Psychoactive Substances: Rolling UK Politics in The Neo-Con Era

The view from the 21st century left isn't doing it either

"hard choices" is a flag.

The experience of Syriza - all those lawyers -- did 'em good when the might of the Eurozone came marchign down

If only the Labour right started tweeting against the real enemy.

when the might of the Eurozone came marchign down

another spiritual!

Oh they scattered and they ran, lord, the whole of Pharaoh's myriad
When the might of the Eurozone came marching down from Gilead

The Miliband team made a complete arse of the actual process of campaign strategy and planning, and they had the best part of five years to prepare and probably a more experienced operation in place. I don't think you need to be some kind of pissy New Statesman twat to suspect that Corbyn's team is perhaps not adequately prepared for a general election that could arrive this year.

if it goes to a general election this year - no way, imo - then the Tories will have done half their job for them

The Tories are in utter disarray if there is ever a gen election this year. Don't think we'll get to that.

On burying bad news then - I guess the Brussels attacks will have an effect on today's proceedings?

I suppose the issue for any incoming Tory leader will be avoiding the Gordon Brown trap, which might mean an election sooner rather than later, but obviously everything hinges on Brexit. If Britain votes to stay in then it's 50:50 whether Cameron will appear to be triumphantly vindicated or stagger on through four years of increasingly frequent attacks from both sides.

Given the polling it's easy to see a narrow win for In that leaves Cameron with a furious Tory version of the 45ers

They'd take 55/45 now.

http://thebaffler.com/salvos/despair-fatigue-david-graeber

I've been living with this piece for a few days now. Bits of it seem off, sometimes way off. But as a whole I think this is a very insightful examination of where we are now.

graeber is generally 70% otm, 30% wtf man are you high or something

idk, i can seemingly get behind the main thrust while disagreeing with almost all of the key points.

I can see that too, up to a point, I feel an ambivalence but he's broadly right about class and he's v right that despair is a luxury for the privileged

Tories, nice peoples

"The thing about George is that a lot of people think he's a bit arrogant and rude, but that's because they don't really know him.

"Well I've worked with him pretty closely for several years now and so I know that the truth is that in person he's actually much worse than that."

I can see that too, up to a point, I feel an ambivalence but he's broadly right about class and he's v right that despair is a luxury for the privileged

The growing undercurrent of radicalism (both on the streets and in a return to serious discussion of socialist economic models) seems overstated to me and there is a danger in assuming any reaction of the un-privileged is going to be egalitarian. As much as i would like both things to be true, it's seems plausible that the despair of the increasingly marginalised could either be co-opted to drive further social atomisation in return for a shot at a share of the pie (as with the other radical he mentions, Thatcher) or channeled into a kind of 'fuck everything' Trump / UKIP nihilism. He's probably right that this is the most fertile ground socialism has had to grow in a couple of decades but the perception that the world is on a slow, endless trudge into the abyss is going to be extremely hard to overcome.

a+

xpost but also not!

Osborne is winding up now.

He says this is a One Nation budget. It devolves power, and supports our children’s future.

It cuts taxes, he says. It delivers security and looks to the future. It is a One Nation, compassionate budget.

Tory MPs are bellowing like cattle: “More”.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell says he is glad the Chancellor has turned up.

He says that the behaviour of Chancellor over the past days "calls into question his fitness for the office he now holds" and his fitness for any leading office in government.

"What we've seen is not the actions of a chancellor, a senior government minister, but the grubby incompetent manipulations of a political chancer," he says.

Conservative MP James Cartlidge intervenes to question John McDonnell's "fitness for office".

"On a day of a terrorist attack" he asks Mr McDonnell to "withdraw his previous support for terrorist organisations that have attacked this country".

Nice.

vile

I'm sure that people will gladly starve and/or freeze to death safe in the knowledge that they will be helping some as-yet-unborn children pay less debt in the future. It's certainly a sacrifice on a par with defeating the Nazis.

I get the feeling future generations will be facing off bigger problems than the national debt and won't be feeling much gratitude for the world we have left them.

how lucky is this fucking government

What do you mean by luck? They have a small majority and will keep making u-turns if they survive a full parliament.

Lucky to have virtually the entire British media cheerleading them?

lucky to have a giant terrorist attack happen on the day osborne is due to defend himself

You could flip this and say that his 'robust defense' has been also ignored by the public as they watch Brussels instead.

So the figures don't quite add up? Does the OBR have to sign this budget off?

Where we've made a mistake, where we've got things wrong, we listen and we learn. And that's precisely what we've done.

things initially presented as a decree, a strongly considered and carefully devised course of action, the right thing to do, the only thing to do are, in fact, only suggestions after all - they're only a question: "can we get away with this? will you wear it?"

totally

"I'm an incompetent chancer"

lucky to have a giant terrorist attack happen on the day osborne is due to defend himself

someone needs to doorstep osborne to ask him to deny that he has any ties to isis

Wait is it true that IDS just voted for the Budget?

Yes, no reason to expect he was going to vote against it.

Also did they just pass a Budget that everyone knew was unbalanced? Is there a precedent to this or does it basically happen every year without anyone mentioning it?

I don't think it is uncommon, though slightly embarrassing in the context of Osborne proposing governments be legally bound to deliver a surplus, though I am not an expert.

yeah, aiui not voting for the budget doesn't express a policy disagreement - it's more like a vote of no confidence, & that's a step too far.

I think 'balanced' might muddy this, because it's got that sense of 'outgoings and incomings make zero' somewhere in the background. Budgets go through where they don't add up in that way, but there's an explanation of how we take on the extra debt in the background, so ok, Annex A is the place to look:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/budget-2016-documents/budget-2016#annex-a-financing

But the unusual thing here is – within a few days, before the vote – 4-odd billion pound of the policy accounts vanished - Treasury's effectively saying we'll change a decision, making the numbers very wrong. I think… this is the important summary table that is now bullshit?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/budget-2016-documents/budget-2016#budget-decisions

soundbites from parliament today, as edited together on the news, presented quite a contrast: labour as sober, dismayed parents, unsure if they would ever get control of their erratic progeny; tories were basically frothing at the mouth, eyes bulging, braying and shouting

This is good and what was missing from the debate:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/22/disability-debate-disabled

hell yes, cf. the entire history of disability legislation, notably the Autism Act 2009 and subsequent "autism strategies", plus the way the concept of "inclusion" has been used for 20 years to cut services for disabled students and the current borderline-legal shambles that is the Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 - taking what i imagine to be thousands of children out of statemented status just at the points where they most need additional support

Unless the parents are reasonably wealthy and can afford to send their kid to a NAS approved private school or something, without a statement ASC kids are almost guaranteed a wretched childhood.

statement is now an EHCP and tho i shd be careful i will say that where the new SEND regs say "all children who were statemented should be transferred to an EHCP" that is a long way from happening on the ground

I have been told it is coming at a school meeting a few months back and told "not to worry about it".

That's probably fine as long as he's at the same school, especially if they take the time to do it right. The new process looks better on paper - on the ground it's creating a lot of issues around transition between different provisions

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/will-the-brussels-attacks-tip-the-brexit-scales.html#

Have we done a Brexit thread btw?

idk about the emphasis on the horse meat scandal - can hardly remember anything about it. V funny piece.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tories-sneak-out-land-registry-7624668

Paul Mason is a lot feistier online

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/30/britain-sacrifices-steel-industry-to-curry-favour-with-china/

This has been doing the rounds and is worth reading as well, even if it is AEP.