization is", is both somewhat contradictory, and playing into the Alt. Right's attempts to obfuscate the issues. Both are a factor, but to deny the former is dishonest.

But then, I'm used to the Bernie or Bust types being largely indistinguishable from the Alt. Right.

[Zaune]

That 30 years of rising inequality, job insecurity and income stagnation, further em-bedded in Europe in a near-decade-long economic crisis in which lower income groups bore the brunt of the adjustment via austerity simply do not matter?

Of course it matters, it just had absolutely fuck-all to do with immigration; total net population growth in this country is something like a quarter of one percent per year. It's a pittance! It's barely at the level we need to maintain a functioning economy. But the redtops made foreigners a scapegoat and the majority of the Great British public lapped it up, and nobody on the "maybe we shouldn't go extinct" side of the debate has been allowed to get a word in edgeways.

And I quite frankly don't have the fucking energy to fight it anymore. Even though I strongly suspect that when we've finally driven all the Muslims and Eastern Europeans out of this country, the disabled and long-term unemployed like myself are going to be the next target along with the Jews.

[Simon_Jester]

What it comes down to is that there are economic dislocations caused by globalism, and social dislocations caused by progress.

Everyone agrees that the first kind of dislocation is a problem, outside of a relative handful of neoliberals who are to economics what Dr. Nick is to medicine. Unfortunately, there are a lot of billionaires who love their Dr. Nick diagnoses.

Racists and certain other groups (religious fundamentalists) are also opposed to the second kind of dislocation, whereas centrists tend to not care very much and the left actively approves of it.

The modern wave of right-wing movements tends to try and tie the two categories of dislocation together and present a single 'menu' of changes that they claim will 'fix' both problems. By blaming economic troubles on immigrants, they can address the economic troubles in the eyes of their constituents, while also pushing the 'racist' button.

In 2016, all Americans wanted some kind of economic reform. Donald Trump is, God help us, a good example of what it looks like when the American right tries to offer economic reform to the general public.