Six More Years of Tory Rule 152


The raison d’etre of the Tories is to ensure the state runs smoothly in the interest of the 1% of the population who own 70% of the wealth. Blair made sure New Labour had the same objective, the only purpose of the party structures now being as career ladders for the likes of Blair to join the 1%.

The Tories have learnt the lesson of Thatcher, that if you keep 42% of the English happy and feeling economically secure, and advantaged over the rest, then you can stay in power through the first past the post system.  This needs an inflated housing market, a few tax cuts, and a rhetoric identifying and excluding the outsiders, be they immigrants, benefit claimants or other groups.  Osborne has this political truth down to a fine art, as his budget showed.  If you are a middle class family able to spend 10,000 a year on childcare, you can now in effect get 2,000 a year from the government.  It is complex to administer, but most of the families who benefit much will be the kind who have accountants.  Similarly the pensions plan liberalisation will not mean a great deal to the poorest in society, although not wrong in itself.  Meanwhile endless benefit cuts are the lot of the needy.

New Labour are left spluttering on the sidelines because the differences in what it would do are so marginal as to be pointless.  What the country needs is massive state intervention to extract funds from the financial services industry and from those with obscenely accrued capital, and put them in to infrastructure in transport, energy efficiency, renewables, housing and high tech manufacturing, areas in which economic benefits are broadly spread in society including through employment.  There are legitimate areas of debate about how you do that – I favour tax incentivisation, or rather heavy tax disincentivisation of non-productive use of capital, rather than direct state agency, although you would need a mix.

Anyway, there is no radical economic choice of any kind on offer to the electorate, and the Tory/Labour divide is one of  tribal adherence rather than real policy difference.  But for what it is worth, with New Labour only leading in the polls by 4% just a year before the election, all precedent suggests that the Tories will easily recover that within the final year and there will be at least six more years of Tory government.

I do hope that Scots are quite clear-eyed about that before September.  The choice on the ballot is simple: Scottish independence, or Tory rule from South East England for the forseeable future.  The rest is smoke and mirrors.


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

152 thoughts on “Six More Years of Tory Rule

1 2 3 6
  • Mary

    All very depressing then. If true, it will be the end of the NHS and the entry of compulsory health insurance.

    The latest poll is saying a 7% Labour lead but I suppose that is splitting hairs.

    Anyway it’s 13 months to May 2015.

    Q What about the UKIP factor in all of this?

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    I can understand your pessimism about the referendum, and the next general election.

    The only thing I can see to upset the traditional expectations is a worldwide economic downturn, triggered by the Fed being no longer permitted to print money, and the holders of its debt being unwilling to just buy more in expectation of its bonds being paid off upon reaching maturity.

    If that happens, looks like the Liberal Democrat support could lose heavily in any poll, something that Thatcher never had to worry about.

  • Daniel

    “It doesn’t matter who wins the next UK GE, as the result will be the same.
    Six more years of Tory rule.”

    I agree. And that will also apply to the Scots should they vote for independence.

  • John Goss

    There are some very good Liberal politicians like Norman Baker and, from what I know, Yardley millionaire John Hemming, for example, but as a political force the party died in the early twentieth century. For that reason it has to try and determine which of the two main Neo-Con parties it is most likely to get through the odd policy from power-sharing. Its share though represents the poor relative, scraps from the table of the master, and however hard individual MPs work their party can never become an overall government policy-maker. It is a sad but realistic truth. My grandfather was a Liberal and a good man. Although I am not a party Liberal I believe a lot of good was born from the political writings of John Stuart Mill.

    However Clegg’s smarminess has dragged the party’s credibility and image down further. The Labour Party no longer represents workers and underprivileged rights. In essence there is nobody to vote for any more. But six years more of Toryism is unthinkable unless you are one of the 1%. I hope you are wrong.

  • craig Post author

    Daniel,

    There is no doubt Scotland’s political ethos is more socially minded than England’s. Post independence the political spectrum will shake up and I have no doubt in the structures that emerge that more left wing attitude will be reflected. Already in Scotland there are properly left wing parties which have a realistic chance of being elected, although the inane useful idiots of the feminist movement keep doing their best to destroy them through monomaniacal obsession. I think your pessimism is uncalled for.

  • craig Post author

    John Goss,

    As I have often said, John Stuart Mill is an inspiration to me, as are others in the tradition like John Bright, William Hazlitt and J A Hobson. John Hemmings is a very good man, as is Norman Baker, and others including Charlie Kennedy. Unfortunately control of the party had been wrested by neo-con wankers, I fear irretrievably.

  • Clark

    Scotland isn’t shackled by the “first past the post” electoral system.

    (“First past the post” – what a misnomer! There isn’t even a post, unlike other systems where greater than 50% support is needed for a candidate to be elected.)

    The voting system for Westminster MPs prevents evolutionary change within government. Beyond swapping Tory for Labour and vice-versa, this antiquated voting system is restricted to revolutionary changes, which seem to occur somewhat less than twice per century.

    This point alone is reason enough for Scotland to choose independence.

  • Ba'al Zevul (Occam's Disposable Razor)

    “….heavy tax disincentivisation of non-productive use of capital….”

    But what could possibly be a more ‘productive’ use of capital than betting both ways on the derivatives market? I wasn’t expecting Osborne, or his SPAD, Harrison, or the money men, to turn into Oliver Cromwell, were you? And a Cromwell (pace the Scots, who suffered from him as badly as any) is what is wanted now.

  • Daniel

    “There is no doubt Scotland’s political ethos is more socially minded than England’s. Post independence the political spectrum will shake up and I have no doubt in the structures that emerge that more left wing attitude will be reflected. Already in Scotland there are properly left wing parties which have a realistic chance of being elected, although the inane useful idiots of the feminist movement keep doing their best to destroy them through monomaniacal obsession. I think your pessimism is uncalled for.”

