New Blogs April 2019

Another round up of new(ish) left wing blogs you say? Why not? If they keep popping up, I'm gonna plug them. Here's what made it into the in tray since February.

1. Jewish Dissident

2. Labour Hub (Twitter)

3. Peach Tree, Pear Tree (Twitter)

4. The Little Leftie (Twitter)

5. Universal Credit Sufferer (Twitter)

If you know of any new(ish) blogs, podcasts or YouTube channels that haven't featured before then drop me a line via the comments, email, Facebook, or Twitter. Please note I'm looking for blogs that have started within the last 12 months or thereabouts. The new blog round up appears when I have enough new additions to justify a post!

The Newport West By-Election

Have the good electors of Newport West sent British politics a message? This is what personages with far more esteem than I have scratched their heads about over the last couple of days. And the unsatisfying answer is ... it doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. The result, which saw Labour's Ruth Jones retain the seat on a reduced turn out was always the certain outcome. But that hasn't stopped some, such as Sir John Curtice - patron saint of pollsters, from stirring the tea leaves and suggesting the polarisation seen since the 2017 election is coming to an end. Is he right?

There are a few things worth noting. By-elections, like European elections, local council elections, and Welsh Assembly elections are second order elections. In other words, contests that don't matter much for the bulk of people because general elections matter more. And they have a point. The writ of central government can run roughshod over every other representative body. Wales might be run by Labour and Scotland by the SNP, but their powers are limited and can be overruled by government. The rows during the Conservative/Liberal Democrat years over funding, and more recently the arguments between Nicola Sturgeon and Theresa May over Brexit are cases in point.

Because these elections are perceived not to matter as much, they can be useful barometers for localised or passing issues. By-elections tend to be "flatter" than general elections. i.e. The support for the main parties falls as voters, perceiving now would be a good time to make a protest and register their dissatisfaction, are more likely to vote for third, fourth, or fifth etc. parties. For example, this tends to be the case in local council by-elections as well as parliamentary by-elections. As John Curtice observed on yesterday's Politics Live, the combined vote for the two main parties was 71% - well down on the 82% of the 2017 general election. Lewisham East last year saw the Tory/Labour combined vote at 64%. Stoke Central in 2017, 61%. But Copeland, held on the same day as Stoke's saw a combination of 81%. In other words, very little can be read off from how flat an election is. A further point worth adding is turn out from Labour loyal voters tends to be depressed in second order elections more so than Conservative voters, and those motivated by smaller parties. Why? Older people are more likely to vote, as study after study has shown, they tend to be concerned more about and follow the local issues that come into play for localised elections, and they are disproportionately Tory voters. Therefore nearly every by-election confers an advantage on the Conservative campaign that Labour has to make up for.

It's therefore premature to speculate as to whether Newport West is heralding the end of polarisation when the dynamics of the election were different to a general election. Remember, Labour's own local election results were pretty poor in 2017 - one month before the party served up the biggest electoral upset since 1945. What matters is the politics of a general election, and the next one - like the last one - will be a pretty stark choice between two parties with very different programmes of government. That was not as clear in 2015, and was even less so in 2010 and 2005. The dynamics of polarisation have not gone away.

Given the spread of votes away from Labour and the Tories in Newport West, can we glean anything? As John Curtice observed pro-referendum parties managed a combined 17% of the vote. And right there is your problem, combined. This is arrived at by totting up Plaid Cymru, the Greens and Liberal Democrats - each of which has a base independent of its EU positioning. One of the pretenders to the centre party crown, 'Renew', managed 3.7 per cent. Not bad for a first outing of a new party, but not great considering the salience of the issue it champions. However, division like this between the pro-referendum camp is not going to translate into success in the tougher battle of a general election and is super vulnerable to Labour. As we know, a confirmatory referendum is a position Jeremy Corbyn and Keir Starmer are negotiating in talks with the Prime Minister.

Bad news for UKIP too and anyone deluded enough to think no deal = electoral success for the Tories. With wall-to-wall coverage of Brexit, with the right wing press screaming blue murder (and getting close to advocating it), UKIP managed eight-and-a-half per cent. Meanwhile the rebranded, reincarnated and pro-Brexit SDP managed less than one per cent, as did pro-Brexit fash candidates for For Britain and the Democrats and Veterans. Not quite the ground swell of angry leave voters we were expecting, especially in a seat that voted leave in the referendum. How to explain? UKIP certainly isn't what it used to be and is now virtually a legacy party drawing oxygen from the folk memory of Nigel Farage. Now he's interested in his new party for the lead up to the putative European elections, the days are numbered for the kippers. Though it will be interesting to see how the Brexit Party does as many UKIP voters won't be aware of his departure. Seeing the two cancel each other out while taking votes from the Tories will sure be fun.

