Wednesday, 26 April 2017

Waiting for Jolyon

Political parties are more or less the expression of classes or class fractions. They organise classes, articulate and arrange their interests, and are a means by which they become conscious of themselves. The durability across nearly all the advanced nations of parties that represent business, that represent labour, that represent small employers and layers of professionals, and how all party systems have seen the eruption of left and right populisms tied to changes in class composition confirms the durability of that insight. Even in the more open party systems of Continental Europe, where parties seemingly appear over night and carry all before it, Emmanuel Macron's En Marche, Beppe Grillo's Five Star Movement, and previously Berlusconi's Forza Italia, do not escape this sociological truism. These parties and movement/party hybrids succeed where they succeed because they speak to and condense constellations of interests and conflict that exist in the real world. Politics is concentrated economics, and why it's a nasty, filthy, unprincipled affair.

If only politics wasn't like this. That, instead, it was a nice debate among nice people who only mean nice things. Is there a saviour among us who could transcend chronic division, cast aside the muck of ages and guide us along the golden path to full liberalism? Readers desperately casting around need not worry any more. There is a man, and what's more, he has a plan. I give you Jolyon Maugham, Queen's Chambers and Graun/Twitter celeb, and the Westminster-trembling news that he's (sort of) launching a political party. Yes, if liberal ex-ministers with loads of insider experience and a big media profile can get through to the final round of the French presidential elections, so an occasional guest on the Daily Politics sofa can shake up politics. And like Macron and sundry others, Jolyon's even given his party its own stupid name: 'Spring'.

Jolyon originally intended to stand in Theresa May's Maidenhead constituency but, after telling us he has "some great friends in the music and creative industries. Serious people ...", he reluctantly decided that Spring will not get its outing at the general election. Come now Jolyon, to announce a new party and then declaring an intention not to stand, what have you to lose apart from your deposit? If it had stood, it would have been a corker alright. Honest. Theresa May, politics as a whole would not know what to make of it. His shtick? According to the strategy document, Spring's debut campaign was about throwing a party. This would be
a joyous, optimistic thing. Not political.
Not talking about politics then, during an election. Great start. 

He goes onto say his party's, um, party would be about
celebrating unity. 28 days long, each day ‘hosted’ (food, drink costume) by one of the member states. We have bands, and comedians, and writers, and thinkers, and artists, and designers.
Foreign stereotype cosplay is perhaps best left for UKIP socials.
And to deliver focus, and urgency, and to frame the contrast with the nation at large, and to make the party a national event, we stand a candidate (Jo Maugham QC) in Maidenhead against Theresa May.
Are you going on the doorstep with your berets and bicycles?

On the feasibility of toppling Theresa May, Jolyon knew he was against a sheer face with jellied eels for grips. But he has positivity on his side, a can do mentality!
There are local pro-Remain groups. The seat has great symbolic value. And – most importantly – if we can inspire people with our celebration they will come again. They will come early, tomorrow. And knock on residents’ doors, and smile, and talk
I can imagine what most residents will say back when you let on you're part of the 28 day freak show parading through town.
The celebration will lay the foundations for a new political party. The strength of those foundations are our metric of success. We will collect members. We will build a brand. And we will raise funding. Spring. A new start. A brighter future.
Inspiring. Sign me the fuck up.
Spring is a party of the radical centre. Solutions for the world today and tomorrow. Not yesterday.
New Labour sloganeering to stir the soul.

After saying they're honest, fair, and progressive, he subjects the mainstream parties to withering critique.
Like Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty, Labour’s left and moderates are bent on one another’s destruction.
Hark at that on trend telly reference!
No one knows what the Lib Dems are for – other than the Lib Dems.
Nope. Everyone now knows Tim Farron very definitely, definitely loves gay people. But not in a gay way.
And we vote for the Tories reluctantly, lacking an alternative.
Do you now, Jo? Such declarations make your progressive creds look ropey ...

Then he moves to wrap up the strategy document.
Step One: Jolyon announces to The Maidenhead Advertiser that he’s standing. It filters out to the National Press. The website goes up, with a short biog, a teaser, a ‘register’ button and a ‘donate’ button.
Step Two: We announce the festival and some acts.
Step Three: We begin to release policies.
All of which would have got Spring off to a flying start.
There is a lot to do. But. If you build it, they will come.
Field of Dreams. Generations of political people who've read all the notorious tracts from The Prince to What is to be Done? have been doing it wrong.

Yes, there are a layer of people who'd love to see the EU referendum result reversed. And if it wasn't for the utterly foolish and downright dangerous precedent ignoring a clear majority result would be for a democracy, it might be a good idea. The problem is for these folks, remainiacs if you will, the European Union is more than a trading bloc with an opaque bureaucracy. It's their Soviet Union, their City on the Hill, their Jerusalem. In their minds, the EU condenses Enlightenment values and liberal internationalism. It's an achievement standing above the nationalisms and tribalisms of old, that proves we can all get along on the basis of common humanity. And they have the nerve to look down their noses at Leave voters and call them deluded. It's stop-the-world-we-want-to-get-off, liberal-stylee.

