@MrsB, some people in authority who call themselves liberal have ceased to be liberal, at least as the term used to be understood. Historically, liberals strongly approved of nation States, and were willing to trust the people. But, many of the governing class now see nation States as primitive, and view the people as a bigoted, feral, mass who need to be kept under control. Today's populists are reacting to this. They aren't seeking to overthrow democracies, but rather, to restore them.
@MrsB, some people in authority who call themselves liberal have ceased to be liberal, at least as the term used to be understood. Historically, liberals strongly approved of nation States, and were willing to trust the people. But, many of the governing class now see nation States as primitive, and view the people as a bigoted, feral, mass who need to be kept under control. Today's populists are reacting to this. They aren't seeking to overthrow democracies, but rather, to restore them.
Well said. Liberals today are just slow socialism. The Deirdre video is spot on.
She was a man for 40yrs until 1995 - I'd never noticed. She's superb on economics, liberalism and the regressive Left.
The UK to manage nominal growth of about 4% (which is pretty much the same level as the last few years), but with inflation of close to 3%, that will just be around 1% in real terms.
UK unemployment to stay at around the current levels, so the psychological impact of the slowing growth will be modest.
Spain to surpass Italy in terms of PPP GDP per capita.
A modest continued recovery in the Eurozone, with GDP continuing to expand at 1.5% to 2%. Unemployment will continue to fall slowly, albeit from very high levels.
Sterling will weaken further, and our exports will not expand as much as hoped.
How do you not have PPP with countries that have the same currency? Or are you assuming one or both might not finish the year in the Euro?
I think you are being pessimistic about UK growth. We will probably grow 0.6 in Q4 and I think the first half of next year will be fairly strong as well with a slow down later in the year. I will be disappointed if growth does not start with a 2 though.
@Nickpalmer I think a rapproachment between US and Russia is possible, what you then have is puppet governments in eastern Europe and the continued fracturing of the EU as Putin meddles to expand his influence and trump looks on clueless/disinterested. The real ongoing story is the collapse of the hegenomy of western liberal democracy as a form of government for people around the world to aspire to, democratic governments are being replaced with cynical authoriatarian governments everywhere. On one level it doesn't surprise me because over the last three decades liberal democracy has failed over and over again, there have been multiple foreign policy failures ie Iraq, the state has been dismantled in pursuit largely of private profit, governments have literally sacrificed themselves and their people at the alter of the inevitable forces of progress and globalisation which enriches a tiny minority whilst destroying jobs and creating instability. The stage managed democracy with acceptable opinion controlled by a compliant media isnt delivering the way it has for the last century, in fact 2016 was the year it fell conclusively apart. I don't know what comes next but have no optimism. There will be many more suprises to come . it will be a case of the unthinkable becoming possible, but in ways we cant predict.
Back in the Thirties, the radical right and left argued that democracy was a bad thing and rule by a fuhrer/Duce/Dictatorship of the Proletariat was the future. Those arguments aren't made very much now. Rather, the radical right and left argue (with some justification) that it's centrist politicians who frustrate democracy.
Back in the Thirties, the radical right and left argued that democracy was a bad thing and rule by a fuhrer/Duce/Dictatorship of the Proletariat was the future. Those arguments aren't made very much now. Rather, the radical right and left argue (with some justification) that it's centrist politicians who frustrate democracy.
Back in the Thirties, the radical right and left argued that democracy was a bad thing and rule by a fuhrer/Duce/Dictatorship of the Proletariat was the future. Those arguments aren't made very much now. Rather, the radical right and left argue (with some justification) that it's centrist politicians who frustrate democracy.
Those who crave power will use any argument to get there. I'd rather they were honest about it.
@MrsB, some people in authority who call themselves liberal have ceased to be liberal, at least as the term used to be understood. Historically, liberals strongly approved of nation States, and were willing to trust the people. But, many of the governing class now see nation States as primitive, and view the people as a bigoted, feral, mass who need to be kept under control. Today's populists are reacting to this. They aren't seeking to overthrow democracies, but rather, to restore them.