In sum, the by-election shows Labour and the Tories are still the main choice and the political situation outside of them is chaotic and fractious. What else is new?

Critiquing "Gender Critical" Feminism

An excellent video from Natalie Wynn, AKA ContraPoints.

Spreading the Pain

Would you take Theresa May in good faith? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me and all that. Yet there hasn't been a peace time Tory Prime Minister in a predicament quite as bad as hers. Pivot to no deal? The party is as good as dead to anyone under the age of 50. Secure a deal with a customs union attached? Major ructions, to the point of MPs defecting to Nigel Farage's bandwagon (or worse, UKIP) or resigning the whip and joining the benches opposite. No wonder May clung to her deal like a Winchester in the hands of Charlton Heston. It was always unlikely to get through the Commons, but it was the best chance she had of holding her party together.

May's career is sat in the anteroom of expiration, but given her party-centred approach to Brexit what could she gain from holding out the hand of conciliation to Jeremy Corbyn? By all appearances and reactions, not a lot. MPs have spent two days calling her every name under the sun. IDS fulminating with a mouthful of feathers should be the only way this odious oaf is portrayed by television. But also check out the state of the twittering and twattering about 'Marxism'. You'd be forgiven for thinking May's diabolism had conjured forth Stalin's shade and beckoned him to gulag the government benches. Yet for all the froth and noise, nothing has happened. No MP has followed Nick Boles across the floor. Instead it appears another day of negotiations - dubbed "detailed and productive" by Downing Street - have come to pass without so much as a ministerial resignation.

One assumes the position being put by Jeremy in these meetings began with that voted down in last week's initial round of indicative votes. i.e. Customs union + single market access + "dynamic alignment" with EU rules. The presence of Keir Starmer at today's talks is a cause for cautious optimism for those still holding out for a second referendum. Nevertheless, given May's stubbornness and rigidity it would be naive for to expect her, despite the desperate straits, to go for this. At a push she might countenance Ken Clarke's all-UK customs union approach (thereby depriving her successor of globe trotting PR opportunities). Taking the pain of a possible split now might limit the generations-long damage the Tories are risking, reasoning that any doable deal is better than no deal as far as future prospects are concerned. However, hoping May would sign up for a referendum is surely phony pony territory.

Corbyn has to negotiate the class politics of this too. As argued previously, for the bulk of the coalition of 2017 Labour voters Brexit/remain does not possess the same gluey properties as Brexit/leave does for Tory voters. Seeing Jeremy Corbyn deliver Brexit with Theresa May isn't good optics, as the politicos say. This has the potential to hive off some voters, but by the same token Tinge 'n' CHUK are well positioned to attract pro-European Tory voters too. Squaring the circle of Labour's conference policy which is simultaneously pro-Brexit and pro-remain (via the second referendum) requires some adroit negotiating. Separating out the two parts of Labour's position might be one way it is done: a vote for whatever Brexit deal emerges, followed by a vote for a confirmatory referendum follow-up. Presumably May would consent to whip the Tories for the first which, with Labour votes, would get over the line. But would not for the referendum vote, leading to it falling. Cynical? Yes. But does it meet Labour's positioning? Yes.

If May is not acting in good faith, then the discussions that have rippled around social media decrying her invitation to talks as a trap are worth paying attention to. If May's game is stringing Labour along to then cancel negotiations and attacking them for betraying Brexit or some such, who will lap that up? Last Friday she goaded Labour into voting against Brexit on what would have been Brexit day. The result was zero effect in real world politics. This would bring us back to the impasse and, perhaps, a final go at getting the thrice-thrashed deal through with no deal looming, or the possibility of a long delay and the convening of a set of European elections the Tories are desperate to avoid.

It seems May's hope is a deal that Labour can support and take a hit for, knowing members and voters are disproportionately remain, will also drag them down with the Tories. This would make it more difficult for Labour to win a majority and make it more likely Corbynism gets strangled by the mess of minority government compromises. Unfortunately, if the party doesn't step through the mess carefully, May's parting legacy to British politics could be the thwarting of the left's ambitions.

The Case Against Borders

Banter and Brexit aren't two things that often go together, but wouldn't it be one of life's great ironies if Theresa May's negotiated Brexit with Jeremy Corbyn and Labour ends up with the Nick Boles Norway option that preserves freedom of movement?

Speaking of which, here's the latest Politics Theory Other episode. In this one Alex interviews Bridget Anderson on the case against borders, what is and isn't a migrant, and much else besides. As ever the conversation is through-provoking and interesting. Give it a listen! And, as always, if you've got a few quid to spare please help support new left media.

The Class Politics of the Indicative Votes

Thinking about politics in general, a useful distinction is made in Alexander Gallas's analysis of Thatcherism by identifying economic order politics and class politics. This analytical separation is useful for thinking about the different orientations of different governments at different times, and in Gallas's hands he is able to consider the accents and emphases of the preparation, war of movement, and consolidation of the Thatcherite project.

This has some use in thinking about the Commons vote Monday evening. Earlier the Speaker selected four options for the indicative votes. These were a Brexit deal based on a customs union (Ken Clarke's option), customs union + single market access + freedom of movement (the Nick Boles option), a confirmatory referendum (Peter Kyle's option), and revoking Article 50 (in the event of no deal - sponsored by Joanna Cherry). Labour's preference, which was defeated last week, did not make the Speaker's cut. However, unlike Theresa May both Labour and the SNP have shown some flexibility. Labour whipped for the first three alternatives to May's deal, while the SNP - who remain opposed to Brexit and are backing the Cherry motion - reluctantly backed Boles's "Norway option".

In the end, did any of it matter? Clarke's custom union lost 273-276, Boles 261-282, second referendum 280-292, and revoke 191-292. Tighter margins for three of the options than anything May has so far managed but not good enough. If May was to soften her stance and go down the Clarke or Boles route, then we might be get there. Alas, her whip won't be having a word in Boles's shell-like again. Attacking his party for an inability to compromise he resigned the whip on the spot - something the Commons hasn't seen for some years.

If you are of the view that Brexit should be delivered, but no deal and May's deal are completely unacceptable - up to and including the option of a second referendum to stop them - and a general election isn't available, then your options are pretty much limited to the least worst sort, as outlined in the options put to the Commons. In the name of straight talking, honest politics, from the standpoint of economic management all these Brexits put the UK at a disadvantage compared with what it enjoys now as an EU member, but Clarke's option and Boles's Norway are not as damaging. It's not the Year Zero nonsense beloved of the hard Brexiteers, and maintains as much continuity with present arrangements as possible. Lesser evil literally means less evil, after all. Labour's priority of a jobs first Brexit is best delivered in this scenario, provided it is interpreted in a dented shield kind of way and not some fantastical land-of-milk-and-honey idiocy. This is the best way to protect livelihoods and look after the interests of our people.

What about the class politics? In this Labour have played a blinder on two counts. A customs union Brexit goes some way to keeping the PLP together as a coherent voting bloc. Boles and Clarke are species of Brexit, and can be sold as such to the wider public - only the ERG, UKIP, Farage and Kate Hoey are likely to object, and the minutiae is the province of a comparative minority. Crucially, it keeps the majority of Labour leavers on side. Meanwhile, though whipping for a confirmatory referendum increased the chances of Labour's hard remain crew following the customs union line on a quid pro quo basis, this wasn't necessarily the case for Labour leaver MPs. But it does do is helps keep onside those voters who went for Labour in 2017 in part thanks to its softer Brexit stance. There might not ever be a majority for another referendum, as Clarke pointed out in his point of order following the vote, but Labour at least can show it tried. What does this amount to? Labour's bloc is likely emerging intact from this tedious business. It's perhaps worth noting the SNP made a similar calculation, wanting to avoid the exposure of being unreasoning remain ultras when they can contribute to an opportunity of significantly softening Brexit.

The second, more interesting dimension to class politics is if you do it well, you disorganise your opponents in the process. The reason May has clung so desperately to her deal while offering zero concessions and pretending as if the referendum wasn't a close run thing is because she has her own class politics to worry about. Any kind of customs union-based Brexit is anathema to the hard Brexiteers, not least because it undermines their sectional interests and blows up their decadent time wasting fantasies. On the other hand, for all the soft soaping of a hard exit we know it's going to be damaging, and it's the Tories who will pay the political price. Polling is showing an increased fracturing of their voter coalition and their long-term decline is sure to accelerate. Even if they keep it together and avoid a split, there's no new force on the political horizon they can intersect with that can conceivably award them a majority now, never mind after the incompetent shit show of their Brexit.

May now has three options now once her deal fails again. Soften her stance, and risk a split. Go for no deal with all the damage that would cause, or perhaps the only option that could unify her party - a general election. But at this stage the chances of enough Tories voting to dissolve this parliament, and potentially their careers, is something she cannot count on. Watching this all play out on television and social media is painful, but nowhere near the agonies the fates have bestowed on the Tory party.

Five Most Popular Posts in March

Wow, what a month. Brexit didn't happen, and the Tories are on the verge of a historic schism. All that said, what were the most popular posts in March?

1. Labour's Crisis of Recomposition
2. Labour's Crisis of Decomposition
3. The Far Right, the Left, and Anti-Semitism
4. Institutional Anti-Semitism and Factional Struggle
5. Chuka Umunna's Honest Politics

Brexit is rending the Tory apart, but still people's appetites for commentary on the Labour Party and its doings and surrounds encompass the rankings. Perhaps there other reasons why people don't write as much about the Tory party. Still, it's a big step up from last month where everything to do with the carcass of liberalism and centrism pulled in the numbers.

What then should get a second look from you folks? I'm going for two. March also saw this blog pass the 3,000 post milestone, so here's the commemorative piece. If you're new(ish) to the blog there's stuff listed there consisting of the highlights, if such a term could ever be applied to this outpourings of this place, from the last three years. And while I'm on a nostalgic tip, there was another anniversary too: 10 years on Twitter dot com. If you're interested in an overview of how it has changed, then this is for you.

What I've Been Reading Recently

Three months have gone by since last time, so here's what I've read since the start of the year.

Obelisk by Stephen Baxter
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S Thompson
Closet Queens by Michael Black
The Thatcherite Offensive by Alexander Gallas
Ruling the Void by Peter Mair
The Great Terror by Robert Conquest
After Blair by Kieran O'Mara
Over To You by Roald Dahl
In Defence of Politics by Bernard Crick
The Functional Analysis of Politics by Roy E Jones
Cat's Eye by Margaret Atwood
The Light of Other Days by Arthur C Clarke and Stephen Baxter
Deleuze, Marx and Politics by Nicholas Thoburn
Hag-Seed by Margaret Atwood
Roxana by Daniel Defoe
The Time Ships by Stephen Baxter
The Edible Woman by Margaret Atwood
Deleuze and Marx by Dhruv Jain (ed)
Billy Bathgate by EL Doctorow

Baxter and Atwood have preponderant entries on this list. Baxter is an unmissable, but I think underappreciated presence in British science fiction. His stuff is the super hard stuff and, at times, can get a bit carried away with the science-splaining. Social commentary-wise he's not a patch on Iain M Banks or Our Ken, but given his maths and engineering background Baxter's scientific imagination is astounding. I recommend all three books here, and especially The Time Ships. As a sequel to HG Wells's classic, The Time Machine, it is, well, completely bonkers but utterly gripping. Some of the stuff in there about the nature of time makes you wonder how such a book could possibly have been written and published in the mid-90s.

And yes, the Atwood. I've always found her stuff hit and miss but all three here are absolutely superb. Cat's Eye is a meditation on lifelong relationships and childhood memory, which are later weaved into the controversial art of the main protagonist. A brilliant novel and rightly held up as one of Atwood's best. Hag-Seed is a rarity because, unusually for Atwood, the main character is a man. It centres around the production of The Tempest, while the novel's narrative structure and plot points mirrors that of the play. Funny and life affirming, I couldn't help but think this is bound to turn up as a Netflix film some day. And lastly is Edible Woman, one of Atwood's earliest novels written when she was a postgrad student in the late 60s. Reflecting the ambivalence to the standard pattern of life then available to women and a sudden shift in what was becoming possible, it is a tale of a woman undergoing a slow disintegration and loss of agency as marriage and respectability approaches, and in inchoate rebellion against it. A book that doesn't get talked about often, it is worth your time.

Also, a quick work on Thoburn's book on Marx and Deleuze. This is particularly useful because he uses Deleuze to discipline some of the exuberance you find in post-Marxist reworkings of him - above all our mate Antonio Negri. Really useful and interesting to anyone who thinks Deleuze's work has something to offer Marxist analysis.

Quarter One By-Election Results

Overall, 54,576 votes were cast over 26 local authority (tier one and tier two) contests. All percentages are rounded to the nearest single decimal place. For comparison you can view Quarter Three's results here.

