Grumble Thread

[oddoneout]

Yes, I think I've posted here before a a clip where members of the public are enthused by socialist policies only be turned off when they discover a certain politician who would enact them! Establishment propaganda, false consciousness and cognitive dissonance are the phrases that spring uncontrollably to mind.

Reducing bills is nice if you can do it. Coordinated, collective action is required I agree and since we failed at that when it came to voting for sane policies, a strike is what's needed. https://dontpay.uk/

There are far too many for whom it isn't optional - they have no choice but to limit or not use energy. They can't protest via DontPay either as that's not how prepayment meters work - just sit in the dark cold watching the standing charges accrue. The Chancellor's recent suggestion that people should cut back on energy use prompted one commenter to quote Oscar Wilde: "To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting.It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less"

[Joseph K]

There are far too many for whom it isn't optional - they have no choice but to limit or not use energy. They can't protest via DontPay either as that's not how prepayment meters work - just sit in the dark cold watching the standing charges accrue. The Chancellor's recent suggestion that people should cut back on energy use prompted one commenter to quote Oscar Wilde: "To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting.It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less"

That's an excellent quote that's been very apposite of late (and not so late).

[french frank]

The Chancellor's recent suggestion that people should cut back on energy use prompted one commenter to quote Oscar Wilde: "To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting.It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less"

A good Wildean quip, which is powerful in the current circumstances. But that isn't a reason for not urging those can do so, to do it, present energy crisi or no energy crisis. For those who have special needs - either through low income or health issues - more practical help must be available. I'm not opposed to nationalisation, but if it has to be a choice between spending billions on nationalisation or on significantly expanding renewables, I'd go first for the renewables. Politicians who want to drop the green levy and who don't favour on-shore windfarms or solar farms on agricultural land because they are such an eyesore (mentioning no names) shouldn't be anywhere near the decision-making process.

[RichardB]

if it has to be a choice between spending billions on nationalisation or on significantly expanding renewables, I'd go first for the renewables.

But realistically there would never be such a choice, because privatisation and short-term profit from continuing with non-renewable energy are two aspects of the same ideology.

[french frank]

But realistically there would never be such a choice, because privatisation and short-term profit from continuing with non-renewable energy are two aspects of the same ideology.

That may be so, but not every politician has to be wedded to a systematic ideology. I believe there are some Conservatives - and Labour politicians -who are fully aware of the climate crisis, and who might well be faced with such a choice.

[Joseph K]

But realistically there would never be such a choice, because privatisation and short-term profit from continuing with non-renewable energy are two aspects of the same ideology.

I was going to say that.

That may be so, but not every politician has to be wedded to a systematic ideology. I believe there are some Conservatives - and Labour politicians -who are fully aware of the climate crisis, and who might well be faced with such a choice.

I don't fully understand your response here. The problem as Richard pointed out wasn't *a* systematic ideology as such, but rather *the* systematic ideology of neoliberalism. What choice are both these Conservative and Labour politicians faced with?

[french frank]

I don't fully understand your response here. The problem as Richard pointed out wasn't *a* systematic ideology as such, but rather *the* systematic ideology of neoliberalism. What choice are both these Conservative and Labour politicians faced with?

Well, you could say that neo-liberalism is "a" or even "the" systematic ideology that I was referring to. The choice I had in mind in terms of the allocation of public money was either nationalising the energy industry or investing in renewables. Even the Tories have been reduced to 'renationalising' some of the train operating lines and Shapps's "Great British Railways" or whatever it's supposed to be called may not be a full-blown socialist version but is being referred to as "nationalisation" which I suppose would involve the expenditure of a great deal of public money.

In the case of the fossil fuel sector, the urgent task is to reduce reliance on these fuels. Would nationalisation be a better use of public money when the aim would be to run these industries down?

[edashtav]

I was going to say that.




I don't fully understand your response here. The problem as Richard pointed out wasn't *a* systematic ideology as such, but rather *the* systematic ideology of neoliberalism. What choice are both these Conservative and Labour politicians faced with?

I’m sorry but I can’t agree there’s a discrete systematic ideology called neoliberalism.

“The term has multiple, competing definitions, and a pejorative valence, ” wrote some distinguished academics.

Because the term is so diffuse and ‘weaselly’ it is subject to endless debate.

[johncorrigan]

St Andrews always strikes me as a place to avoid like the plague. The combination of students, trippers, golfers and a wind off the North Sea which would cut you in half at times. And very expensive car parking so the ripping off of the poor misbegotten souls desperate for a fish supper somehow doesn’t surprise me. I wonder how much they were charging for my favourite - a pie supper. The Scots Pie does, though, have to be deep-fried. It makes the pastry extra-crispy and is rarely the greasy horror that the cooking method might suggest. Brown sauce as a condiment - bliss!

