Make informed decisions.
4 stars based on
T he political situation in Britain is defined by the fractures that have opened up over Brexit and in the Labour Party. This journal supported a vote to leave the European Union on 23 June for two main reasons—first, and as a matter of principle, we oppose the EU as an engine for imposing neoliberalism in increasingly authoritarian forms, and, secondly, Brexit would cause a major crisis for British and, to a lesser degree, world capitalism.
This latter judgement has been vindicated by developments since the referendum. The truth is that one can argue the toss about this: No, the real problem lies in the disruption Brexit might cause to stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication global positioning of British capitalism and thereby to the dominant capitalist networks.
More alarming for the custodians of the Union stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication the example the English vote sets to other dissident electorates.
This is a bit of a problem for May since, whatever else the more than 17 million people who voted to leave the EU on 23 June had in mind, they wanted things to change. Elsewhere in this journal Charlie Kimber analyses the reasons why Brexit triumphed on 23 June.
The strongest single predictor of how an individual voted was their educational qualifications, themselves largely a proxy for socio-economic position. The referendum rejected the EU, but it was also a vote of no confidence in the state of British society. Often this was articulated in reactionary, Little Englander and indeed racist terms. As Kimber shows, the consciousness behind the vote was far more mixed and ambivalent.
Conjunctural phenomena too depend on organic movements to be sure, but they do not have any very far-reaching historical significance; they give rise to political criticism of a minor, day-to-day character, which has as its subject top political leaders and personalities with direct governmental responsibilities.
The majority, along with the bulk of trade union officialdom, offered more or less radical versions of the pro-EU case being put by the leaderships of all the major parties with the exception of UKIP and by most serious capitalist interests in Britain. The minority that called for a Leave vote largely waged a principled campaign, chiefly in the shape of Lexit, opposing the EU on an internationalist and anti-capitalist basis, but it was too weak to make its voice heard on the national stage.
This allowed the Tory right and UKIP to pose as the spokespeople of the poor and marginalised, whom the left largely failed to represent. Rather than stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication over how we voted on 23 June, it would be more sensible to recognise this shared failure. Does this mean that the effect of the referendum has been to push Britain sharply to the right, as many pro-Remain leftists claim?
In this she was aided by the bungling of the leaders of the supposedly triumphant pro-Leave Tories—Boris Johnson and Michael Gove taking each other out like characters in the final scene of a Tarantino movie, and the equally hapless Andrea Leadsom blowing herself away in the space of a weekend. Further to the right, UKIP, which should have been well placed to capitalise on victory in a referendum it helped to achieve, has instead imploded.
Easterhouse modernisation, which focuses on fighting the kind of poverty found on the Glasgow estate after which it is named, and Soho modernisation, which is all about social liberalism.
With this approach, of course we would still help the very poor and of course we would fight injustices based on gender, race and sexuality, but the Party would adopt a relentless focus on governing in the interests of ordinary, working people…. These people have modest means, but they work hard, they want to stand on their own two feet, and they want to give their children the best start in life they can. They are natural conservatives for precisely the reason that the stakes they have are small.
They want stability, certainty, and steady leadership by politicians who have their interests at heart. In particular, they are suspicious of politicians making big promises and dismissive of excitable talk about radical policies. To them, radicalism means risk, and they know they are the ones who lose out when radicalism turns to rot. She is going to be preoccupied with managing the struggle unleashed by Brexit between antagonistic forces, crucially within the cabinet. Despite the self-immolation of the Leave leaders in the struggle to succeed Cameron, she confronts a Tory right reinvigorated by the referendum victory and pressing for a hard Brexit—as complete a break as possible from the EU, which will allow Britain to float free as a global free market trading power.
While in continental Europe, the EU, first with the Single European Act ofthen with Economic and Monetary Union EMUand most recently with austerity, has provided the mechanism through which neoliberalism has been imposed. In Britain, however, the shift in a free market direction preceded these changes and took place at the national level, most decisively under Thatcher. It is in any case crucial to understand that this ultra-Thatcherite conception is not shared by the dominant capitalist interests in Britain.
They are in mourning over the referendum result and are determined to minimise the effects of Brexit. Already the lines of battle are becoming clear.
Fear that this access is under threat helps to explain the Japanese demarche in early September. The Financial Times explains: Before June, Japanese companies barely had to think about where they should set up in Europe. The answer, in most cases, was Britain. Over the past five decades, about 1, Japanese firms have used the UK in effect as a springboard into Europe… Stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication Japan, it is not only future investments in the UK—in areas such as nuclear energy, autos, public transport, the internet-of-things and pharmaceuticals—that Brexit has put at risk.
It has also hung a question mark over existing factories that employ someBritish workers. Many Japanese companies—for example, the car firms Nissan, Honda and Toyota—specialise in producing and exporting goods. But the Single Market is in services as well as goods.
British services exports are inseparable from the role of the City, since financial services and insurance play the predominant role. Interestingly, 8, companies based elsewhere in the EU have passports to operate in the UK. This reflects the centrality of London: As far as the EU is concerned, access to the Single Market is inseparable from free movement of labour.