This is nonsense and you know it. Liberals have always been internationalists and wanted nation states to work together in organisations such as the League of Nations, NATO and the UN. As to "trust the people", yes. liberals stand four square behind democracy and the democratic process and have always done so.
It was conservatives who opposed the extension of the franchise and wanted to keep power within the hands of the wealthy and landowners.
It is centralising parties such as the Conservatives and Labour who have always sought to tell people how to live their lives - they have systematically removed authority from local democracy and vested it in central Government and the civil service. If anyone views the electorate as a "mass to be kept under control" it is a conservative or a socialist.
As to today's populists who you seem to admire so much (presumably because they haven't yet existentially challenged the conservatives), I don't know whether they are democrats or not and I doubt they do either. They are good at anger but the anger is all they have - that's not to say it isn't justified and needs to be recognised but it's typical partisanship to blame "liberals". If anyone needs to shoulder the blame, it's conservatives but they aren't very good at that.
Back in the Thirties, the radical right and left argued that democracy was a bad thing and rule by a fuhrer/Duce/Dictatorship of the Proletariat was the future. Those arguments aren't made very much now. Rather, the radical right and left argue (with some justification) that it's centrist politicians who frustrate democracy.
I haven't noted much influence on government from Heseltine, Patten, Clarke or indeed Cable. In economic terms the radical right has been in charge since Thatcher dumped the 1945-79 promise of near-full employment and declared 'the market will provide'. Blair kept the faith in the form of PFI, sale and leaseback of central government offices, public-private partnerships in the MoD and more idiocy like it.
@neilh, I'm optimistic, because in general, Western electorates haven't resorted to violence against those who have let them down. They've acted peacefully to show their disapproval, which means they still buy into the democratic system. That's what was so good about the night of the Brexit vote, to witness a huge political change taking place without violence.
@MrsB, some people in authority who call themselves liberal have ceased to be liberal, at least as the term used to be understood. Historically, liberals strongly approved of nation States, and were willing to trust the people. But, many of the governing class now see nation States as primitive, and view the people as a bigoted, feral, mass who need to be kept under control. Today's populists are reacting to this. They aren't seeking to overthrow democracies, but rather, to restore them.
This is nonsense and you know it. Liberals have always been internationalists and wanted nation states to work together in organisations such as the League of Nations, NATO and the UN. As to "trust the people", yes. liberals stand four square behind democracy and the democratic process and have always done so.
It was conservatives who opposed the extension of the franchise and wanted to keep power within the hands of the wealthy and landowners.
It is centralising parties such as the Conservatives and Labour who have always sought to tell people how to live their lives - they have systematically removed authority from local democracy and vested it in central Government and the civil service. If anyone views the electorate as a "mass to be kept under control" it is a conservative or a socialist.
As to today's populists who you seem to admire so much (presumably because they haven't yet existentially challenged the conservatives), I don't know whether they are democrats or not and I doubt they do either. They are good at anger but the anger is all they have - that's not to say it isn't justified and needs to be recognised but it's typical partisanship to blame "liberals". If anyone needs to shoulder the blame, it's conservatives but they aren't very good at that.
hmmm is this why liberals are so keen on the eu then? Because it has been admitted by government ministers it is used to pass laws governments can't get past their electorates
@MrsB, some people in authority who call themselves liberal have ceased to be liberal, at least as the term used to be understood. Historically, liberals strongly approved of nation States, and were willing to trust the people. But, many of the governing class now see nation States as primitive, and view the people as a bigoted, feral, mass who need to be kept under control. Today's populists are reacting to this. They aren't seeking to overthrow democracies, but rather, to restore them.
This is nonsense and you know it. Liberals have always been internationalists and wanted nation states to work together in organisations such as the League of Nations, NATO and the UN. As to "trust the people", yes. liberals stand four square behind democracy and the democratic process and have always done so.
It was conservatives who opposed the extension of the franchise and wanted to keep power within the hands of the wealthy and landowners.
It is centralising parties such as the Conservatives and Labour who have always sought to tell people how to live their lives - they have systematically removed authority from local democracy and vested it in central Government and the civil service. If anyone views the electorate as a "mass to be kept under control" it is a conservative or a socialist.
