Faithless feat. Boy George - Why Go?

The Ferry Corstern Remix is also worth anyone's time.

Labour and the Social Workhouse

Is Kemi Badenoch the Prime Minister? I ask because last week prior to Keir Starmer's announcement about increasing military spending, the Leader of the Opposition said it should be part-funded by cuts to social security. And on Wednesday, the BBC was leading with news from "sources" that this is exactly what Rachel Reeves plans to do.

It could be this is more muddying of the water. The government's comms haven't exactly been on point, and "anonymous" downbeat briefings have been made in the past that came to nothing. But in this case, I don't think so. The contempt Reeves has for those subsisting on social security has been known for a decade, since she said Labour doesn't want to represent people who are out of work. Readers will recall that, as Chancellor, Reeves has followed it up with stripping away winter fuel payments and keeping the two child benefit cap. Before Trump came back, there have long been mutterings about doing something about the benefits bill, with disabled people and the long-term sick in the crosshairs.

The way this is being presented is typical of a government drenched in dishonesty. In April last year, 1.5m people reported inconveniences associated with long Covid and a further 381,000 said their day-to-day activities had been limited a lot. A good chunk of whom would be in receipt of sickness benefits. Another gift of Covid and the preceding government's lack of seriousness has been the co-morbidities arising from infection. Susceptibility to auto-immune diseases, cancers, heart disease, respiratory conditions, and more are well known and are exacting a toll from a population that have contracted it many times. These too are adding to the sickness bill. But the most common problems are musculoskeletal conditions to the point of debilitation, and mental illness. We never hear about what's driving these, perhaps because it raises inconvenient questions.

Politicians know some ill and disabled people are unsuitable for work and that the overwhelming majority on sickness and disability benefits are there precisely because of that. Which is why the Tories are past masters at scapegoating them by tarring them with the scrounger/skiver brush. Labour are not so crude, prefer to say the system isn't working for them, and is creating "perverse incentives" to stay away from work. But the effect is the same: the delegitimation of the long-term sick, a denial that their system chews up and spits out broken bodies and damaged minds, and has no further use for them.

The Italian autonomists used to talk about the social factory in which every occupation, including unpaid domestic labour, reproduced the system and were therefore productive of capital. Perhaps we should think about the social workhouse, which is productive of stigma, fear, and forcing unwell people into work. This isn't primarily to make money out of the disabled and the ill, but to reinforce the discipline wage labour depends on. Clamping down on benefits is Labour's way of telling their bourgeois backers that the management of class relations is safe with them.

Image Credit

Rumpus on the Right

Associating a right wing political project with Donald Trump is a risky move. Though you can't say Nigel Farage wasn't warned. There was a four-year record of chaos available for review, well-telegraphed statements of intent, and before he took office Trump's unprecedented and stupid attacks on friendly nations and allies. And now that transatlantic alliance, which has bitten Farage once is back to tear off a larger chunk.

Following the double-team ambush of Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday, the latest entertainment from the White House include suspending military aid to Ukraine, and JD Vance attacking "random countries" (i.e. Europeans) for not having fought a war for 40 years. The latter, of course, is in poor taste considering personnel from almost every NATO member died needlessly in the occupation of Afghanistan. Fewer countries were in Iraq, but the losses were by no means insignificant. And as for Ukraine, its case against Russia is almost sacrosanct as mainstream politics and public opinion goes. Woe betide anyone who sets their face against this.

Farage is having a go, mind. Josh has done a good job listing his recent compromising utterances. These include criticising Zelenskyy for being "rude" in the White House, excusing Trump's treatment of the visiting leader, and supporting the pathetic question about his attire lacking "respect". There was also his suggestion Ukraine was a uniquely corrupt country, admitting he was not a "huge fan". Whether Farage is actually in the pocket of the Kremlin or not is a moot point. Like Trump, he acts as though he is.

Might this dent the (resistible) rise of Reform? As Josh rightly notes, like all far right outfits there is an inherent instability to the project. The evidence is there in the waxing and the waning of its continental counterparts (who, unfortunately, are on the up), and the history of UKIP had similar peaks and troughs. Farage knows this better than most given the dozen or so times he quit as the party's leader, which is why he ensured the Brexit Party and now Reform were private companies he was the majority shareholder of. As noisy the internal life of the party might be, he can never be challenged because it's his personal, private property. So if the combination of Trump's colourful behaviour and Labour's adoption of military Keynesianism does chip away at Reform's polling, Farage is safe in his manor.

