Sir Keir’s management

I purposely call it ‘management’ because currently at least, we don’t want management, we want inspiration – if it frightens the horses a bit, so be it.

Jeremy Corbyn gave that inspiration.

I fear that Keir Starmer doesn’t.

Blair Fix is a heterodox economist, whose article I’m afraid I think is ‘overthought’ and also I do not actually agree with – but he does quote this gem:

Groups governed by belief systems that internalise social control can be much more successful than groups that must rely on external forms of social control. For all of these (and probably other) reasons, we can expect many belief systems to be massively fictional in their portrayal of the world. [David Sloan Wilson in Darwin’s Cathedral]

So we have Labour suggesting their previous manifesto was ‘unrealistic’ and undeliverable – when it certainly was not. They are sumerged in the Tory economic belief system, which is certainly massively fictional

Isn’t that actually – if we looked a bit more deeply – an internalised social control?

There have actually been too many focus groups and not enough original thinking.

The Tories would be trying to influence and ‘bend’ thinking – by fair means or more probably, foul, in order to influence perceptions. Hence all their right wing think tanks – which are rather, in fact, much more for persuasion than thinking.

Labour seems to be enveloped – Stockholm syndrome like – in the outlook that they must respond to what people are thinking.

They need to wonder why people are thinking as they are.

People have been deceived. Responding to their deluded thoughts, influenced by right wing ‘policy based evidence’ should not ever now be Labour’s modus operandi.

Perhaps Blair was successful using this system – but the airwaves have been submerged in right wing thinking ever since – on the basis of nothing other than ‘bending’ thought.

Labour in 2019 won the vote of the majority of ‘younger’ voters – under 40 year olds. At the time the media referred to this as a “Youthquake”.

Youth are still Labour’s heartland and indeed they are the future – but they need to be motivated and INSPIRED!

Rumours that student loans will suffer more stringent repayment terms should play into Labour’s hand’s.

I suggest that Labour have to ignore the more mature voters – those that are inspired will vote for them – those that fail to be – never will.

And they are also a lost cause.

But let’s be frank – they are dying out…

Comments

  1. Schofield -

    MMT ought to be beating the drum louder to point out that believing the government has no money creation powers of its own is in reality institutionalising or “internalising” the sociopathic!

    The rich in particular are able to act selfishly and claim through the media and politicians they recruit that the amount they are taxed is unjust given their disproportionate contribution to the well-being of society through their marketplace activity of deploying capital.

    Michael Hudson of course comes close to saying this but doesn’t engage in the psychological reasoning underlying sociopathy.

  2. Schofield -

    Perhaps my message isn’t clear in my first post but if you regularly propagandise that a government can only get its spending money through taxation (and borrowing) then it becomes easy to claim your own personal level of taxation is unjust. Of course, this has been going on for centuries in the UK:-

    http://financeandsociety.ed.ac.uk/article/view/3017/3999

    This seems a trite point but it’s obviously a powerful driver of of right-wing politics. Obfuscate how a fiat monetary system really works and it becomes Britannia Chained or at least knee-capped!

    1. Peter May -

      All good points…

  3. Schofield -

    An important paper that needs to be read in conjunction with Dorn’s paper referenced above is Munro’s entitled “Usury, Calvinism, and Credit in Protestant England: from the Sixteenth Century to the Industrial Revolution.”

    Essentially Munro’s argument is that it was Calvin who weakened the Catholic Church’s restrictions on usury and ruled interest on commercial lending was not an affront to God. Of course, this tied in neatly with Calvin’s Predestination argument. This was important because in addition to increased state spending (1694 introduction of banknotes) especially for war it helped lead to the Industrial Revolution. What, of course, it also allowed was an increase in sociopathy as the 2007/2008 Financial Crash clearly shows!

    https://www.economics.utoronto.ca/public/workingPapers/tecipa-439.pdf

Write a reply or comment Comments Policy

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *