TALKING POLITICS

Latest Episodes:

Adam Tooze on US vs China May 12, 2019

Show notes

An extra episode with Adam Tooze to catch up on the latest in the US/China trade wars. What's really at stake and what does Trump want? Is this about economics or security? What does it say about the future of capitalism? And where does Joe Biden fit in? With Helen Thompson.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

President Bernie? May 09, 2019

Show notes

A Mockery of Democracy? May 02, 2019

Show notes

Are the UK's looming European elections making a mockery of democracy, or is this how democracy is meant to work? Would cancelling them at the last minute make the situation worse? We talk about trust in politics, the threat to the two main parties, and the knock-on effects for the rest of Europe. Plus we discuss what can meaningfully happen before the end of October, and whether the events of the last few weeks have done permanent damage to the Tory brand. With Helen Thompson, Catherine Barnard and Chris Bickerton.

Talking Points:

Local elections and the European parliamentary elections are the closest that UK voters have been to getting a say on what’s going on—even if they may not actually have any consequences.

Are they good or bad for democracy?
People’s faith in democracy overall is declining.

Because of Brexit, and the upcoming elections, the fracturing in British party politics is greater than ever before—what does this mean for British politics?

We overestimate how often we’ve had a two-party system. It’s actually rare (1832-1870 and 1945-1970)
You need a stable UK to have two party dynamics.
Brexit has shaken up the parties in fundamental ways.
Whether or not Britain leaves the EU, the next Conservative leader will likely be a leaver.

With this Parliament, if it does come down to no deal or revoke article 50, what will it do?

This partially depends on the EU’s position.
There is still the problem of sequencing when it comes to leaving the EU.
The UK has become a geopolitical issue for the EU in a way that it wasn’t before. This is why Merkel and Macron are fighting.

Mentioned in this Episode:

Further Learning:

On the 2019 European elections

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

David King on Climate Repair Apr 30, 2019

Show notes

An extra episode in our climate season: we talk to Sir David King, former Chief Scientific Advisor to the British government, about what's now known about the scale of the threat and the urgency of the need for action. What has happened since the Paris agreement? What is the Chinese government most afraid of? What is the meaning of Extinction Rebellion? And is it time to start talking about refreezing the poles to repair the damage already done?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Paul Mason on the Human Future Apr 25, 2019

Show notes

We talk to Paul Mason about his new book Clear Bright Future - a radical defence of the human being in the age of digital transformation and a call to political action. The book covers a lot of ground and so do we: Trump and Nietzsche, machine learning and network effects, climate change and neoliberalism, secular humanism and Christian Enlightenment. But no Brexit! A conversation about the biggest political choices we face and the deep philosophical questions that lie behind them. With Helen Thompson.

Talking Points:

How do we demystify technology?

In his first book on mechanics, Galileo described machines as things that harness the forces of nature.
Likewise, Adam Smith emphasized that labour produces value, not machines.
Modern science often likens reality to a computer; but we’ve created them, not the other way around.

AI has the potential to fundamentally transform industrial societies.

Civil society needs to have a say in how this technology evolves.
How do we introduce ethical questions earlier in the process, instead of building first and asking questions later?

Information has never been more abundant, yet we feel relatively helpless because we have so little control over network effects and the information environment.

Information wants to be free, but everywhere it is in chains.
Information technology has not created the fourth industrial revolution; it has created social relations of production that are designed to suppress the fourth industrial revolution.

Is there still space in our political discourse for difficult choices? Are we willing to lose things we value if we want things to be better?

Paul thinks that civil society needs to refocus on moral philosophy.
Paul takes Nietzsche to task and argues that there is a biological basis for universal human rights.

Paul is critical of the effect of neoliberal practice on the human self.

He argues that in America, the problem, as Arendt put it, is an alliance of the elite and the mob over “access to history.”
The thing to fight for is not just the truth but the possibility of truth.

According to Paul, the left needs to harness the power of the state.

He calls himself a “radical social democrat.”
He thinks that the left’s failure to project a holistic answer and theory of reality has left the right possessing all of the momentum.

Mentioned in this Episode:

Further Learning:

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Copernican Principle Apr 18, 2019

Show notes

David gives the third in his series of talks about the future of democracy. This one uses an idea from cosmology to work out where we might be in the story of democracy: are we at the beginning, in the middle or near the end? It all depends when and where we think the story starts. From Stonehenge to Les Miserables, from ancient Athens to Facebook, a simple idea turns out to have some surprising applications, and some important lessons for contemporary politics.

Talking Points:

The Copernican Principle is based on the idea that we are not the center of the universe.

Because we are not inherently special, most of the time, we encounter things without a natural life expectancy somewhere in the random middle.
If something has been going on for years, it will likely keep going for years. If something has been going on for weeks, it will likely keep going for weeks.

What does this mean for democracy? It depends on which story you think we’re in.

The long story is about 2,500 years old, going back to the principles articulated in ancient Athens. This is the idea that humans are equal in political terms and no one is uniquely capable of rule.
The middle story is about 250 years old. This is the story of representative democracy. Democracies exist to protect against misrule and are based on a division of labor between professional politicians and everyone else.
The short story is at most 100 years old (and in many places, shorter). This is the story of mass enfranchisement, mass communications, and administrative democracy.

It’s unlikely that all of these stories will end at the same time, but it also seems fairly likely that there are people alive now who will see at least the short story end.

In Eastern Europe, the short story is only 30 years old.
The second story is also under pressure. People are getting tired of the safeguards, and the division of labor appears increasingly unsustainable.
The old story, however, still stands. These may be the ideals that are better suited to tackle the current challenges.

David on Democracy:

Further Learning:

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brexit Lessons Apr 10, 2019

Show notes

We try to draw some wider lessons from the nightmare that the Brexit process has now become. What have we learned about the relationship between parliament and the executive? Is there any way that the Article 50 process could have worked? And what conclusions will other countries reach about how hard it is to leave the EU? Plus we talk about the recent report from the Hansard Society indicating that the British public is more open than ever to the idea of a 'strong leader'. With Helen Thompson and Kenneth Armstrong.

Talking Points:

The Cooper Act has been rushed through both houses—but has it really changed anything?

Very little in this act actually constrains the government.
No deal isn’t off the table.
Even if it didn’t change much in substantive terms, in constitutional terms, Parliament may have set something in motion.

The relationship between the executive and the legislature is under fire in a lot of places.

Executive power tends to be more unrestrained on the international stage.
Treaties take important issues out of the realm of national politics. Legislatures only get to say yes or no.
The EU raises a lot of these issues because it is a treaty-based union.

By all objective measures the May government should be on its last legs right now.

But the Fixed-term Parliaments Act means there’s no real mechanism for getting rid of the government.
Could the May government just stagger on?
A lot of MP’s don’t want a general election.
Even if the Labour leadership does, the parliamentary Labour party doesn’t.
At every turn, Parliament seems to be trying to escape responsibility for its own actions.

What is the lesson others should take from all of this?

Is the problem Ireland?
Or is the problem the UK parliamentary system, and coalition governance?
... Or is it just really hard to leave the EU?

A new report from the Hansard Society shows that a lot of people in Britain seem to have a taste for authoritarianism.

What people really want is a politician who can cut through politics.
There may be a substitution effect between process and personality. When process breaks down, people want a charismatic leader.

Mentioned in this Episode:

Further Learning:

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trump After Mueller Apr 07, 2019

Show notes

We catch up with Gary Gerstle in the US to assess where the Trump presidency stands after the Mueller report appeared to give him a pass. Are there more revelations to come once the full report is available? Can Trump take advantage of his good fortune? And who in the crowded Democratic field currently looks best placed to beat him in 2020? With Helen Thompson.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

May Rolls the Dice Apr 04, 2019

Show notes

Moment of Truth? Mar 28, 2019

Show notes

As parliament finally gets the chance to indicate its Brexit preferences - if it has any - we discuss the real choices now facing MPs and government. What is the sequence of events that would actually prevent a no-deal Brexit? Can the Withdrawal Agreement be separated from the Political Declaration? And if it can, will MPs eventually have to vote for it? Plus we ask how long we can avoid another general election and we discuss whether Theresa May's survival to this point tells us more about her resilience or about the dysfunctionality of British politics. With Helen Thompson, Chris Bickerton, and Catherine Barnard, Professor of EU Law.

Talking Points:

What is the relationship between the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration?

The political declaration is about the future; the withdrawal agreement is about wrapping up the past.
Article 50, which is the basis for the withdrawal agreement, does not allow discussions about the future.
Anything about the future is done under separate legal provisions.

The only feasible options now are no deal, May’s deal, or revoke article 50.

Are we underrating the possibility of no deal? How does parliament prevent it if it can’t do anything else.
Both sides seem to be sticking to the same strategy, which is to put their party first.
The only thing parliament can do unilaterally is revoke Article 50—everything else depends on the EU. This is the nuclear option.

There are divisions within the EU over Brexit: Merkel doesn’t want a disruptive Brexit; Macron doesn’t want Britain in the EU.

A disorderly Brexit poses economic risks for Europe.
It’s hard to predict what the EU would do about another request for an extension.

Any form of compromise doesn’t work: it’s either too little for remainers or too much for leavers.

The middle ground, which may be economically sensible, doesn’t work politically.

Have we learned something about the office of the prime minister in all of this?

It’s really hard to throw people out of office.
Becoming prime minister now—the risk is enormous that your legacy would almost immediately be one of dramatic failure.
If the withdrawal agreement passes, people will want the job. But now?
The underestimated explanation of Theresa May’s resilience is the fixed-term parliament act. This is a fundamentally different constitutional arrangement.

Mentioned in this Episode: