The Labour policies (which are sensible IMHO) are very "one nation tory", very centre ground ... they are far from the old socialist ideals and much more mixed economy. The problem is, the rest of the political spectrum has shifted so far to the right ->
X : Do you think the LibDems are right wing?
Me : I can't distinguish them from Conservatives except on a singular issue of brexit. There seems to have been a political cleanup and shift going on.
X : Explain.
Me : We started with warring parties (i.e. internal wars)
Me : I can't distinguish them from Conservatives except on a singular issue of brexit. There seems to have been a political cleanup and shift going on.
X : Explain.
Me : We started with warring parties (i.e. internal wars)
... then the Conservatives cleaned out the "one nation tories" - wiped every major one from the party. Labour shifted a bit more centre, a few on the more Blairite side along with some Conservative MPs joined the LibDems.
This is roughly where I see it today. It's why when you look at Labour policies, I know mainstream goes "radical socialism" but it's a million miles from it. The policies wouldn't even be seen as centre, probably centre right if you go back to the 60s.
The issue is our political system has become polarised towards individualism and friedmanism over the decades i.e. we've lurched a long way to the right.
i.e. the entire Labour manifesto is costed, it brings Gov % of GDP to a mid ground across Europe, it's focused on rebalancing, creating opportunities and investment ... it's all sensible stuff. And the joke is, it makes Conservatives of the 50s to 60s look like raving marxists.
X : Poor Smith. I doubt he would agree with Hayek.
Me : Both believed in the importance of Government. If you live in the EU then Smith, Keynes and Hayek are closer to each other than the extremes of Marx or Friedman. If you're US then you are likely to have a polarised view.
Me : Both believed in the importance of Government. If you live in the EU then Smith, Keynes and Hayek are closer to each other than the extremes of Marx or Friedman. If you're US then you are likely to have a polarised view.
X : Conservatives of the 50s to 60s being raving marxists? Really?
Me : By today's standards - that's what mainstream would be calling them.
Me : By today's standards - that's what mainstream would be calling them.
X : China is communist.
Me : China has been mixed economy for many decades. Polarisation of economic thought in US is probably why US policy makers can't get a handle on it. I suspect it's also why every year for the last 30 the economist has been anticipating China's collapse.
Me : China has been mixed economy for many decades. Polarisation of economic thought in US is probably why US policy makers can't get a handle on it. I suspect it's also why every year for the last 30 the economist has been anticipating China's collapse.
X : That's not true.
Me : Well, it's almost 30 years. There are plenty of lists out there.
Me : Well, it's almost 30 years. There are plenty of lists out there.
X : China is more capitalist than US.
Me : Oh god. China knocks the stuffing out of a bunch of neoliberal systems and the cry goes out that China must be more neoliberal. Give it a break. China is mixed economy with good strategic play by Gov that trashes any laissez faire dream.
Me : Oh god. China knocks the stuffing out of a bunch of neoliberal systems and the cry goes out that China must be more neoliberal. Give it a break. China is mixed economy with good strategic play by Gov that trashes any laissez faire dream.