Party	Number of Candidates	Total Vote	%	+/-  Q4	+/- Q1 2018	Average	+/- Seats
Conservative	24	14,082	25.8%	-6.6%	-12.5%	587	0
Labour	25	14,788	27.1%	-4.3%	-2.8%	592	-2
LibDem	21	11,731	21.5%	+1.5%	+6.0%	559	+1
UKIP	12	1,106	2.0%	+0.2%	+0.7%	92	0
Green	12	2,418	4.4%	+0.0%	+0.8%	202	+1
SNP*	1	865	1.6%	-1.8%	-2.4%	865	0
PC	1	831	1.5%	+1.5%	+1.5%	831	+1
Ind***	17	5,779	10.6%	+4.9%	-4.8%	339	-2
Other****	13	2,976	5.5%	+3.7%	+3.9%	229	+1

* There was one by-election in Scotland
** There were two by-elections in Wales
*** There were two Independent clashes
**** Others this quarter consisted of the SDP (0 and 14 votes), North East Party (74), For Britain (20 and 89), Socialist Alternative (368), Integrity Southampton (178), Christian People's Alliance (17), Women's Equality Party (46, 65), Aspire (1,012, 1,002), and House Party (89)

An interesting spread of results that reveal precisely nothing. Labour and the Tories are out in front, but both are depressed - as is usually the case in by-election results - by the disproportionate success of Independent candidates and, to a lesser extent, the others. You know none of these would get anywhere under the conditions of a general election. However, the LibDems are doing very well indeed, in terms of candidates fielded, vote tally achieved and vote averages. Can this be maintained next quarter where, if anything, the Brexit nonsense if going to get even more intense? And what if TInG, or Change UK, or CUK, or whatever you want to call them get involved at local election level? There is, after all, a small activist base and some sitting councillors who've left Labour and declared for them. They won't want to be idle during the coming local elections. 

Whatever happens, I guess we'll soon see!

Local Council By-Elections March 2019

This month saw 20,790 votes cast over 12 local authority (tier one and tier two) contests. All percentages are rounded to the nearest single decimal place. No council seats changed hands. For comparison with February's results, see here.

Party	Number of Candidates	Total Vote	%	+/-  Feb	+/- Mar 18	Average/ Contest	+/- Seats
Conservative	11	5,024	24.2%	+0.2%	-10.2%	457	0
Labour	12	6,614	31.8%	+1.7%	-3.4%	551	0
LibDem	10	3,626	17.4%	-8.8%	+7.3%	363	0
UKIP	6	490	2.4%	+1.2%	+1.2%	82	0
Green	6	1,634	7.9%	+5.3%	+5.1%	272	+1
SNP	1	865	4.2%	+4.2%	-2.5%	865	0
PC**	0						0
Ind***	7	1,777	8.5%	+4.2%	+2.3%	254	-1
Other****	7	760	3.7%	-4.8%	+0.3%	109	0

* There was one by-election in Scotland
** There were no by-elections in Wales
*** There was one independent clash
**** Others consisted of North East Party (74), For Britain (20 and 89), Socialist Alternative (368), Integrity Southampton (178), SDP (14), Christian People's Alliance (17)

Not the most terribly exciting of months in local council by-election land. Or is it? Having four seats change hands is nothing out of the ordinary, though it has to be said the Aylesbury Vale result for the Greens is stunning. To effectively come from nowhere and capture a Tory seat ... Well, it's not something we haven't seen before. I am convinced there is a section of the Tory vote who would have their heads turned by the Greens given the opportunity to support them. Not because of their programme, which in a number of ways is closer to Labour's than anyone else's, but because of environmental concerns. Remember, Conservatives are interested in conservation as well.

Also for those into their leftist trainspotting, the Southampton Coxford result is of interest. The retiring councillor there was a member of TUSC, though always "preferred" to run as an independent rather than under the coalition's label. I wonder why that is? Well, now we know. Standing as Socialist Alternative the Socialist Party, for it is really they, did well by the usual electoral standards of TUSC but came nowehere near to taking the seat.

Lastly, it's worth noting that despite Brexitgeddon ramming the news there's little in the way of life when it comes to the UKIP vote. Long may this continue.


7th March
Aylesbury Vale DC, Haddenham and Stone, Grn gain from Con

14th March
Croydon LBC, Norbury & Pollards Hill, Lab hold
Durham UA, Wingate, Lab hold
Southampton UA, Coxford, Lab gain from Ind

21st March
Basildon BC, Vange, Lab hold
Durham UA, Esh and Witton Gilbert, LDem hold
Kensington and Chelsea LBC, Dalgarno, Lab hold
Newcastle-under-Lyme BC, Holditch and Chesterton, Ind gain from Lab
Southend-on-Sea UA, Milton, Lab hold
Thurrock UA, Alveley and Uplands, Con gain from Ind

28th March
Clackmannanshire UA, Clackmannan Central, SNP hold
Sutton LB, Wallington North, LDem hold