Live data from Hacker News

The strange case of Britain’s demise

economist.com

11–20 of 584 posts

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#11

I feel like the article lays it out pretty well? It’s a government who’s been in power too long, whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt and the impossibility of delivering the Brexit fairy-tale, and who weren’t simply ejected at the last election because of Corbyn’s overwhelming unpopularity.

The way we elect a prime minister (i.e. we don't) plays a large part here I think. Parties themselves select the leader.

Johnson, Corbyn, Truss, Sunak - all voted in by relatively small numbers of people (e.g. 80k in the case of Truss IIRC), yet they are somehow the leader of the party and potentially even PM.

This is where labour shat the bed I think with Corbyn - totally obvious that he would be terrible as a PM yet the favourite of the popular vote of self-selected labour party, who of course are too extreme to represent the common person on the street.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#16

I feel like the article lays it out pretty well? It’s a government who’s been in power too long, whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt and the impossibility of delivering the Brexit fairy-tale, and who weren’t simply ejected at the last election because of Corbyn’s overwhelming unpopularity.

I don’t think overwhelming is the right word, his vote share was around Blair’s average.

Now that half of Tory MPs have been cabinet members, it’s harder to demand loyalty by dangling a job for votes. Especially the ministerial roles that the public are aware of.

The article seems to be avoiding the term "lame duck period". It reads an excessively selective set of opinions, and it's unclear who should be trying harder.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#17
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hadn't Starmer already replaced Corbyn by the last election? I don't think you can blame this on him. I don't think he's really the most unpopular element of Labour either. Even after most media was slandering him as an "antisemite" and all that other garbage because neoliberals have captured all of the institutions in the UK.

> Hadn't Starmer already replaced Corbyn by the last election? No.

Yep, you're right. I guess all that felt longer ago than it actually was

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#18
Remarkable article.

2000-odd words, goes into great detail talking about politics, psycho-analyzing the Tories...it is all because they went to Eton...of course...the Brexit, the bankers...it is all so simple.

A brief sentence is expended on planning, no mention about supply-side problems, the productivity crisis in govt (which is now 50% of the economy)...nothing.

I will say this another way, you can measure the intelligence by looking at the gap between how often they talk about Brexit and how often they talk about economic reform. People who talk endlessly about Brexit have nothing to say about any economic reform...beyond reversing Brexit (and then say, without self-awareness, something sniping about the "religion" of Brexit). There is no content.

The UK has many problems but the worst is an elite that is almost totally preoccupied with arguing and rutting with other members of that same elite. Recursive, insular, almost no connection with reality.

That was the problem from the 20s until Thatcher (with exceptions, there were a few good men on both sides...Labour just totally imploded first). That crept back into the Tories in the early 90s, and crept back into Labour with Brown (I will ask you this: Brown oversaw one of the most catastrophic bailout programs that actually brought down healthy institutions...he is still advising Labour, how...he devised not one but two constitutional programs that imploded...he is STILL advising Labour on a third one, how...the article talks about people leaving politics, if people leave how is this unflushable turd still there).

All of the Tories who left after Brexit were some of the worst, most incompetent people in politics. All they did by the end of 2019 was argue with other politicians, they had no connection with reality. The current Cabinet are fine, there are lots of very obviously competent people attempting to deal with massive structural issues (Home Office has gone feral, Justice has gone feral, Health is beyond repair...again, the article mentions not one word about this...why might that be?). Look at Labour...they have Starmer (not wholly competent) and Reeves (who is risking a coup by meeting the Tories on policy)...again, the biggest issue is the profound lack of progress made on massive structural issues and this comes down to a failure of political leadership, not a failure of voters.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#19
post #8

I feel like the article lays it out pretty well? It’s a government who’s been in power too long, whose talent base was massively thinned by a Brexit Purity witch hunt and the impossibility of delivering the Brexit fairy-tale, and who weren’t simply ejected at the last election because of Corbyn’s overwhelming unpopularity.

Hadn't Starmer already replaced Corbyn by the last election? I don't think you can blame this on him. I don't think he's really the most unpopular element of Labour either. Even after most media was slandering him as an "antisemite" and all that other garbage because neoliberals have captured all of the institutions in the UK.

The accusations were partly based on him cosying up with terrorists, from Hamas, Iran, etc. Is it too much to ask that a candidate for Prime Minister should respect the Rule of Law?

There's also his support for Chavez/Maduro, his suicidally naive pacifism which helps the enemy, etc.

Oh, and the episode with the mural, where he was too stupid to understand why a picture of fat people with hooked noses oppressing "the workers" would be offensive to a certain group. And what kind of adult sees the world in that way anyway?

[edit] Whatever. Downvote me. You people will never win in the real world.

Re: The strange case of Britain’s demise

#20
> ..in office but barely in power

To me this sums it up. The political kayfabe is in part constructed to make it appear like the government is in control of state affairs, but Blair's legacy was to remove power from government and spread it thinly through an increasingly overweight bureaucracy that answers to itself and only sings the governments tune when it empowers itself.

Post reply on HN