Home » Posts tagged 'Margaret Thatcher'
Tag Archives: Margaret Thatcher
Time for fun
The Church of England is to invite suggestions from the public on who should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. (Yes, I know, this bypasses the question about whether there should be a new archbishop or an Anglican Church at all. But let’s not spoil the fun.
The general unbelieving public will probably not take part, other than to make improper suggestions in language unfamiliar to your local vicar. Most Christians who are not Anglicans won’t bother; evangelical Anglicans will shift uncomfortably in their seats because they quote the Bible verse that says “Christ is the head of the church” rather than the King, even if, or especially if, he passes the role down to, say, Jacob Rees-Mogg. Catholics won’t bother because their pope is the successor of St Peter and is elected by a bunch of cardinals who claim to be guided by God. The current pope, Francisco, had no illusions about who chose him. As the smoke rose from the chimney above the Cistine Chapel after the vote, he apparently turned to his fellow cardinals and said, “May God forgive you!” As for the King having the final say, at least once under Thatcher’s governments she vetoed the church’s choice. I suppose he “wasn’t one of us”!
We should look for nothing but fun from this charade. The only alternative is to be violently sick!
Rishinomics and its discontents
Quite a neat summary here (by Elliott Chappell in today’s Labour List email) of yesterday’s spending review based on Rishinomics:
“Our health emergency is not yet over and our economic emergency has only just begun,” Rishi Sunak told us as he launched into his spending review. 2.5 million public sector workers will see their pay frozen – including 90% of police, 80% of fire service and 75% of prison officers, at least 80% of secondary school teachers and 75% of those in primary schools. This, remember, just a week after the PM unveiled the biggest investment in defence since the Cold War. The Chancellor announced a new £4bn ‘levelling up’ fund that will see MPs bid for money in what looks to be the same mechanism that led to the controversy over the Towns Fund – in which the Tories prioritised spending to marginal seats ahead of the last election. He was silent on the £20 uplift to Universal Credit – the emergency top-up grudgingly given earlier in the pandemic. Failing to extend it will slash annual incomes for 16 million households by £1,040 in April. And, of course, the Chancellor rounded off all that (and much more) by going back on the Tory manifesto promise to keep UK aid spending at 0.7% of gross national income.”
“Rishinomics“ is what I’ve called it for fun, of course. It’s neoliberalism really. And this is how it always works. It isn’t simply that capitalists hate the poor (though they often do). Capitalists need the poor. So they create poverty. An executive in a finance company housed in the World Financial Centre in New York, Craig Dinsell, explained some of it to me over lunch in the Metropolitan Museum restaurant in 2012. Low-paid workers can’t expect to be paid good wages, or even half-decent wages. That would cause inflation. Actually, low pay is good for them because it gives them an incentive to better themselves and get themselves out of poverty. It gives them ambition. Without that, they would just stay in their menial jobs for life. That’s “human nature” apparently (I’d been waiting for that). This little narrative, of course, ignores the fact that poverty more often destroys ambition and hope, it grinds people down. The truth is that low pay remains part of the system because it is essential to the pursuit of profit, although Craig didn’t quite put it like that—he was ruminating on “human nature”. So this, as far as I could tell, was the best of all possible worlds—There Is No Alternative. Tina lives.[1]
I knew Craig Dinsell in the late 1960s, when he was 20. We attended an evangelical Baptist church in North London, where he played the role of gadfly to the church establishment and sang Bob Dylan songs. Now, as I said, he moves in high circles and is himself part of a rather bigger establishment (“We were invited to a dinner for Tony Blair”, he told me. “He seemed a nice guy”). Craig is a nice liberal. He reads the New York Times and advised me not to watch Fox News. I’m sure he voted for Biden.
And in that there is a warning. We justifiably feel relief at Biden’s victory. But while Reagan was the first who decisively took the neoliberal path, it was so decisive that none of his successors or their followers ever abandoned it. Including Biden. As Brando Marcetic notes in “Yesterday’s Man: the case against Joe Biden”:
“While Clinton’s neoliberal politics alienated many voters, Biden was one of the earliest adopters of neoliberalism, successfully pushing the [Democratic] party to become more like him.”
If Marcetic is right (and I confess I have only read the introduction to the book so far, but it sounds likely to me) then while the tone, the style, and most of the politics of Biden may be very different from the horrors of the last 4 years, we should beware of wanting to “get back to normal”. For “normal” still includes neoliberalism. And Joe needs to be watched. And pushed.
As for Rishi, don’t ask.
[1] Tina was the name given by cabinet minister Norman St John Stevas to Margret Thatcher because of her frequent use of the phrase “There is no alternative” to justify her neoliberal policies. In the end he had to go.
Is no news good news?
I have hardly watched any news since just before Christmas. And you know how it is when you’ve been on holiday and when you come back it takes time to understand that you are back and that you will have to adjust to what is called normality, as opposed to the beach, or the mountains, or the Metropolitan Museum? Well, I’ve been away from the news for two weeks (apart from an accidental, careless sight of the Home Secretary telling the nation that asylum seekers are only genuine if they make their applications in the first safe country they cross on their journey and not bother us here; at that point I fumbled for the off-switch, rushed out of the room, and went back into news-blocking mode. Oh, but before I found the off-switch I caught a glance of a newly inaugurated Brazilian president, and then I was really desperate for the off-switch.
Anyway, yesterday morning I watched the Andrew Marr Show and found I didn’t understand much of what was being said. There was Theresa May repeating the words of her old recordings. When she felt that perhaps they had lost some of the impact they once had she reverted to that real old-time-religion favourite: “On the 29th of March we will leave the European Union, take back control of our borders, control of our laws, and control of our waters with a deal that is in the interests of all the British people”, she sang. Her voice took on a slight Thatcher intonation, and the whole performance, with the accompanying jangly necklace, was obviously designed to bring the likes of Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg to a premature orgasm. As a matter of fact, I never really did understand what “control of our waters” actually meant, but now, since my news-blocking effort, I don’t understand what any of it means. Still, life goes on and I must try to revise my Brexit vocab.
Then there was Labour Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth, who also repeated a lot of old songs, though without the jangly necklace, about the damage Tory policies were doing. The songs all spoke the truth (and I cheered up a bit) but then he seemed unable to answer any of the really interesting questions, like what Labour’s own policy on social care and the NHS would actually be. From his first words, I think he was saying something like “We’ll look to see what the Tories are offering and then we’ll …” and I felt the urge to block the news again. Then he was asked whether his plan for the NHS would be full public ownership like in the old days. He muttered something about “there will always be a role for the private sector”. This sounded like a kind of partnership – a public-private partnership even. This has usually been code for “private”, both under Tory and Labour governments. These schemes are ones where private calls the shots, makes everything more expensive and rakes in the profit. That’s its purpose. So Jonathan’s words were worrying. Because many of us thought those days would be over under the new politics. Not that we want to go back to the old days, far from it. We thought we would go forward to a democratically accountable public ownership, in which workers and users of services would call the shots. That was never the case in the old days. The old nationalised industries and public services were run by more or less the same people who ran them when they were private. And they ran them on the same lines. At the end of the day they were supposed to make a profit, like their capitalist predecessors. And they mostly did.
It’s time to tell a story. Long years ago, when Sir Keith Joseph was Education Secretary, I interviewed him for an audio magazine for the blind. We touched on the private versus public question. He agreed that publicly owned outfits make a profit: “Oh, yes, they make a profit, of course, but – well, look at that splendid jumper you’re wearing. I don’t know where you got it, where did you buy it?”
“I don’t remember,” I replied nervously. “Marks & Spencer’s probably.”
“Very well, then. What do you want us to do? Nationalise Marks and Spencer’s? And what would happen then? They’d say, ‘You can’t have the colour you want – we’ll choose it for you; you can’t have the pattern you want – we’ll choose it for you; you can’t have the style you want – we’ll choose it for you.’ Is that want you want?”
I can’t remember my answer, but anyway he slowly calmed down. Of course, he wasn’t really worried about my rights, or customer satisfaction, or the service provided. His real concern was that in a publicly owned operation the profits would go to the wrong people: instead of going into the pockets and coffers of his friends they would go to the state, where they might be spent on improving the service. Of course, in “the old days” governments often spent the money on things that, if we’d been asked, we would have vetoed. But we weren’t asked. That’s why now, after Corbyn’s election, the eyes of some of us lit up when we heard the words “democratically accountable” attached to the words “public ownership”. And that’s why my eyes glazed over and I was tempted to head for the news-blocker when Ashworth mentioned “a role for the private sector”. But I thought, No, I’ve closed that door behind me. I must now find my way back to being a responsible citizen. It’s difficult though. There aren’t that many role models.
The other thing I noticed yesterday was that America is in lockdown. That sounds uncomfortable. Like when, during the dockers’ strike in the 1970s the Heath government said they would “sequestrate” the union’s funds. “By heck,” said union leader Hugh Scanlon, “We’re going to be sequestrated – that sounds painful!” But Trump clearly doesn’t understand how workers, even those in government departments, feel when they’re sent home or have to work without pay. “They’re 100% behind me,” declared Trump. Yes, and hopefully they’re all armed to the teeth!