There is one very clear message from this week’s elections. It is that politically the UK is in a very confused state. This needs some discussion. A thread follows.....
Scotland has a strong pro-independence majority at Holyrood. No one but a charlatan could deny it.
Wales has rewarded competent, even if slightly boring incumbency. Plaid Cymru did not make the cut through it hoped for. And yet Labour’s win is so distinct it feels like an expression of independent Welsh thinking nonetheless.
Except that is that elsewhere - in Manchester, Liverpool and London, Labour also proved it can deliver and win repeated terms in office.
Unionism in Northern Ireland is in chaos, and without leadership at present.
The Tories won Hartlepool. The Red Wall is theirs for now. But they cannot win Cambridgeshire or the Isle of Wight.
The Greens did well.
Despite all that it is easy to see Johnson as dominant. That is what the media portrayed on Friday. But now? Really? What is actually happening?
This feels incredibly Gramscian to me. The Italian philosopher famously said that there is always a moment when the old is dying and the new is waiting to be born. I suspect we are in that moment now.
My suspicion is that much is dying. The UK is, for a start. Brexit is history. We all now know that. But its legacy is that the UK is dying. Without a common membership of a common union it has nothing left in common to hold it together. Scotland has just realised that first.
Labour is also dying. Again, Scotland is leading the process of change, but the reality is that Labour is built around materialist constructs of class war - and they do not resonate with most people any more. That consigns it to history in its current form.
The Liberal Democrats are dead. Centrism is rightly seen as indecision in a world where new direction n is required. The party has nothing left to say to anyone any more.
And the Tories are nearly dead too. The party I once knew - of MacLeod, Gilmour and Walker and their likes - who once dominated Tory thinking has long been a memory. Major was its last outpost.
What is not acknowledged is that the Tories now have no ideology at all. Neoliberal monetarism killed the one-nation Toryism, but that philosophy has also died now. Sunak’s quantitative easing is evidence of that. But so too are freeports - a meaningless gesture passing as policy
All the Tories have going for them now is populism. And that is built around Johnson, a character built for that role without a rival close to his ability in performing it within his party.
Johnson succeeds where Cameron and May did not. Remember that the Tories did not look good under them, and majorities were hard to find. But there is nothing to Johnson except the promotion of division and discord as cover for failure. That is what populism does.
Expect much more division and discord, is my prediction. But also do not expect anything close to building back better, or reconciliation of the nations, or levelling up. There is no intention to do any of those things. Nor to deliver better public services.
The public will notice all of that. It will be unavoidable. And so too is something else. And that is that Johnson is not going to hang around in Downing Street for a long time. Commitment is beyond Johnson. And his friends have already left Number 10. So too will he.
Will he make it to 2024? Maybe, but probably not, and by 2026? I can’t see him as leader then. Who will succeed him? The Tories are as bereft of talent as Labour is. We have hollowed out politics. But what that means is that there is no one else to lead the division and discord.
What Johnson is doing is taking the Tories towards a dead end as surely as Starmer is taking Labour in that direction. Very different men can neither deliver managerialism or discord to a country anxious for direction, when none is on offer.
The reality is that both our leading parties are walking the political path to oblivion. Labour as it stands is structured for a fight that belongs to the early twentieth century. The Tories are intellectually bankrupt, seeking now only the refuge of the scoundrel.
What happens then? I except the answer is quite a lot.
We have to redefine the nations. There will be four - although quite what relationship Northern Ireland will have with Ireland is not clear. I see no chance for a Union any more.
Scotland will develop new parties. The SNP will not be a single entity after independence.
Wales will have a surviving Labour Party. Its own Methodist roots will ensure that. But Plaid will have a different left of centre vision. The right will have little to do in either country.
And in England? More Covid, no levelling up, cuts to public services (which are planned), more corruption, Johnson being under continual attack from the Tory media (which is already happening) and economic failings will account for Johnson.
The Tories will seek to find another populist. But whoever it might be will repel people. Only Johnson has the ability to make the repugnant views of populism acceptable in England. The Tories will be in deep trouble by then.
And Labour? They will be in as much trouble, unless they abandon their infighting. Whether that is possible is in doubt.
