Thinking The Unthinkable

A brief recap of the political landscape sees us in an unaccustomed situation. May screwed the pooch and lived up to her internal nickname of “Submarine” by saying something, disappearing and resurfacing going another way entirely. It seems this wasn’t as carefully crafted a plan as we all believed. According to Guido Fawkes, she caught Tory HQ on the hop. It seems she believed her own PR a little too much and now she is so power hungry and desperate she wants to risk derailing the Northern Ireland peace process by cosying up to terrorist sympathisers/supporters, despite the brickbats hurled by her lot at Jezza for saying some pretty commonsense things about trying to achieve a resolution to a conflict. Not the way I’d do it but he has been resolutely consistent, something you can’t say for many politicians.

On the other hand, Momentum seems to have spiked Corbyn’s tea with something strong that worked to jolt him into towing the party line. Albeit for a short time.  Labour  is attempting to spin this momentous second place loss – trailing by 56 seats – as the second coming of Christ. Corbyn hailed this as, “an amazing response from the public…I think it is pretty clear who won this election”.  One ought to recall a certain person writing in The Morning Star in 2010 decrying the 48 seat difference as, “disastrous for new Labour”. It is funny how power changes people. Nonetheless, he has a messianic following so one can’t ignore that.

Both parties want a hard Brexit for different reasons. Now Labour think they may have a sniff at actual power they are softening their stance somewhat. May hasn’t got the mandate she sought so she can’t just bundle the country over the nearest cliff as planned. In the meantime the EU are doing good cop bad cop with the chief negotiator making withering remarks whilst the new centrist president of France (Macron) smiles sweetly and alludes that the door to EU membership hasn’t slammed fully shut. That combination of Michel Barnier and Macron will have sowed enough doubt in the minds of sensible people in the Lords and Civil Service that we may be able to wriggle free. The nerves will be getting frayed. Although, there is no doubt that any re-entry will come at a considerable price, both in pride and money.

But back to my party of choice, the Liberal Democrats. The  wailing and gnashing of teeth over the departure of our once glorious leader won’t last long. Many nauseatingly sycophantic comments along the line of, “Tim walked on water and people just need to see what an incredible human being he is”, type thing. There is a recurrent theme here of people having so incredibly strongly held personal viewpoints that they are unable to step back and take a bigger view. Many, in the party rank and file LibDems, seem to function with no distinction between a Parish Council style mentality of ‘dog fouling on the green has to stop’ compared to  National Government issues. There remains a depressingly recurrent theme of trying to blame electoral failure/Farron’s departure or anything else  they don’t like on anything other than themselves. It is the Orange Book believers, the bitchy sniping fringes, Clegg, tuition fees, coalition and so on and so forth.  (Caveat – I am, apparently,  one of the bitchy sniping outsiders. Though, in my defence, I and others are devoting time to try and think how the dire state of the political centre ground  can be fixed.)

Those of us that don’t think the purity of the political soul comes just from the hard graft of pushing leaflets through letter boxes as the answer to every setback are not just corporate bully-boys/girls. We just take a more businesslike view of things. Measuring output and not input is how we look at things.Tim Farron has resigned as leader and that is a very good thing. He singularly failed to get any traction with the press or the electorate regarding Brexit,arguably the most important issue of our time. Say what you like about Corbyn having the air of a divorced geography teacher, at least he has stuck to his guns. I find him deeply distasteful but I respect him nonetheless. People knew who he was and if they had even heard of Farron it was usually because of one thing. Just prior to the election I was at a function and fell in to chat with a retired Brigadier General. Not that old and still very sharp. The talk turned to politics and parties. I told him I was a LibDem and he thoughtfully replied that they were an ok bunch but, and I quote, “I am not keen on that poof-hating god botherer you lot have let into the driver’s seat”. And that, ladies and gents pretty much sums up the public perception of Farron.

Given his voting record, Farron clearly isn’t a homophobe, but try telling that to people who consume mainstream media. He was incapable of deconflicting his personal views and political stance and had had two, count them, two, years to put this to bed and yet he couldn’t. Couple that with external appearance of the cheery carer to Corbyn’s miserable old man persona and he really didn’t cut it. This weekend gone he was obviously handed a loaded pistol, a shovel and told to take a solo walk into the woods, make peace with his god and do the decent thing. And so he did. Kudos. All told, a very liberal regicide.