As to today's populists who you seem to admire so much (presumably because they haven't yet existentially challenged the conservatives), I don't know whether they are democrats or not and I doubt they do either. They are good at anger but the anger is all they have - that's not to say it isn't justified and needs to be recognised but it's typical partisanship to blame "liberals". If anyone needs to shoulder the blame, it's conservatives but they aren't very good at that.
And this would be why the Tories are on 9 seats and the lib dems are on 329, right?
I've ten episodes of Westworld to watch - anything I should keep an eye open on?
Extraordinary amounts of nudity.
Really? I may need to persevere....
The Affair is excellent and two seasons in. It's well worth a watch if you can.
I thought the Affair, season 1, was excellent until its truly idiotic ending (apparently it was changed at the last minute when they decided to have a second season)
The coda was so bad it quite put me off. Is series 2 good?
It got back onto its feet. I'm jolly intolerant of crap TV that isn't deliberate popcorn - and it redeemed itself.
Best awkward sex is in Tell Me That You Love Me.
Only one season and so wincingly awful/well acted with marriage guidance counselling meme. All single hand cam realism that replicates cheap porn a la HBO.
1) There will not be a General Election. 2) Corbyn will still be Labour leader. 3) The Conservatives will be having regular polling leads (see point 2). 4) Article 50 will have been triggered. 5) UKIP will be struggling to find a new policy position. 6) Lib Dems will rise in the polls and continue to win locals, but will have more trouble in any parliamentary by-elections. 7) The SNP will start to suffer electorally from its years in power. 8) At least two MPs will resign from the government over Brexit: one from leave, and one more from remain. 9) Trump and Putin will have a falling out. 10) House of Lords reform will continue to be talked about, but will not be progressed (this one is a banker).
Of these 1, 3, and 4 are the ones that most match my own wishes.
And this would be why the Tories are on 9 seats and the lib dems are on 329, right?
Oh, wait...
I really don't understand the point you are trying to make.
Just because a party is popular doesn't make them right - Labour were very popular in 1997 and 2001 - did you think they were right ?
You're putting your party on a pedestal that relatively few people think is anything more than laughable on a national basis. I would have thought that was pretty self evident.
hmmm is this why liberals are so keen on the eu then? Because it has been admitted by government ministers it is used to pass laws governments can't get past their electorates
No, I voted LEAVE because the direction of travel of the EU is wrong. Working together with other nations and collaborating with them where possible and desirable isn't something to be avoided.
There are a range of issues from migration to climate change that require European countries (and however much some on here may not like it, we are geographically part of Europe) to work together. Leaving the EU doesn't mean leaving Europe or stopping collaboration.
@neilh, I'm optimistic, because in general, Western electorates haven't resorted to violence against those who have let them down. They've acted peacefully to show their disapproval, which means they still buy into the democratic system. That's what was so good about the night of the Brexit vote, to witness a huge political change taking place without violence.
hmmm is this why liberals are so keen on the eu then? Because it has been admitted by government ministers it is used to pass laws governments can't get past their electorates
No, I voted LEAVE because the direction of travel of the EU is wrong. Working together with other nations and collaborating with them where possible and desirable isn't something to be avoided.
There are a range of issues from migration to climate change that require European countries (and however much some on here may not like it, we are geographically part of Europe) to work together. Leaving the EU doesn't mean leaving Europe or stopping collaboration.
I was of course referring to the "liberal democrats" in particular and most of those such as guardian readers that regard themselves as liberal not you as an individual
@Stodge, I'm not blaming all liberals, least of all yourself.
However, arguments for ignoring the Brexit vote mostly come from those who would describe themselves as liberals.
Fair enough though others on here seem to take a different view.
I would conjecture a number of Conservative and Labour supporters voted REMAIN but if you are saying liberal-minded people tended to vote REMAIN, you may be right, you may be wrong, I've not given it any thought.
I have never said the vote to LEAVE should be ignored - it cannot be - but while I am convinced of my reasons for voting LEAVE, I'm far from convinced it will be the right decision for the country. So much will depend on the A50 negotiations and their outcome.