Safe, but politically vulnerable. Vladimir Putin has become a bruise on Reform Labour wants to, and is, punching. Yet this is an opportunity for someone else too. Typically languishing third in the polls and desperately looking for a way back into contention, this is an opportunity to turn the tables on Reform. After all, it was a Tory Prime Minister who was enthusiastic about sending weapons to Ukraine and was critical in persuading Washington to do likewise. Under the Liz Truss interlude and Rishi Sunak, the arms kept making their way to the front lines and there was no suggestion of letting Kyiv roll over. And like Labour, they have tried to capitalise on the moment. At the weekend, Robert Jenrick put out a release condemning the behaviour of Trump and Vance in the strongest terms. Priti Patel has attacked Farage for equivocating on Russia's invasion. The goal is not just open, it's begging the Tories to score against Reform.

Sadly for them, it's Kemi Badenoch in the striker's position. After mildly criticising the Americans at the weekend, she was today making excuses for Vance's comments. The Tory leader said "I've looked at the comments. I don't think he actually said that. A lot of people are getting carried away." Her weak apology meant that Farage, putting self-preservation first, was able to get out a stronger statement that demonstrated a better understanding of how the politics of Vance's comments would land on the right. Instead of Farage looking vulnerable, it was Badenoch. He used the situation to mount a successful rear guard action. The Tory leader completely blew it.

Yes, Reform and their ilk are volatile parties with Russia-sized weak spots. But when the Tory leader is reluctant to get involved in the rumpus to save her party, probability suggests her time at the helm will be short.

Image Credit

Cuddling the Russian Bear

Following the "great television" of Donald Trump and JD Vance berating Volodymyr Zelenskyy in public, the Kremlin have said the new foreign policy positions of the United State largely aligns with theirs. But this begs the question, how has this come to be? From the end of the Cold War up until Trump's re-election, the settled position of the US has been to contain Russia. As the only power that can presently face down the Pentagon thanks to its huge stocks of nuclear weapons and capacity to turn the US homeland into glass, keeping it strategically boxed in tried ensuring it was never in a position to challenge the unipolar world worked out in the Project for a New American Century.

Why the break from this and the spurning of traditional allies? Why does Trump want to cuddle the Russian bear? The theatrics of the last month are overkill if it was all a crafty move to get European governments to cough up more on military spending. Ditto if it's just for domestic consumption too. Some Trump voters will be amused, the majority bemused, and for nearly all of them they're secondary considerations to the cost of living crisis - a key reason why they put him back in the White House. Nor are the intelligence reports that compromises Trump in all sorts of ways. As head of the most powerful military and intelligence capability the world has ever seen, in a sharply divided America front page splashes about Russian money and grim-sounding sex tapes would make little difference where Trump's support is concerned.

The more compelling answer lies in divisions within the American establishment about the strategic orientation their state should have in the 21st century. The shifting economic centre of gravity towards East Asia coupled with the long-term demographic decline of Europe's wealthy markets provides a compelling case for orienting away from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Something that Britain has tried doing too. But this is not just about where the new profitable opportunities lie. Under Barack Obama, the US downgraded Russia as a rival and therefore European states as clients as they switched attention to the strategic challenge of China. During the 2007-8 stock market cataclysm, the US was weakened by its indebtedness to Beijing, and while the winds of recession blew through Western economies China only grew more, and kept on growing. Over the last decade, Chinese multinationals have been winning strategic infrastructural contracts across the West and is starting to threaten American technological supremacy. The desperate efforts at trying to ban TikTok and the embarrassment of the tech oligarchs by China's cut price AI application are harbingers of more to come.