Jolyon might think he's putting down a flag and showing leadership, but the laughable awfulness of his foray into party politics shows he's rudderless and without ideas. The remainiac milieu not drawn into the LibDems haven't a clue what to do next, and from that flows confusionism and sense-denying idiocy. At least those taken in by the yellow party, albeit under a false prospectus because they think the referendum result should be honoured too, have a focus. They're getting stuck into politics and helping shape the post-Brexit landscape. What is Jolyon and his oh-so modest "party" doing, apart from parading his naivete?


Morgan said...

Look, I'll say it - is this a joke? And if so, who's joking?

Speedy said...

"The problem is for these folks, remainiacs if you will, the European Union is more than a trading bloc with an opaque bureaucracy. It's their Soviet Union, their City on the Hill, their Jerusalem. In their minds, the EU condenses Enlightenment values and liberal internationalism. It's an achievement standing above the nationalisms and tribalisms of old, that proves we can all get along on the basis of common humanity. And they have the nerve to look down their noses at Leave voters and call them deluded."

You laugh, but the EU is a tremendous achievement, bringing peace to Europe, and does prove we can all get along on the basis of common humanity. That is why Brexit was such a tragedy. It wasn't just about the trade, it was a rejection of all that. Certainly, it has its faults, but you ignore how different Europe is from 70 years ago. So much for universalism!

John Rogan said...

As a "Remainiac", I'm beginning to think you're right. "Brexit means Brexit" and it does look like no matter what deal the EU27 say the UK is getting, we will be leaving the EU. We are assured on that by the Conservatives and Labour's Shadow Cabinet. The one problem that both Parties don't seem to have come to terms with is that EU leaders are also quite clear that "Brexit means Brexit". Namely, there is no "cake and eat it" Brexit that any UK Govt can offer.

Look at the report from the Guardian today. Merkel and Schultz (SDP leader) are both against any compromise on Brexit. Macron is too. Anyone who doesn't think that this will not have a devastating effect on jobs and living standards in the UK is living in cloud-cuckoo land. Whether it be Blue Riband, Ford saying that the UK needs to have tariff-free access to the single market to stay or Deutsche Bank announcing that they may move 4,000 jobs from the UK because of Brexit, we will see jobs migrating and inflation rising because of Brexit.

Labour's paper promises to protect worker's rights come across as naive at best and cynical at worst. What's the point if many thousands lose their jobs?

On a personal note (and I usually try not to go into these things) I'm married to a German who works for the NHS in Wales. On the morning of June 24th, she felt she'd really been told to "fuck off" by the majority of Welsh people. She still feels like that. That same morning, I had to look at our children differently. They were not just our children any more but the children of an immigrant. They were now a problem that Labour hadn't been discussing as much as they should. The kind of problem that people like Yvette Cooper said needed to be discussed. The "Labour Heartlands" had said such in the vote.

So this "Remainiac" (great new insult, btw) is now moving from the "anger" stage to the "acceptance" stage. It won't be long though before the UK hits the reality stage about Brexit and, unfortunately, by then it may be too late for those whose jobs have migrated.

Angela Merkel attacks British 'illusion' of keeping benefits of EU

Anonymous said...

I like Jolyon. He writes a good blog, has a lot of good things to say about taxation and has been very insightful and interesting about Brexit. He (like Ian Dunt who is well worth following too) has consistently warned about the downsides of leaving the EU. I think they will become clear over the next year or two when it becomes obvious that we have few cards to play, and that the other 27 countries will be putting theirs and the EU's interests first.

But a new political,no.


Anonymous said...

"If you build it, they will come." Isn't that what supply-side economics was all about?

Lidl_Janus said...

"Isn't that what supply-side economics was all about?"

Yes - but in fairness, all the best pornography operates on this principle too.

James Semple said...

I am an immigrant from a deeply racist society - South African white "settlers". In getting away from using race as an index of entitlement I was greatly assisted by post-graduate study of psychometrics, the measurement of psychological attitudes.

Race, I learned, was a construct - an artifical grouping of assorted elements with some common factors. Constructs had no real existence but could be useful: atomic theory in chemistry and physics was one example of this. Faced with a mass of similar data it can be simpler to wrap it all up in a single box, put a label on it and deal with the label.

But as I had seen, the construct of race could be deeply damaging, both to individuals and to a society, and I was glad to emigrate to the UK (courtesy of my father's birth in Cambuslang). Here I found social constructs were alive and well - working class, public school, "one of us" etc. However, racism was negligible (by SA standards) so I did my best to adapt and blend in.

But I know constructs are always unreal - purely mental assemblies of associated data into convenient chunks to simplify thought. I know this as I constitute a counter-example - fitting neither the SA white "master" construct nor any UK class construct. Yet I exist, so they do not.

I therefore find it very disturbing to read above "... condense constellations of interests and conflict that exist in the real world." Interests and conflicts do exist but as themselves, and any construct formed from them has no objective reality. It may be useful to form technical constructs but they don't exist in reality, anymore than atoms or electrons do.

My philosophy group in U3A has been discussing truth, and some struggle with electrons. You can fire electrons towards two slits so slowly that they emerge from the source one by one, yet they still form interference fringes on the other side. So, did one electron go through both slits at the same time and interfere with itself? I did not shout out "It's a construct, not a little ball!" because that would undermine the lecturer's authority, but I'm interested in seeing how he deals with it.

Science has lots of constructs which were once useful but are now obsolete - phlogiston, pre-Copernican cosmology, the ether. And what of sociology: how well founded are your ideas of social class.

I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, consider it possible you may be mistaken.