Thread by @AndrewPRLevi

The Road to British Serfdom

“The Road to Serfdom” is a foundational text for “libertarians”.

Influential UK politicians seek radical deregulation & privatisation, & truncation of citizens’ rights.

They’re attempting a Hayek Brexit.

That’s a constitutional hijack.

A 🧵/1.

The ideas, & many of the people & institutions, have been around for decades.

Significant financial backing comes from a narrow, wealthy, ideological (not to exclude selfish) milieu.

The foot soldiers are journalists, politicians, “think tankers”👇 /2.

theguardian.com/politics/2019/…

As the Conservative govt was on the cusp of power, the “Tax Payers’ Alliance”
(as much a freely associating group of citizens interested in tax as “The Godfather” is a religious work about Jehovah), for example, published this, about “charter cities”👇/3.

taxpayersalliance.com/charter_cities…

“Libertarian” think-tankery on whether to “pull down the shutters” on “the north” (“have you ever been to Hull?” they ask), then proposing quasi-privatised “charter city” status as the saviour, might seem barely worth attention.

It isn’t happening here.

It couldn’t.

Right? /4.

But the “charter cities” they refer to are real.

The term covers a broad spectrum of city governance models, ranging from constitutionally sound & (at least potentially) socially beneficial, to grimly dystopian.

Useful background here … 👇/5.

blog.politics.ox.ac.uk/is-the-charter…

… & here👇

So what’s going on in the UK? /6.

verfassungsblog.de/the-danger-zon…

The key phenomenon isn’t the “charter city” as such.

It’s policy intent & action in the UK & internationally, on:

▫️dismissal of human & social rights
▫️radical deregulation & privatisation of the public realm
▫️attacks on the foundations of governance & the constitution /7.

In the UK, for relevant politicians & their backers the EU presented two big obstacles:

▫️a regulatory regime supportive (contrary to “Lexiter” folklore, recently repeated by the RMT’s Mick Lynch) of social democratic forms of governance
▫️a requirement to adhere to the ECHR /8.

There’s no question, for anyone who has observed the people concerned - now heavily represented in the Conservative party & cabinet - over decades, & since the 2016 referendum, that for them, alongside personal ambition, removing those obstacles is what Brexit has been about./9.

We’ve heard of hard Brexit, soft Brexit, EEA Brexit, BRINO & many variations on the theme.

What we’re seeing is the attempt at a Hayek Brexit.

A road to 21st century serfdom.

For all but a tiny minority of the wealthiest & most powerful, & a penumbra of loyal courtiers. /10.

The attention the government has given to “free ports” - a failed policy under Michael Heseltine in the 1980s (he called them “enterprise zones”), failed again under George Osborne in the 2010s, more recently resurrected under Rishi Sunak & Co. - sends troubling signals. /11.

Govt literature suggests they’re to be “sandboxes” for experimenting with deregulation & alternative governance.

Still, if we look, say, at the Plymouth & South Devon Freeport plan, & past the hyperbole, it’s mostly straightforward sounding stuff👇 /12.

plymouth.gov.uk/sites/default/…

The reason “free ports” failed before & would most likely do so again is they divert economic activity & jobs from elsewhere, rather than create a net benefit for the country as a whole.

There’s nothing special in the current proposals to suggest a likely different outcome. /13.

But might the “free ports” stealthily be turned into deregulated, privatised “charter cities”, “sandboxes” for radical removal of regulations, rights & the role of government across the UK? /14.

The question is perhaps misplaced.

For a Hayek Brexitist government & its backers, no “sandbox” stage is necessarily required before applying the approach to the UK as a whole. /15.

The 2019 Conservative manifesto sets “supporting excellent business practice” against “protecting workers, consumers & the environment”, saying there has to be a “balance” between them. A bizarre, troubling juxtaposition. /16.

The current AG says the UK should leave the ECHR.

The two candidates for PM attack it & “lefty lawyers”, while vying to bin thousands of regulatory statutes in “100 days” or “by the end of 2023” - take your pick - & threatening to rip up the treaty they agreed with the EU. /17.

These, & many other examples illustrating the intent of those at the top of the UK’s political hierarchy, are very recent.

They’re consistent with a decades-long approach, described above & visible, for example, in “Britannia Unchained”, co-authored by Liz Truss in 2012. /18.

And of course there’s reams of this stuff, over many years & still going strong, from the “think tanks” around which the politicians, outriders & backers concerned have flocked. Whether “Tax Payers’ Alliance”, “Institute of Economic Affairs”, “Heritage Foundation” or others./19.

That there’s well-funded, long-term & current intent to implement such an agenda in the UK & elsewhere isn’t up for debate. That might not matter if the opportunity were lacking. But, in the UK, it’s clearly there.

The Hayek Brexitists are in charge. The country’s in crisis./20.

Against that background, it’s hardly surprising that the UK “free ports” programme - which, apart from its scale, might seem run of the mill if misguided - frightens some.

“Look at Honduras”, they say.

Indeed 👇/21.

aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/13…

The retort, from others, that it’s alarmism from cranks is in danger - particularly after all we’ve experienced in the UK over the last six years - of evoking painful echoes of Sir Humphrey’s infamous “four point plan” 👇/22.

Whatever Hayek would’ve thought - he was far subtler, more erudite & interesting than the grotesques who caricature his ideas in our contemporary discourse - a Hayek Brexit (no, Brexit never was “done”) is a real & present danger to the UK’s security, prosperity & well-being./23.

Let’s not get hung up on precisely which of 57 varieties of “charter city”, “free port”, “Singapore-on-Thames” or other “libertarian” dystopia we are or aren’t talking about. Or whether “Brexit” was or wasn’t “all about” this or that. (Or who is or isn’t flaky or annoying). /24.

For the UK, & not least for “free ports”, “low-regulation zones” & the like, we should at least agree extreme vigilance is now required on:

🔺regulatory protections
🔺human rights
🔺democratic governance
🔺constitutional integrity
🔺corruption prevention

I hope we do. /25. End

P.S. This 🧵 is neither an endorsement nor rejection by me (who would care?) of anyone else’s take on what’s going on, whether the wider issues addressed in it, or the “free ports”/ “low regulation zones”/ “charter city” aspects.

As always, I look forward to reading other views.

P.P.S. Always important to note (see tweet 8) that the Good Friday Agreement, combined with the text of the ECHR itself, requires the whole UK of GB & NI to remain in the ECHR. That’s a serious obstacle for the Hayek Brexitists. They’re trying very hard to circumvent it.

Article developed from the above 🧵⬆️

https://twitter.com/WCountryVoices/status/1560282035591163909