Voting against the past and present is easy, voting for the future is a lot harder and needs more thought. I am increasingly of the view the post-EU treaty needs proper scrutiny and debate and a referendum. To mask it by the partisan nature of a GE is wrong - it's much more important.
@neilh, I'm optimistic, because in general, Western electorates haven't resorted to violence against those who have let them down. They've acted peacefully to show their disapproval, which means they still buy into the democratic system. That's what was so good about the night of the Brexit vote, to witness a huge political change taking place without violence.
"Without a single bullet being fired”
Was it the bullet that achieved the result, or are you trying to be clever by deliberately misunderstanding?
And this would be why the Tories are on 9 seats and the lib dems are on 329, right?
Oh, wait...
I really don't understand the point you are trying to make.
Just because a party is popular doesn't make them right - Labour were very popular in 1997 and 2001 - did you think they were right ?
You're putting your party on a pedestal that relatively few people think is anything more than laughable on a national basis. I would have thought that was pretty self evident.
I didn't even mention the Liberal Democrats in my original post which you have clearly failed either to read or understand.
As with many others on here, you confuse being popular with being right. Mrs May is personally popular - that doesn't make her right.
I do not fear 2017 personally. I have taken a new job on almost double my last salary, my two-year-old daughter is bright, healthy and happy, and things going well we will buy a new family home in the spring and get some space after being cooped up in a two bed apartment in central London.
I am one of the lucky ones.
More broadly though, I expect to continue witnessing the slow retreat of Western liberal democracy.
It's been my privilege (age 38) to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, the crushing of Communist dictatorship, the rise of the Internet and the rapid decrease in global poverty wrought by globalisation.
But liberal democracy looks to have worn itself out.
The Iraq War was a political disillusionment; the global financial crisis the economic one. "Hard men" everywhere (Hungary, Poland, India, Russia, Turkey, China) are on the ascendant and the West no longer has the economic clout to influence (or ignore) it.
Trump is the icing on the cake. Evidence that the US system (if not our own) is rotten to the core. If he is not a true fascist, he at least happy to talk like one and there are no shortage of demented cat lovers who have convinced themselves that a dose of anti-freedom (for that is what illiberalism means) is a necessary corrective to an NYT editorial line they don't agree with.
Trump will accelerate the US's geopolitical decline, although it may take years for this to become certain. The Russia rapprochement makes sense, not as an alliance against Islamofascism -- which is frankly a minor irritant in the grand scheme of things -- but as a backdrop to a policy of confrontation with China. I cannot see it ending well.
Like Sean F I take comfort from the fact that Brexit was above all a democratic process, even if I profoundly disagree with the decision. We still hold democracy in high esteem in this country, or say we do. But how will we protect it as the world grows increasingly hostile to our values?
@neilh, I'm optimistic, because in general, Western electorates haven't resorted to violence against those who have let them down. They've acted peacefully to show their disapproval, which means they still buy into the democratic system. That's what was so good about the night of the Brexit vote, to witness a huge political change taking place without violence.
"Without a single bullet being fired”
Was it the bullet that achieved the result, or are you trying to be clever by deliberately misunderstanding?
Golly, you're certainly on 24/7 guard duty since your return.
I thought you'd enjoy the precise words of your hero* being quoted.
@neilh, I'm optimistic, because in general, Western electorates haven't resorted to violence against those who have let them down. They've acted peacefully to show their disapproval, which means they still buy into the democratic system. That's what was so good about the night of the Brexit vote, to witness a huge political change taking place without violence.
"Without a single bullet being fired”
Was it the bullet that achieved the result, or are you trying to be clever by deliberately misunderstanding?
Golly, you're certainly on 24/7 guard duty since your return.
I thought you'd enjoy the precise words of your hero* being quoted.
RCS - given the backloaded growth in 2016, 1% annual growth for 2017 implies very near to 0% quarter on quarter for the 4 announced numbers next year - do you really think it will be that bad?
I do not fear 2017 personally. I have taken a new job on almost double my last salary, my two-year-old daughter is bright, healthy and happy, and things going well we will buy a new family home in the spring and get some space after being cooped up in a two bed apartment in central London.