St Andrews has a topping independent bookshop, Dougie, which makes it always worth a visit...also a fine class of charity shops - picked up some real bargains over the years. Parking in the winter is free down at the front. It's also got some cracking wee nooks and crannies to explore and some decent cafes. Agree re golfers, but they don't tend to inhabit the same visiting places as I. I found out many years ago that I love golf but generally cannae stand golfers. Oh yeah, and the chippy is extortionate...have I mentioned that already?

[Joseph K]

I’m sorry but I can’t agree there’s a discrete systematic ideology called neoliberalism.

“The term has multiple, competing definitions, and a pejorative valence, ” wrote some distinguished academics.

Because the term is so diffuse and ‘weaselly’ it is subject to endless debate.

I just meant privatisation and priority given to short term profit.

Having read a few books about neoliberalism and 'Disaster Capitalism' (which I consider an alternative term) I would be interested to hear about the multiple definitions.

I know the word 'socialism' is subject to a lot of debate that it might be considered 'diffuse' but I still use it and consider it to have meaning, just like 'neoliberalism'.

[Joseph K]

Well, you could say that neo-liberalism is "a" or even "the" systematic ideology that I was referring to. The choice I had in mind in terms of the allocation of public money was either nationalising the energy industry or investing in renewables. Even the Tories have been reduced to 'renationalising' some of the train operating lines and Shapps's "Great British Railways" or whatever it's supposed to be called may not be a full-blown socialist version but is being referred to as "nationalisation" which I suppose would involve the expenditure of a great deal of public money.

In the case of the fossil fuel sector, the urgent task is to reduce reliance on these fuels. Would nationalisation be a better use of public money when the aim would be to run these industries down?

As I've averred, energy companies will continue to use fossil fuels if it still profitable to do so. So ultimately that industry will have to be run down, but jobs saved through a transition to a green economy. Simply investing in renewables won't make the fossil fuels disappear.

[Serial_Apologist]

I’m sorry but I can’t agree there’s a discrete systematic ideology called neoliberalism.

“The term has multiple, competing definitions, and a pejorative valence, ” wrote some distinguished academics.

Because the term is so diffuse and ‘weaselly’ it is subject to endless debate.

It's just a "neo" version of good old economic liberalism à la 18th century, but to be applied in a post economic liberal capitalism in which it can no longer apply given that Adam Smith model of "perfect competition" to which it was once applied has long been superseded and overruled by a dominating monopoly capitalism of multinational corporations and banking institutions. Not that "perfect competition" ever really existed outside the minds of Adam Smith and those who follow him, but that is the sense in which neo liberalism, or neoliberalism, is defined, in deference to them.

[french frank]

As I've averred, energy companies will continue to use fossil fuels if it still profitable to do so. So ultimately that industry will have to be run down, but jobs saved through a transition to a green economy. Simply investing in renewables won't make the fossil fuels disappear.

Given that renewable energy is getting so much cheaper to generate than fossil fuels, how could that not hasten the end of that industry? No reason why substantial government investment shouldn't be set up in such a way that the sector is, effectively, in public ownership, is there?

Instead of which a Truss-led government would favour issuing many new licences for gas and oil drilling in the North Sea and fracking, as well as being against new solar farms on agricultural land. I don't believe that is even what Tory members want, but people have a weird way of voting for what they don't want. Apparently that won't even bring down the domestic energy bills.

[gradus]

Given that renewable energy is getting so much cheaper to generate than fossil fuels, how could that not hasten the end of that industry? No reason why substantial government investment shouldn't be set up in such a way that the sector is, effectively, in public ownership, is there?

Instead of which a Truss-led government would favour issuing many new licences for gas and oil drilling in the North Sea and fracking, as well as being against new solar farms on agricultural land. I don't believe that is even what Tory members want, but people have a weird way of voting for what they don't want. Apparently that won't even bring down the domestic energy bills.

In our neck of the woods - E Suffolk - new warehouses of stupendous size are springing up everywhere presumably in anticipation of free-port status for the area. It would seem sensible to require their vast roofs to be covered by photovoltaic panels but they aren't, so I hope and Truss that some of the solar farms will be encouraged to migrate skywards.

[Joseph K]

Given that renewable energy is getting so much cheaper to generate than fossil fuels, how could that not hasten the end of that industry? No reason why substantial government investment shouldn't be set up in such a way that the sector is, effectively, in public ownership, is there?

Sounds to me like you're suggesting government-run renewable energy should compete with private fossil-fuel derived energy companies until the latter's end is hastened by its exorbitance compared with renewables.

Sounds like essentially leaving it to the markets could be a long drawn-out affair, and I don't think you appreciate the urgency of ceasing fossil fuel production. Far better to just nationalise, to follow a course of action laid-out here: https://labour.org.uk/manifesto-2019...al-revolution/