This context is most useful for thinking about Trump's foreign policy. As a well-known China hawk, he and his goon squad are executing a turn away from the Biden era's preoccupations (save one) with Europe, Ukraine, and Russia to ultimately face down and box in China. Russia fits this picture for a couple of reasons. Gone are the days of the Sino-Soviet split, China and Russia have grown closer to one another. Beijing has tried exerting a moderating influence on Putin over Ukraine without much success, but that doesn't detract from the common interest they share in resisting the American "international community" of allies, lackeys, and puppets that marked the pre-Trump world. For the White House, its overtures appear to be aimed at prising Russia away from China. It also helps to explain the thinking aloud about readmitting Russia to the G8, and the possibility of joint exploitation of Ukrainian mineral wealth in Russian-occupied zones. The economic and diplomatic reintegration of Putin's gangster state could turn Putin's head and leave Beijing without a major military ally. Secondly, on the subject of minerals the bulk of the vast natural resources of Russia remains in the ground. Bringing Moscow in from the cold not only promises US companies the chance of super-profits from exploiting this wealth, it denies China these strategic resources. A strong friendship between Trump's America and Putin's Russia is not just good for business. It would stymie China and keep the US secure in its position as global hegemon.

Others would prefer to prattle on about Trump's alleged cognitive decline or the doings of the FSB to explain all this. They prefer fairy stories that obscure more than they reveal because anything else compromises the fantasies that have been crafted about the US, its actions, and its prime position in the global order. But Trump's embrace of Russia is not without risks. Another reason why post-war American foreign policy has stressed Transatlanticism is to keep Europe under its thumb. Washington's Marshall Plan, the rebuilding of Western Europe, and the encouragement of the EU created affluent markets for US corporations, while tying the West and later the East to NATO ensured that European states were never strategically at odds with them. Trump deciding to position the US as an unreliable ally has had the desired effect of increasing military spending, but at the price of becoming unmoored from US interests. For as long as Putin or a similar nationalist/military adventurist regime remains in the Kremlin, Ukraine reminds everyone that none of Europe's eastern states are safe. Europe also has the wealth and the military and technical expertise to put together an alliance without Trump that could deter Russia. But the real problem for him is if Europe is shepherded down this road by US vibe, US statements, and US actions (notwithstanding attempts at bridging the divide), then far from isolating Beijing we might find a new alignment of east-west interests without America and without Russia. And that could be a recipe for accelerating the decline of US world dominance.

Trump is playing a high stakes game that many in the State Department and the wider American oligarchy are opposed to because it hurts their immediate interests and weakens them in the long-term. Establishment opposition so far appears thin on the ground, but as their power is at stake they cannot and will not sit back in a bewildered haze forever.

Image Credit

Local Council By-Elections February 2025

This month saw 41,242 votes cast in eight local authority contests. All percentages are rounded to the nearest single decimal place. 12 council seats changed hands. For comparison with January's results, see here.

Party	Number of Candidates	Total Vote	%	+/- Jan	+/- Feb 25	Avge/ Contest	+/- Seats
Conservative	23	9,896	24.0%	+2.7	-7.0	430	0
Labour	23	9,998	24.2%	+7.1	+3.0	435	-6
Lib Dem	20	7,917	19.2%	-2.6	-9.7	396	-1
Reform*	22	8,020	19.4%	+8.9	+18.5	365	+5
Green	20	2,887	7.0%	+1.3	+0.0	144	0
SNP**	2	1,474	3.6%	-6.0	+2.3	737	+1
PC***	0						0
Ind****	5	709	1.7%	-11.9	-5.6	142	+1
Other*****	8	341	0.8%	+0.4	-0.6	43	0

* Reform's comparison results are based on recomputing their tallies from last year's Others
** There were two by-elections in Scotland
*** There were two by-elections in Wales
**** There two Independent clashes
***** Others this month consisted of Alba (63), Christian People's Alliance (14), Heritage (21, 12), Putting Cumbria First (76), Rejoin (68), SDP (69), Sovereignty (18)

Reform take the by-election crown this month, hoovering up councillors (three courtesy of Labour, two from the Conservatives) and finally achieving a vote share that's closer to their polling figures. You might ask why it took them so long, seeing as the news media continues to be framed by the preoccupation of the right wing press and differential turn outs by age give them and the Tories an advantage over the other parties. Whatever the answer is, the catch up is sudden. This time last year Reform could hardly be bothered fielding by-election candidates and scores below 1% were routine. They have quickly become a force not to be dismissed lightly.

Labour was everyone's punching bag in February. They had better get used to it. We'll see if what's been happening with Donald Trump shifts the dial on national polling. The Tories managed to hold steady, winning and losing in equal measure. February was another strong month for the Liberal Democrats. If this persists, it would be reasonable to assume they have permanently annexed a section of liberalish soft Tory opinion. The upward momentum of the Greens, however, has been halted by Reform's advance and its new role as a repository of protest votes. They gained one and lost one council seat, but annoyingly came within four votes of taking a seat off the Tories in East Suffolk.

Over the course of this year, I'll be running a side project keeping an eye on the Independents and Others. Now Reform are a proper contender and by-elections typically have a range of choice, will Reform become a) a new vehicle for self-styled local heroes to get on their councils who might otherwise have stood as Independents, and therefore depress the number of candidacies from this quarter? And b), is it going to have a similar effect on the candidacies from Others? We'll see.

As for next month, unfortunately it's likely Reform will carry on doing well. I expect the Lib Dems to turn in a creditable performance, and Labour and the Tories get vote shares commensurate with their polling. And for the Greens ... maybe they will surprise us.

6 February
Hyndburn, Baxenden, Con gain from Lab
Medway, Rochester East & Warren Wood, Ref gain from Lab x2
Medway, Gillingham South, Lab hold
Tendring, The Bentleys & Frating, Ref gain from Con
Wokingham, Winnersh, LDem hold

11 February
Pembrokeshire, Haverfordwest Prendergast, Ind gain from Con

13 February
Barnet, Burnt Oak, Lab hold
East Dunbartonshire, Kirkintilloch North & East & Twechar, Lab gain from LDem
New Forest, Bransgore, Burley, Sopley & Ringwood East, Con gain from Grn
Stevenage, Manor, LDem hold
Torfaen, Trevethin & Penygarn, Ref gain from Lab
Warwick, All Saints & Woodloes, Grn gain from Lab

18 February
Brent, Alperton, LDem hold

20 February
Barking & Dagenham, Whalebone, Lab hold
Colchester, Tiptree, Con hold
East Ayrshire, Kilmarnock North, SNP gain from Lab
Hammersmith & Fulham, Hammersmith Broadway, Lab hold
Hammersmith & Fulham, Lillie, Lab hold

27 February
Breckland, Bedingfeld, Ref gain from Con
East Suffolk, Rushmere St Andrews, Con hold
East Suffolk, Woodbridge, LDem hold
Westminster, Vincent Square, Con gain from Lab
Westmorland & Furness, Eamont & Shap, LDem hold

Image Credit

Five Most Popular Posts in February

There might be a crisis in the transatlantic alliance, but nothing, I mean nothing will stop the customary monthly round up of what's hot on this here blog.

1. The Politics of Noticing
2. The Radicalisation of Young Women
3. Blue Labour and the Working Class
4. The Sacking of Andrew Gwynne
5. Revisiting Brexit and Corbynism

Coming out top was a piece on how sections of the left/liberal press and academia are beginning to notice that Keir Starmer isn't necessarily on their side. A crisis in the making for the Prime Minister. This was followed by a crisis of another sort. While commentators were falling over themselves and wringing their hands about the advance of the AfD in Germany, little noticed was the much deeper left wing radicalisation of young women. What's going on? In third was my exasperated piece on Blue Labour, the theory middle class right wingers in the Labour Party keep trying to resurrect to cover for their own prejudices. Not far behind was a look at the arrogant stupidity of Andrew Gwynne and how this brief episode lifts the lid on the mundane culture of Labour parliamentarians. And last was a trip down memory lane on news that there were talks between Dominic Cummings and Jeremy Corbyn's office back in the day. Ah, what simpler times they were.

A couple of other pieces for your consideration. The first is last night's scrawlings reflecting on the profound shock establishment political opinion received after Trump's public bullying of Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office on Friday. A far cry from the clubby atmos of Keir Starmer's visit the day before. This one's going to reverberate. The second is February's sole foray into science fiction with a look at Norman Spinrad's The Void Captain's Tale.

What's coming up in March? I've got four or five posts queued in my brain so if nothing appears, it's not for want of material. The resignation of Anneliese Dodds, Trump's affinity to Russia, and a couple of SF commentaries immediately spring to mind. I'm sure the comings and goings of politics will provide unforeseen occasions for content creation too. As ever, if you haven't already don't forget to follow the (very) occasional newsletter, and if you like what I do (and you're not skint), you can help support the blog. Following me on Bluesky, Facebook, and for what it's worth Twitter, are cost-free ways of showing your backing for this corner of the internet.

Image Credit