    I personally have a lot of time for the views of former Labour cabinet minister, the Rt. Hon. Brian Wilson.

  • passerby

    The upside down pyramid of tax burden is a further evolutionary manifestation of the bigger apes bullying the lesser monkeys and taking their food, and chattel for the sake of fun of it.

    The constant torrent of unconscious drivel spewed; “we must reduce the welfare bill” is in reality the continuation of the trends of shifting the tax burden onto the lower income majority, by taxing their income/deducting their earnings at source, ie taking away the services they need, the benefits they depend on, eliminating their sickness benefit payments, reducing the amounts of the state pensions they worked for.

    The relentless annexation of the public assets into private hands, through “privatisation” scams, further have created an opportunity for the privateers to form price fixing cartels, that in turn maintain the high prices of the essential commodities and energy, that in turn is encouraged by the gofer (the so called political elite/government sponsored by the owners/super-class/one-percenters whom are far less in numbers in reality). This is due to the increase of the indirect taxation revenue, ie the more the cartels can charge the higher the income from the value added tax and other indirect taxation.

    The financial noose is tightening around the necks of the 99 percenters and the Ponzi style money back schemes are only to appease the dyscalculic punters who can hardly identify their arse from their elbow, giving them the sense of well being, in perpetuation of the fraud that has been foisted upon them all as the “capitalist” doctrine.

  • John Goss

    “As I have often said, John Stuart Mill is an inspiration to me, as are others in the tradition like John Bright, William Hazlitt and J A Hobson. John Hemmings is a very good man, as is Norman Baker, and others including Charlie Kennedy. Unfortunately control of the party had been wrested by neo-con wankers, I fear irretrievably.”

    I guess that is why you left the party. Some of the liberal Quakers embraced, absorbed and radiated similar political-liberal philosophies and social practice rather than theory, like the Rowntrees of York and the Cadburys of Birmingham as caring employers, and like Robert Owen with his New Lanark mills. Good pioneers. Where are the new philanthropic employers? Do they exist?

  • YouKnowMyName

    Tonight, Britisch Prime Minister Ralph Fiennes (Alec Beasley) is on BBC2 at 9p.m.
    “Politics is just a function of business now, just a tributary of the great entrepreneurial capitalist system,”

  • Ba'al Zevul (Occam's Disposable Razor)

    “I personally have a lot of time for the views of former Labour cabinet minister, the Rt. Hon. Brian Wilson.”

    Before or after he bailed out of the West Highland Free Press? As I recall he began to the left of Keir Hardie, but wound up as a Tory in all but name…

    this guy seems to have seen what was not vouchsafed to Wilson’s supporters;

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/softening-up/

  • Mary

    From the Medialens Message Board

    ‘We no longer have a government, we have a mafia’ –
    Posted by marknadim on March 20, 2014, 1:50 pm

    Scriptonite Daily:
    While scrolling through twitter this morning, I was met with the words “We no longer have a Government, we have a Mafia”, tweeted by Kanjin Tor. The words didn’t leave my mind all day. This government, with unprecedented audacity and speed, are transforming our nation run on laws and institutions, into one run on patronage and privilege – more like a mafia of the 1%, than a government of the people.

    contd
    http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2014/03/12/we-no-longer-have-a-government-we-have-a-mafia/

  • Daniel

    “Politics is just a function of business now, just a tributary of the great entrepreneurial capitalist system,”

    This is the crux of the matter. It underscores my view that we will all remain under tory rule for another 6 years – even the Scots – irrespective of whether they vote for independence or not.

  • Daniel

    “Before or after he bailed out of the West Highland Free Press? As I recall he began to the left of Keir Hardie, but wound up as a Tory in all but name…”

    I’m particularly referring to his views on Scottish independence.

  • Anon

    “Meanwhile endless benefit cuts are the lot of the needy.”

    The lot of the feckless in most cases, Craig. I’d opt for far more drastic cuts, whilst ensuring a safety net is in place for the genuinely needy.

    Also, there’s the £65 billion a year up for grabs from leaving your beloved EU.

  • Daniel

    “The lot of the feckless in most cases, Craig. I’d opt for far more drastic cuts, whilst ensuring a safety net is in place for the genuinely needy.”

    The problem is there is no method that I’m aware of which would enable the weeding out of the feckless that doesn’t already adversely impact upon those who are in genuine need. The application of generic cuts across the board as the justification for the former is a zero-sum game.

  • Ba'al Zevul Such a Parcel of Rogues)

    “I’m particularly referring to his views on Scottish independence.”

    Thought so. Just checking. When he was a lad he was an SNP member, btw. Ah, well, at least he isn’t a Rangers man. Yet.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    Mary, looking into her crystal ball, predicts

    “All very depressing then. If true, it will be the end of the NHS and the entry of compulsory health insurance.”
    ____________________

    Would that be such a tragedy? Most continental European healthcare systems work on the compulsory insurance principle and I think you’d have to be a particularly insular and blinkered Brit to claim that healthcare in France, Germany, Belgiumn, Switzerland and so on is works worse than healthcare in the UK. Or that outcomes are worse.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    “You Gov’s president is Peter Kellner the husband of the EU’s Ashton.”
    ___________________

    Here we go again – “guilt” by association, even irrelevant association. Egregiously silly.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!

    Mr Goss says

    “The Labour Party no longer represents workers”

    _________________

    Given that even investment bankers work – many of them putting in longer hours than, for example, local govt officials or nurses – how would Mr Goss define a “worker”?

1 2 3 6