Thus Norway and Switzerland, non-EU states that participate in the Single Market, are required to give free movement to EU citizens though Switzerland is trying to qualify this. Information services will often have two important characteristics.
Stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication, they involve large economies of scale and benefit from geographic clustering which improves the flow of knowledge and know-how. Second, they will often exist in order precisely to serve the needs of a large market in goods and the other types of services —as is obvious with, for example, international banking and commercial law.
Nevertheless, the Brexiteers have been allowed to define the referendum result as stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication rejection of free movement of labour. Despicably, right-wing Labour MPs who campaigned for Remain are now selling the pass on free movement. Rachel Reeves, for example, has written: This underlines the importance of the anti-racist campaigning that Stand Up to Racism is increasingly driving.
This must now include the new front of defending free movement. Negotiating a new trade deal with the EU on whatever terms could take much longer than the two year lead-up to departure from the Union laid down in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The Financial Times expresses widespread ruling class concerns that.
The country would face, among other things, immediate tariffs on its exports to the EU, bureaucratic customs checks and loss of passporting rights for services. Some politicians compare it to falling off a cliff edge. But it is a recipe for a divided cabinet. Reporting on the row over leaving the Customs Union, the Financial Times commented: After all, Mr Hammond and the Treasury are unlikely to be able to hold their ground on this matter if they did not have some backing from the prime minister.
EU leaders will also be caught between contradictory pressures—to minimise the disruption caused by Brexit, to discourage any other member states from leaving, and to accommodate increasingly vocal anti-EU forces in their own domestic scenes. But May has a particularly tortuous path to tread between the demands of big capital and the dreams of the Tory right. But this would increase her difficulties, by swelling the number of Europhobic backbenchers striving for a free market Utopia beyond the EU.
Brexit also figures in the second key feature of the political situation—the struggle between Jeremy Corbyn and the bulk of the Parliamentary Labour Party PLP. But many in the PLP may have feared that this stance, together with the implosion of the Tory party, might dangerously increase his credibility as an alternative prime minister.
The PLP seems to have relied on the mass resignations demoralising Corbyn into capitulation. Then, when this failed, they fumbled over who to run against him, ending up with the weaker of the two challengers. The sheer ineptitude of the revolt suggests that ideology played a big role.
Their problem is that the ground is shifting under them. Since the general election, Labour Party membership has grown from aroundmembers to in July this yearmembers and affiliated supporters plus stock broker trader difference between socialism and communicationregistered supporters. This influx, overwhelmingly of Corbyn supporters, has made the structures of the Labour Party the vehicle of a mass movement that, whatever the uncertainties about what it is in favour of, rejects the New Labour embrace of neoliberalism and imperialism.
The fact that Syriza in Greece and Podemos in the Spanish state have challenged social democratic parties like Labour does not undermine the comparison. Corbyn won an increased overall majority 62 percent compared to 59 percent the year beforewith substantial majorities in the three categories of members, affiliated supporters and registered supporters. The old power structure, in which the axis between the PLP and the trade union bureaucracy could contain left-wing surges among the membership, has broken down.
In its place we have a situation of dual power between Corbyn, legitimised by the support of a growing stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication membership, and the PLP, with the trade stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication leaders hovering in the background as power brokers.
The disequilibrium will continue in part because the right has retreated from its earlier threats to split Labour. For some of the PLP, not splitting implies a limited truce with Corbyn. The Telegraph reported in the lead-up to the Labour Party conference:. They will demand a list of assurances from Mr Corbyn as a sign of his goodwill before pledging their support. These include allowing them greater say in the running of the shadow cabinet, giving his support to a return to shadow cabinet elections, and dropping the threat that MPs who opposed his leadership will face de-selection.
All in all, this is a funny kind of truce. It would therefore be potentially a fatal mistake for Corbyn to follow his re-election with substantial concessions to the right. Wasting time trying to get the right onside carries a real danger that Corbyn will lose impetus and demoralise his own supporters. But, in the lead-up to the conference the Corbyn team was reported to be courting ex-shadow ministers such as Dan Jarvis.
Instead of pursuing this kind of broad church approach, Corbynism needs to become a real movement with the ideological coherence and practical heft really to take Labour in a different direction. The obstacles are partly practical. In the huge rallies he addressed all over the country during the summer, Corbynism certainly felt like a mass movement.
But this movement so far has been most politically effective when taking part in the essentially atomised activity of voting for Corbyn online. This sense of communality is reinforced through the very effective use of social media by the Corbyn team and by the rallies.
This is a crucial point of difficulty for Corbyn. But these are two very hostile terrains, where he is relatively weak and surrounded by enemies. Where he is strong is in his support among the mass membership, but this is stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication and atomised. This makes a lot of sense, but the question is how to turn stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication a successful conference into sustained organisation in working class communities that stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication widen support for Corbyn and his policies.
Moreover, stock broker trader difference between socialism and communication organisation has to be built on struggle. But what should the focus of the struggle be?
Against the right within the Labour Party, say by deselecting the most obnoxious MPs? The alternative is a more outward looking orientation towards resistance to austerity, racism and war.