So what will happen? In England I do not know. I am genuinely unsure in ways I am not in the cases of Wales and Scotland. England needs electoral reform. It needs to tackle corruption. It needs new thinking. It has to create a new story of what it is.
Scotland and Wales know what they are. That is why they have hope. England has to find it. The peculiarly English first past the post system, the two party dominance and the failed ideologies of past eras that say nothing to us now all suggest this will not happen.
But it has to. And I am sure it will. England changes. It always has. Its politics are bankrupt. That’s the only conclusion on English politics from this week. But, from out of this bankruptcy, as Gramsci said, the new will be born. The sooner the better.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Richard Murphy

Richard Murphy Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RichardJMurphy

14 Mar
Current debate about inflation isn’t really about whether it’s likely: it isn’t. Instead it’s about whose vision of the future is going to win. Is it going to be the right-wing demand for small government that the inflation fetishists promote, or the one we need? A thread....
Remember that the inflation that we are talking about is that with regard to consumer prices, which is often related to wages. It does not relate to asset inflation on things like shares, or house prices, which can behave quite differently, as the last decade’s shown.
Since the 1990s central banks have been given the target of keeping inflation low. 2% has been the goal. But in practice as this diagram shows, the trend was already strongly downward before central banks were given this goal. Achieving it was not a problem as a result.
Read 74 tweets
6 Mar
Why does Johnson wants to take on the nurses? Is this his Union fight; a version of Thatcher’s with the miners? Is the Battle of the Hospitals to be his Battle of Orgreave? And why? Thatcher wanted to break the unions. Does Johnson want to break the #NHS? A thread...
Even someone with the insensitivity of the average minister in this government must have realised that a 1% pay offer to the NHS would, after the last year, be treated as contemptuous, not just by the nurses themselves, but by many in the population at large as well.
We didn’t clap for nothing. We have seen the exhausted faces. Few of us can really appreciate the trauma of going to work knowing we will see people die in greater numbers than we ever expected during that day. Nor can we imagine the feelings of helplessness that must induce.
Read 72 tweets
5 Mar
There is no budget that does not unravel. Rishi Sunak’s has It’s apparent there us much wrong with it, but the significant was the issue surrounding nurses pay, which is totemic of the austerity built into the budget, none of which is necessary.
The last year has shown that the argument ‘we cannot afford it’ does not hold true. If there are resources available to use that need to be put to use then the reality is that there is nothing that this country cannot afford.
Money is not scarce. Money is a wholly artificial mechanism created to ensure that the necessary exchanges that put people to work in our economy can take place. That can be done. The money to make this possible can always be created.
Read 21 tweets
2 Mar
I have been asked by some politicians to answer the question ‘How we should we deal with the mountain of Covid debt?’ which is the question that they all fear when facing a radio or television interviewer. What follows is my fantasy @BBCRadio4 exchange.
INTERVIEWER: Let's face reality here. The country is more than £2 trillion in debt, and this has got to be repaid. What would you do about it?
POLITICIAN: I am sorry to say that I do not agree with the arguments implicit in your question, and I need to explain why.
Read 36 tweets
2 Mar
We have just had another week when the media has obsessed about what they call the UK’s national debt. There has been wringing of hands. The handcart in which we will all go to hell has been oiled. And none of this is necessary. So this is a thread on what you really need to know
First, once upon a time there was such a thing as the national debt. That started in 1694. And it ended in 1971. During that period either directly or indirectly the value of the pound was linked to the value of gold. And since gold is in short supply, so could money be.
Then in 1971 President Nixon in the USA took the dollar off the gold standard, and after that there was no link at all between the value of the pound in the UK and anything physical at all. Notes, coins and, most importantly, bank balances all just became promises to pay.
Read 83 tweets
28 Feb
To listen to Rushi Sunak you’d think that if interest rates rose now the government would see its interest rate costs rise by £25bn, but this is complete nonsense. Let me explain why.
First, most government borrowing is on fixed rates. And these aren’t short term. They are 14 year fixed terms, on average. So it will take a decade or more for the increased cost to worth through into the system, if it ever does. That covers around £1 trillion of the debt.
Second, most of the rest of government ‘debt’ is actually made up of bank deposits, either by commercial banks with the Bank of England or the public with NS&I. And the government sets the rates on these accounts.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(