I am one of the lucky ones.
More broadly though, I expect to continue witnessing the slow retreat of Western liberal democracy.
It's been my privilege (age 38) to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, the crushing of Communist dictatorship, the rise of the Internet and the rapid decrease in global poverty wrought by globalisation.
But liberal democracy looks to have worn itself out.
The Iraq War was a political disillusionment; the global financial crisis the economic one. "Hard men" everywhere (Hungary, Poland, India, Russia, Turkey, China) are on the ascendant and the West no longer has the economic clout to influence (or ignore) it.
Trump is the icing on the cake. Evidence that the US system (if not our own) is rotten to the core. If he is not a true fascist, he at least happy to talk like one and there are no shortage of demented cat lovers who have convinced themselves that a dose of anti-freedom (for that is what illiberalism means) is a necessary corrective to an NYT editorial line they don't agree with.
Trump will accelerate the US's geopolitical decline, although it may take years for this to become certain. The Russia rapprochement makes sense, not as an alliance against Islamofascism -- which is frankly a minor irritant in the grand scheme of things -- but as a backdrop to a policy of confrontation with China. I cannot see it ending well.
Like Sean F I take comfort from the fact that Brexit was above all a democratic process, even if I profoundly disagree with the decision. We still hold democracy in high esteem in this country, or say we do. But how will we protect it as the world grows increasingly hostile to our values?
I certainly don't believe that Liberal Democracy has either worn itself out nor has found itself in retreat. What I believe has happened over the past few years is that those who believed that Liberal Democracy meant a left wing, soft socialist agenda would always win out have been roundly disabused of that notion - and that is no bad thing.
I am afraid your world view has blinded you to the fact that your particular notion of liberalism and democracy are not as widely held as you might think. That does not mean that either liberalism or democracy are under threat, simply that other opinions on what they mean for how we are governed are currently in the ascendant.
Comments
She was a man for 40yrs until 1995 - I'd never noticed. She's superb on economics, liberalism and the regressive Left.
Happy New Year to all PBers
I think you are being pessimistic about UK growth. We will probably grow 0.6 in Q4 and I think the first half of next year will be fairly strong as well with a slow down later in the year. I will be disappointed if growth does not start with a 2 though.
Hope 2017 is a good year for you.
The real ongoing story is the collapse of the hegenomy of western liberal democracy as a form of government for people around the world to aspire to, democratic governments are being replaced with cynical authoriatarian governments everywhere.
On one level it doesn't surprise me because over the last three decades liberal democracy has failed over and over again, there have been multiple foreign policy failures ie Iraq, the state has been dismantled in pursuit largely of private profit, governments have literally sacrificed themselves and their people at the alter of the inevitable forces of progress and globalisation which enriches a tiny minority whilst destroying jobs and creating instability. The stage managed democracy with acceptable opinion controlled by a compliant media isnt delivering the way it has for the last century, in fact 2016 was the year it fell conclusively apart.
I don't know what comes next but have no optimism. There will be many more suprises to come . it will be a case of the unthinkable becoming possible, but in ways we cant predict.
Back in the Thirties, the radical right and left argued that democracy was a bad thing and rule by a fuhrer/Duce/Dictatorship of the Proletariat was the future. Those arguments aren't made very much now. Rather, the radical right and left argue (with some justification) that it's centrist politicians who frustrate democracy.
It was conservatives who opposed the extension of the franchise and wanted to keep power within the hands of the wealthy and landowners.
It is centralising parties such as the Conservatives and Labour who have always sought to tell people how to live their lives - they have systematically removed authority from local democracy and vested it in central Government and the civil service. If anyone views the electorate as a "mass to be kept under control" it is a conservative or a socialist.
As to today's populists who you seem to admire so much (presumably because they haven't yet existentially challenged the conservatives), I don't know whether they are democrats or not and I doubt they do either. They are good at anger but the anger is all they have - that's not to say it isn't justified and needs to be recognised but it's typical partisanship to blame "liberals". If anyone needs to shoulder the blame, it's conservatives but they aren't very good at that.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-eu-is-used-to-bypass-national-democracy-home-office-minister-admits-a6680341.html
Oh, wait...