The Liberal Democrat party is such a big church of conflicting viewpoints that it is too overweight with competing opinions to ever get airborne. By contrast, we make the Tories and Labour appear as ideologically tightly knit units. I think that we try too hard to accommodate too many different positions and it just doesn’t work. Our poor results speak directly to being overweight on too many different opinions and underweight on slick electioneering.

The Social Liberals are perceived as the left wing and the Classical Liberals as the right. I have formed the view that many at the extremes of the Social Liberal position are just Labour supporters in Liberal clothing, scared of the big bad Labour party. The Classical Liberals are definitely just right of the general centre ground and I heard them described as Tories who aren’t bastards. Either way, the tension between the two seems too high. They spend their time arguing amongst themselves rather than winning power.

The wider electorate do not perceive the Liberal Democrats as having a defined leader and nor can they repeat any policy much past the legalisation of cannabis. Corbyn is someone to get behind and to some extent May is the same, though wounded and about to be dispatched soon. It doesn’t matter if you are economically illiterate, do not realise how illiberal both are, you can just be tribal and support a team. Part of that is slavish and unquestioning support for the team when the chips are down. Hell, even the latest Panorama about what happened in this debacle of a General Election never mentioned or showed the LDs at all. Caroline Lucas even got a 10sec slot. Us, nothing. If the LibDems are to ever prosecute a liberal agenda they need recognition and media, however distasteful they may find it.

I think that we may need to do a reverse ferret (apologies to Private Eye for I dip liberally – geddit? – into their terminology) and consider another centre party. At this point many people recoil, gasp and point to the failed SDP-Liberal Alliance that preceded the LibDems. To successfully form a new party one would have to discard convention and do it differently from how it has always been done. Additionally, you need at least three other things for a successful party – good candidates, a good team and money, lots of it.

To take the last one first: Money. Political donors may claim their donation is ideologically driven and altruistically motivated, though that is a little dishonest. We all want something, be it a warm and fuzzy feeling that comes with supporting a shared ideology or  the time-honoured belief that donating to a party buys you influence. A new party needs to be treated like a start-up business with a great idea. Potential investors need to see a return. Their will be a period of burning cash, just like a start-up. When it succeeds you have to pay the piper so investors need to be chosen wisely because they will be microscopically scrutinised and require their return. Again, this needs to be carefully planned.

Whilst on the topic of scrutiny, any new party will need to have candidates.  Not in every seat but 5-10 (max) and targeted, mostly on LibDem seats. This may sound cruel, it ain’t personal, just business. Early successes are needed so that investors need to see the idea working, within the predicted timeframes.  There is a ripe pool of centrist candidates; from Chuka Umunna to Ken Clarke to Ruth Davidson and (gasp) George Osbourne. As an aside, no one seems to be enjoying May’s discomfort more than George. None of the aforementioned are in politics because they love campaigning in the rain, they are in it for themselves as much as anything else. A new party would need an attractive proposition, a plan even! If you ask a successful politician to give it all up and defect they need to see what is in it for them and their constituents. This proof of concept will work if we can back to the hilt a chosen few. The “Full Macron” will have to come later as we run a fundamentally different electoral system here.

Finally, planning. This is not about traditional reactive behaviour, it is treating the enterprise like a start-up business with big investors and lots at stake. A goal, a strategy, tactics and many what-if contingencies. Politics is a brutal pastime, the knives will be out. No planning equals no nothing. A blend of commercial, technical and political talent, people with contacts, people with a clear agenda for themselves. Being in at the launch can make or break them. No namby pamby clockwatchers. If the investment is right and the founding candidates are few then decent salaries can be paid to tempt the best talent away to the start-up. This is how business works. We are not creating a new market but rather trying to introduce a vastly improved product into an established and crowded market. We’ll need to test policy, cost policy, recruit, win backing and be pragmatic while all the time be mindful of our goal to introduce a purer liberal party that is unencumbered by the baggage of the existing one.