Just because a party is popular doesn't make them right - Labour were very popular in 1997 and 2001 - did you think they were right ?
Best awkward sex is in Tell Me That You Love Me.
Only one season and so wincingly awful/well acted with marriage guidance counselling meme. All single hand cam realism that replicates cheap porn a la HBO.
1) There will not be a General Election.
2) Corbyn will still be Labour leader.
3) The Conservatives will be having regular polling leads (see point 2).
4) Article 50 will have been triggered.
5) UKIP will be struggling to find a new policy position.
6) Lib Dems will rise in the polls and continue to win locals, but will have more trouble in any parliamentary by-elections.
7) The SNP will start to suffer electorally from its years in power.
8) At least two MPs will resign from the government over Brexit: one from leave, and one more from remain.
9) Trump and Putin will have a falling out.
10) House of Lords reform will continue to be talked about, but will not be progressed (this one is a banker).
Of these 1, 3, and 4 are the ones that most match my own wishes.
There are a range of issues from migration to climate change that require European countries (and however much some on here may not like it, we are geographically part of Europe) to work together. Leaving the EU doesn't mean leaving Europe or stopping collaboration.
May I suggest some reading:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-infinity-comes-in-different-sizes/
However, arguments for ignoring the Brexit vote mostly come from those who would describe themselves as liberals.
I would conjecture a number of Conservative and Labour supporters voted REMAIN but if you are saying liberal-minded people tended to vote REMAIN, you may be right, you may be wrong, I've not given it any thought.
I have never said the vote to LEAVE should be ignored - it cannot be - but while I am convinced of my reasons for voting LEAVE, I'm far from convinced it will be the right decision for the country. So much will depend on the A50 negotiations and their outcome.
Voting against the past and present is easy, voting for the future is a lot harder and needs more thought. I am increasingly of the view the post-EU treaty needs proper scrutiny and debate and a referendum. To mask it by the partisan nature of a GE is wrong - it's much more important.
IIRC it's now on Netflix
Saw it a few years ago and still fab
https://youtu.be/Q38RjSOTim4
As with many others on here, you confuse being popular with being right. Mrs May is personally popular - that doesn't make her right.
I am one of the lucky ones.
More broadly though, I expect to continue witnessing the slow retreat of Western liberal democracy.
It's been my privilege (age 38) to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, the crushing of Communist dictatorship, the rise of the Internet and the rapid decrease in global poverty wrought by globalisation.
But liberal democracy looks to have worn itself out.
The Iraq War was a political disillusionment; the global financial crisis the economic one. "Hard men" everywhere (Hungary, Poland, India, Russia, Turkey, China) are on the ascendant and the West no longer has the economic clout to influence (or ignore) it.
Trump is the icing on the cake. Evidence that the US system (if not our own) is rotten to the core. If he is not a true fascist, he at least happy to talk like one and there are no shortage of demented cat lovers who have convinced themselves that a dose of anti-freedom (for that is what illiberalism means) is a necessary corrective to an NYT editorial line they don't agree with.
Trump will accelerate the US's geopolitical decline, although it may take years for this to become certain. The Russia rapprochement makes sense, not as an alliance against Islamofascism -- which is frankly a minor irritant in the grand scheme of things -- but as a backdrop to a policy of confrontation with China. I cannot see it ending well.
Like Sean F I take comfort from the fact that Brexit was above all a democratic process, even if I profoundly disagree with the decision.
We still hold democracy in high esteem in this country, or say we do. But how will we protect it as the world grows increasingly hostile to our values?
I thought you'd enjoy the precise words of your hero* being quoted.
*After Enoch of course.
I am afraid your world view has blinded you to the fact that your particular notion of liberalism and democracy are not as widely held as you might think. That does not mean that either liberalism or democracy are under threat, simply that other opinions on what they mean for how we are governed are currently in the ascendant.
Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose
No sin in watching Tv, I just lean towards BBC 4 as THE most informative. I cannot be doing with long series as one did with the likes of Dallas.