 

PS: This will take time. 18 months minimum to launch. Done under a decent cloak of secrecy. FWIW, I don’t think people have the stones to make this happen. This post is to just put the idea out there and get people thinking and talking. Perhaps it will, who knows.

 

It Is War. Class War.

I have just listened to a vox pop piece on the Radio 4 Today program with the ‘woman in the street’  interviewing the various parties in the Southern Rail strike. Both sides levelled accusations of unreasonable behaviour at the other. The lady pronounced them childish, and on the basis of what was said it does sound like petulant kids arguing over the toys. However, no one seems to be able to describe the real toys at issue, because they sure ain’t the ones they speak of.

This is not an argument about safety. That one has been put to bed long ago. Technology moves things on whether you like it or not. The Luddites fought it, the rail unions are attempting the same. Sadiq Khan, the Labour Mayor of London, said as much about the advances in safety enabling driver operated trains only yesterday, and one would reasonably expect him to be a union ally. However, Khan sees the massive disruption to the people of London that is being caused by the ideologically motivated actions of the few and he is condemning the unions behind both the Southern Rail and London Underground disruptions.

Still, the ASLEF and RMT  bods scent blood. There is no gaping wound of safety, they think they are inhaling heady scent of a wounded right wing bastard. Fighting ‘the right wing’, the filthy capitalist bastards who are all Tory,  is the single most worthy and exciting thing a class warrior can do. Going down in flames and possibly dragging everyone  around you into your fiery victory pit is pretty de rigueur for a good Marxist/Stalinist/Trotskyite (I am never sure of the terminology, and rarely are the protagonists).

[As an aside: to defeat the left one merely needs to ask them to agree on an ideological question, close the door and come back in the morning. There will be one left who may be right but has killed their fellow interlocutors to reinforce their point] 

The media is talking about the discontent spreading to other parts of the country and that is fanning the flames of class-war. The unions want to take us back to a previous time where the unions were powerful, they had a voice in government, they have a story of success to sell back to the workers who pay dues. It is all so financially grubby. The capitalist railway owners are doing what capitalists do: increasing operational efficiency and increasing market share. Both sides need to be controlled.

The sides are now at loggerheads and oddly the union(s) are making a claim that is very Trumpesque. They claim to their supporters that the Tory Transport Secretary is pulling the strings thus making this strike a working class versus the Tories battle. Trumpesque because it cannot be proved or disproved. It plays well to the audience and that is all that matters. In case you are grappling with it: this is what ‘post truth’ means. You make shit up that your side believes. End of.

This strike has assumed a great importance for both sides. The Tories – who have recurrent wet dreams about Thatcher and often set everything in the light of Maggie and Ronnie – fear that this is the top of a slippery slope that saw Maggie set against Arthur. The left are similarly scared of being crushed.

My experience is that the hard left are on a constant war-footing against the right. This is a very tiring position to adopt. Being born ready is one thing, hyping oneself up into a state of heightened alert and staying alert just doesn’t work. The ones that maintain anything approaching this state of hypervigilance  rapidly become dull. They fail to see their own hypocrisies and have a very limited focus. It makes for boring company.

The right rarely seem to invest the same amount of effort in setting themselves to ready against an attack from the left. They are too busy trying to make money and amongst them there are the people who are similarly fixated and therefore dull. The difference is that they are looking outwards to this mythical market in search of opportunity and not at their immediate foes. This infuriates the left. They are always trying to entice the right into a battle and the right just feels they are a tiresome interference in the quest for growth and profit.

Who is right? Not sure. As ever I believe that it would be wonderful to have a sensible middle ground. In the meantime, ASLEF and pals will destroy the lives of millions of ordinary people to prove their ideologically correct stance.

As I proofread the High Priest of the left is on, Jeremy Corbyn. He makes some sense but we know he has been coached. Hilariously (one can imagine the press people doing yet another face-palm) he leaks hard left ideology about 1 min in. They have got him onto the strike, the union leaders and it is all unravelling as he disagrees with Khan. It is about the struggle, not the issues. He signs off with the usual verbal tropes, none of which will get him (Labour) elected.

This or this?

Class War is so boring.