spring cleaning - with a difference

Spring cleaning is generally a chore but can, if serendipity is in the air, be a pleasure – particularly if the focus of removal is .......books. Space needs to be created in the cluttered shelves if new finds are to have a home…. 
Getting rid of books which had disappointed is the easy part – so no question about recent buys which had let me down – eg Snyder’s The Road to Unfreedom; Euan Davies’ “Post-Truth”; and Craig Oliver’s “Unleashing Demons” although I should probably take another look at Slavoj Zizek’s “The Courage of Hopelessness”, much as his style annoys me. (the last link by the way is to a real skewer of a review by novelist Will Self) which helps direct the book into the reject category…

I also have quite a few titles from the Lonely Planet and Footprint series – particularly France, Italy and Turkey…..but also an enticing couple on India and Andalucia

I thought it would be a simple matter to evict the titles which had been lurking unopened for several years but She Who Must Be Obeyed likes her stock of books about the operation of the EU which go back almost 25 years and includes, for example, Keith Middlemas’ Orchestrating Europe (1995) So reprieve is graciously granted these….

Howard Zinn’s  “A People’s History of the United States” causes a minor twinge as it goes – it is such a good read….Laurence Cosse’s “A Novel Bookstore” and “Eva Luna” are both great novels but don’t fall into the category of books which should be reread    particularly when I still haven’t done justice to the likes of Dostoyevski, Conrad or gone back to reread Aldous Huxley and HG Wells (eg his "The New Machiavelli")

But before I release Paul Mason’s Postcapitalism or John Carey’s The Unexpected Professor – an Oxford Life in Books, I would like a last few minutes with them – providing, that is, they are destined for a good home!! 
A couple of self-help books also could do with a quick skim before they join the haul of a dozen or so books which I will now offer up to friends…

But, as I’ve been carrying out this exercise, I’ve been very aware of how many of the 400 books in my virtual library are also still not properly read – and, more to the point, offer much more powerful reads than most of the titles in bookshops these day…..
So there’s another project for me – it is a matter of a few hours to transfer the url to my blog (uploading any which are no longer available to my website).

The pity, however, is that the world doesn’t know what an amazing resource/library my blog and website is…..Time perhaps for some marketing??

Books which can be immediately downloaded in full – just click on the title (UPDATED)
New Entries

Political Order and Political Decay; Francis Fukuyama (2014). The second volume (which can be downloaded in full!!) of Fukuyama’s magnum opus. Its introduction summarises the first volume – and the opening chapters set out his framework showing the link between economic, social and political development and how ideas about legitimacy have shaped our understanding of the three basic building blocks of “modern” government – “the state”, “rule of law” and “democratic accountability” (see the figure at p43)

This first chapter spells out how very different social conditions and traditions in the various continents have affected the shape and integrity of government systems (The sequencing of bureaucracy and challenge to political power is of particular interest)

Politics and Governance in the UK; Michael Moran (2005) is actually a textbook – aimed at undergraduates - from one of the best UK political scientists whose focus was much wider than most such academics. Somehow such people are clearer writers than those with narrow specialisms. 
Given the breadth of his reading and the originality of his thought, it's ideal reading (even at 500 pages) for a foreign audience 

Original Titles

Against Power Inequalities – reflections on the struggle for inclusive communities; Henry Tam (2010) One of these rare book aimed at activists but written by an academic… Positively inspiring

Capitalism and its Economics – a critical history; Douglas Dowd (2000). The Pluto Press is a rare British leftist publisher which ensures that its titles are clearly written – since it is aiming not at academics but the committed citizen.

The Economics of the 1% - how mainstream economics serves the rich, obscures reality and distorts policy, John Weeks (2014) One of the small bunch of economics titles I strongly recommend

The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People; Stephen Covey (1989) I have been recommending this book to change-agents since its publication (and often giving a version translated into a foreign language). It is, of course, the sort of self-help book despised by bien-pensants – but, as I say, it’s well worth study….

The Primacy of Politics – social democracy and the making of the 20^th Century;  Sheri Berman (2006)

I’m a despairing social democrat and find it ironic that one of the best treatments of the subject is by an American academic

A Brief History of NeoLiberalism; David Harvey (2005) One of these essential books….a good review is here http://rebels-library.org/files/d3Thompson-1.pdf

The Biographical Dictionary of Dissenting Economists; ed P Arestis (1992) Don’t be deceived by the humble title – this is fascinating stuff…History is, as someone once said, written by the victors. I had heard of few of the almost 100 individuals in this book (although I was taught by 2 – Meek and Nove) but it tells the story of those whose courage deserves to be remembered

How to change the World  - reflections on Marx and Marxism; Eric Hobsbawm (2011) Like most people, I tend to be put off by those who talk about Marx. This is my loss, I readily agree…and Hobsbawm is one of the few people who could persuade me to lift my self-imposed cynicism on the subject….

The Fifth Discipline- the art and practice of the learning organisation; Peter Senge (1990) A seminal book which started a long-lasting fascination with “organizational learning” (personal note - in the 80s I even wrote a master’s thesis on the subject!)
Building the Bridge as you walk on it – a guide for leading change; Robert Quinn (2004) With “Change the World”, one of my all-time favourites. Before attempting the entire book, you might find this summary useful; as well as this excerpt from the first chapter.

Decisions. Decisions…….

A daughter’s career dilemma raises the question of how well served we are by the literature on decision-making. With the usual serendipity, I had just bought from the second-hand English bookshop here "Decisive – how to make better decisions in Life and Work" (2013) whose focus is actually a bit more on the commercial world – although it does give examples of more solitary decision-making. It is actually one of no less than 89 books which one site offers on decision-making

And I had already noticed that the bookshelves are being increasingly swamped by books by psychologists divulging in numbing detail their various experiments and how they might help us improve our personal decision-making.

I blame populiser Malcolm Gladwell - for the success of his 2005 "Blink – the power of thinking without thinking" about which a contemporary reviewer wrote -

Malcolm Gladwell’s fevered new book, Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking is evangelical in a got-religion kind of way, with Gladwell praising a stratagem he calls “thin-slicing” — using the smallest amount of information possible to make decisions. In fact he’s wandering through territory staked out by Herbert Simon fifty years ago when he wrote about “bounded rationality,” as well as by practitioners of a branch of psychology called “heuristics and biases,” and by evolutionary biologists and economists and neuroscientists and philosophers and those ancient taxonomists who classified cognition as either intuition or reason. It’s a long literature, and hey! who has time for it?

The result, ironically, of this embarrassment of riches is to make it increasingly difficult to find the book on the subject which might best fit a particular person at a particular point. Of course, you can find lots of reviews of such books – but they are of a single book and give no overall assessment of the field..  And those most capable of doing such comparative assessments would never attempt it...for fear of the damage it would do their professional or academic reputations….”did you hear that old so and so actually reviewed a clutch of self-help books??? What is the world coming to…??”

I can’t say I am all that decisive myself – things panned out well for me...so I tend to a more fatalistic philosophy….Que sera sera. But the reference to Herbert Simon in the review above reminds me that I do have form in this field of decision-making…..Back in the 1980s I took a part-time MSc in the country’s first degree course in Policy Analysis in which Simon and others such as Etzioni loomed large….I even, in 2002, wrote a Manual on the subject – for Slovak senior civil servants!

The New Labour government of 1997 made the subject a sexy one – although the manuals its policy unit spawned were still rationalistic…..it was not until the mid 2000s that I got a copy of what remains for me far and away the most satisfactory (less rationalistic) treatment - Policy Paradox -the art of political decision-making by Deborah Stone

A post last autumn noted the explosion of interest the last decade has seen in efforts to change people’s behavior – initially it seemed by governments although subsequent revelations demonstrated the extent to which big business had been successfully using algorithms to influence our social behavior…

My plea

So my plea to editors of book sections and of Literary journals is – please don’t look down on these popular books on decision-making….there are a lot of readers out there who would value some guidance to the literature!

Background Reading

Decisive - how to make better decisions in life and Work; C and D Heath (2013) 

https://fs.blog/2015/06/books-on-decision-making/

https://epdf.tips/queue/handbook-of-decision-making.html

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/01/21/the-art-of-decision-making

Blink – the power of thinking without thinking  - the full read

The Art of Decision Making; Helen Drummond (2001)

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1972/10/19/cooling-it/

https://readingraphics.com/book-summary-decisive/

The sculptures which heads the post were found in Cernavoda on the border between Romania and Bulgaria and date from 6,000 BC ie the oldest of their sort.... 

Memorable Texts

Rereading a book after a gap of 50 years can be a grave disappointment – that was certainly the case for me recently when I was able to download Stan Andreski’s Social Sciences as Sorcery which I had read in the 1970s. What I had remembered as a series of caustic witticisms turned out to be rather belaboured and cheap digs..  

Thanks to researchgate, I am currently rereading with a great deal of pleasure a book which made a huge impact on me in the early 60s - during my Politics and Economics course at the University of Glasgow. The Twenty Years’ Crisis is the first classic of what was to become the prestigious discipline of International Relations. 

It opens with the fascinating story of how any field of study generally starts with a utopian stage - which focuses on the ideal or how things should be, eg the study of gold for example started with alchemy. Only after major disappointments and no little strife do people move on to adopt a more scientific approach. Thus the high hopes with which the 20^th Century started were dashed by the horror of the First World War – paving the way for the efforts in the 20s and 30s to “end all war”. “The Twenty Years’ Crisis” was written not just to challenge such naivety – but to explain it. It was at the printers on the very day in 1939 that the Second World War was declared…

What was it about Carr’s writing – almost 60 years ago – that gave his words such impact then and now? At the time I know I was also reading Moral Man and Immoral Society (1932) which also left a lasting impact. It must have been the bluntness with which the doctrine of Realism was spelled out in the two books – against the chimera of utopianism which had been so well taken apart by Karl Popper’s The Open Society and its Enemies (1944) 

Another important – if less memorable - book in the course was “Ideology and Utopia” (1954) by Karl Mannheim, an early text on the sociology of knowledge…. 

The texts in the Economics part of the programme offered no such exciting reading - with one noticeable exception – Schumpeter’s powerful Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942)

All in all, it’s perhaps not surprising that I emerged from my studies as a reformist convinced of the benefits of Fabianism….Ironic that my LSE tutor on the political sociology MSc programme I briefly enrolled in should turn out to be Ralph Miliband of Parliamentary Socialism fame (1961) - but even more ironic that his two sons should in the 2000s rise to such heights in the party he despised.

And if you think these titles were dated even for the 1960s, that was all that universities could offer in those days – even if JK Galbraith used the term “The Affluent Society” for his famous 1958 book. SM Wolin’s Politics and Vision – continuity and innovation in western political thought was quite exceptional as a 1960 textbook which was given pride of place in our reading list…

What is History? is based on lectures Carr gave in 1960 and contains a sentence which has stayed with me for half a century….   

facts are like fish swimming about in a vast and sometimes inaccessible ocean; and what we catch will depend partly on chance, but mainly on what part of the ocean we choose to fish in and what tackle we chooses to use - these two factors being, of course, determined by the kind of fish we want to catch. By and large, we will get the kind of facts we want

I mused recently about what it was that accounted for the originality of good writing – suggesting that straddling of boundaries (whether national or intellectual) does help give an extra dimension to one’s understanding. Carr was a Brit through and through but straddled the worlds of the civil service (Foreign Office); journalism (Deputy Editor of The Times no less) and academia. It’s increasingly rare to find such career combinations these days – which is very much our loss!!

update; https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2019/05/eh-carr-what-is-history-truth-subjectivity-facts

The crayon drawing which adorns this text is by Grigor Naidenov - one of my favourite Bulgarian artists of the first half of the 20th century, well known for his aquarelle cafe scenes...

Rising – or falling – to the Occasion?

The question for today – April Fool’s Day - is how well served the Brits have been during this past 3 years of the Brexit saga by their “opinion-makers” – or “the chattering class” made up by their MPs, journalists and intellectuals?

Richard North – the author in 2015 of the 400 page bluebrint Flexcit - has been consistently disdainful of the ignorance shown by MPs of the technicalities of the various options, reminding us of the scale of the research facilities they have at their disposal if only they would use them properly. And, given the way North’s plan was ignored both before and after the referendum, he is clearly entitled to his disgruntlement. Here he takes apart those who contributed to the government’s third defeat on 29 March. And how he assessed the qualities of the various options MPs drafted in the first of the historic sessions of indicative votes they held on the 27th
By way of comparison, this is how one of the Guardian journalists set the scene. 

But it is contempt which is the dominant tone of most commentators eg of this diatribe last week against the political class; and this TLS comment on Parliamentarians – although “grammar of Brexit” is less caustic.

A great new blog

Context Matters is a fascinating blog I have just discovered – with intermittent posts written by ex-pat Jonathan Story - Emeritus Professor of International Political Economy at INSEAD at Fontainebleau – joining  it in 1974. He does great book reviews – often on recondite matters….see this recent one on a couple of academic books about German politics .

He is also one of the most articulate enthusiasts for Brexit – set out in one recent series

And last week’s post assessing the state of affairs was, as always, a great read.

Almost uniquely he gave us a summary of the key points of Theresa May’s deal with the EU

Titbit of the week

I have just come across a 1972 novel which anticipated Brexit! It’s the last novel written by the famous Daphne du Maurier – “Rule Britannia” It's a rather dystopian affair which actually involves a referendum (a device which had never been used at that time) a by the US!nd involves a takeover

Are Literary Magazines up to the Task?

Although I’m not a fan of newspapers, I did succumb recently to an offer from Le Monde – even if I miss the smell of the newsprint and its footnotes. But it is to journals I turn for serious reading - some two years ago I shared quite a long list of journals worth reading which is probably due an update. Here in Romania I often buy “Lettre Internationale”…..whose woodcuts are a great attraction. “Le Nouveau Magazine Litteraire” is also a regular purchase – sadly, German literary journals are not easily available so I have to make do with the German version of Lettre Internationale.

At the moment I actually have internet subscriptions to no fewer than 3 journals the New York Review of Books; the London Review of Books; and Political Quarterly

A venerable journal acquires a new editor

But the spark which ignites this particular post was my purchase recently of a couple of copies of the Times Literary Supplement (or TLS) – which have started to appear in Bucharest’s great little English bookshop “Carturesti and Friends”.

TLS is a venerable English institution – if not quite as old (est 1902) as its parent The Times which began in 1788 and was, until the late 1970s, very much the paper of the British elite whose seriousness was immediately evident by the closeness of the script and the lack of photographs. Indeed, until 1966 the front page was devoted to small advertisements of interest to the monied classes. All of this changed in 1981 when Rupert Murdoch acquired the newspaper after which its reputation may have declined but by 2005 its circulation had more than doubled (to 600k). Presently its circulation is only 300k

The Times Literary Supplement (TLS) I knew of old had repellent elitist tones but was then the only regular journal (weekly) devoted to books but, in the 1970s and 1980s, it was “New Society, “The Listener” and “Encounter” which attracted – and whose passing (some 30 years ago) I deeply regret. Each, in their distinctive ways, had a breadth and sensitivity which few other cultural mags seem capable of these days. I daresay that says more about me than the mags…..You can still taste the delights of “Encounter” in its archives which can be accessed here

But a strange happened in 1978 – a newspaper strike put The Times and TLS off the streets for almost a year. And into the empty space jumped a new title – initially as a pull out in the New York of Books. It was called the “London Review of Books” (or LRB) – a bi-monthly which now has a circulation of almost double that of TLS. The precise details of all this are set out in this nice little story in The Financial Times. What I had forgotten was that another title also jumped into the gap – and one which is also going strongly, the monthly Literary Review. But it is the LRB which has engaged my affections – confirmed whenever I buy the odd copy of TLS.

However the TLS acquired a new editor a couple of years ago – Stig Abell, a 39 year-old who had….wait for it….been the editor of the most offensive british tabloid newspaper – the Sun - for a couple of years…as well as a presenter on London Radio.

If the 2 copies I'v e read recently are typical, then he seems already to have made a difference to the staid journal I remember.....and I am tempted to write to him to make some points along the following lines.......   

I am an unashamed bibliophile – but of non-fiction - who has, however, become so concerned with the combination of scale and quality that I suggested recently (only half jokingly) that non-fiction books needed to be rationed. I now look very carefully at the introductions (and “Further Reading”) of books I pick up - to see what awareness the author (and indeed the publisher) reveals of the cynicism with which many of us readers approach this latest addition to our burden of reading. Ideally I would now like to see a typology – a short review of the relevant literature - to give me the confidence that the author is master of the field and has a mind open to the points at both ends of the relevant spectrum…..I certainly need to read a few pages of the text to give me a sense of the clarity and sensitivity of the writing 

And this is where we need the help of the literary journals…whose reviewers should be more obviously be asking these questions on our behalf – and exerting some pressure for answers on publishers and editors (with the exception of Simon Winder do editors exist these days?)

 But it is the European dimension which, not surprisingly, I find missing in the British journals….with the exception of the towering figure of Perry Anderson to whom I refer fairly regularly here.… Perry Anderson deserves much more credit for being one of the very few English-speaking writers whose articles (mainly in LRB) pay serious attention to contemporary debates on the European continent – whether France, Germany, Italy or even Turkey. They are collected in a version The New Old World which can be downloaded simply by clicking on the title. 

A UK outside the EU is in particular need of such writing – but has enough bilingual journalists (eg Olterman) and translators of the quality of Michael Hoffman – let alone polymaths such as Clive James of blessed “Cultural Amnesia - to make it possible. They just need a bit more encouragement from the editors of literary journals…

In the meantime I am just grateful to the EC for its continued support of the Eurozine venture which brings together the best of some 70 European cultural journals. And point to Courrier International as an example of a good selection into the French language of quality global journalism. Pity no one thought of making a bid some years ago for European funding for a journal giving us a sense of how different European countries were dealing with the big issues in their societies…..

Drama in the Commons

Brexit is apparently delayed - at least until April 12. And the headless chickens now have control of the farmyard ie MPs are now attempting to get their colleagues to support an alternative strategy from that of the government’s - which has twice in recent weeks been voted down by huge majorities. 

Even some of the hardline Brexiteers who have refused to support the government “deal” are beginning to understand that Brexit could be slipping away from them…..

There are no fewer than 16 different propositions on the official agenda for the House later today – only a few of which will by selected by the Speaker as likely to command wider support. One will be more of a procedural vote – to hold a second referendum. So I shall this afternoon be in thrall to parliamentary television. I watched the last few minutes of the interplay between witnesses and MPs on the Brexit Select Committee and it will be an hour or so before the exchanges start in the Chamber…..

One MP who will not be present is Chris Mullin - who retired in 2010 but whose wry memoirs are among the very few of that genre to attract readers. He occasionally contributes a diary entry to the London Review of Books and gave this insight last year into recent House of Commons’ operations - 

On this Wednesday afternoon, I was struck by the absence of recognisable faces. There were many staffers and officials, but scarcely any MPs. A sad truth dawned on me: for many of the present generation of MPs, the business of Parliament occupies only two days a week. Most out of town MPs travel down on a Monday morning and leave soon after Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday. Anyone who has seen the chamber on a Thursday, or indeed at any time other than Wednesday at midday, will know it is usually embarrassingly empty. The majority of debates and even important statements are thinly attended.
 Increasingly the business of Parliament has to be shoe-horned into the two days on which sufficient MPs can be guaranteed to be present.

It’s not that MPs are lazy; on the contrary, many work long hours. It’s just that holding the government to account appears no longer to be a priority for them. The trend has been noticeable for some years but seems to have accelerated. Part of the explanation is that Brexit has so overwhelmed the business of government and public discourse that there is little legislation of any significance and, as a result, nothing to vote on. Three-line whips on a Wednesday or a Thursday are now virtually unheard of. Sometimes weeks go by without a meaningful vote.
Many MPs have young families to whom they are anxious to return, and constituents and constituency parties expect a great deal more from their elected representative than they used to. Long gone are the days when an MP could get away with a quarterly visit to his constituency, where he would be greeted on arrival by the stationmaster in his top hat. Nowadays an MP is expected to live or, at least, have a base in their constituency and to be highly visible.The facilities available to MPs at the Commons have dramatically improved. The best a new MP could hope for forty years ago was a locker on the library corridor. Postage was strictly rationed and, until the 1960s, MPs were not allowed free phone calls outside London.

The secretarial allowance was introduced in 1969 and gradually morphed into the office costs allowance which, by the late 1980s, was enough to enable MPs to establish constituency offices. Over the years these and other allowances have steadily increased, with the result that the role of an MP has been transformed.
 The downside is that MPs are increasingly constituency-focused and some, especially those who represent poorer areas, have become glorified advice workers, embroiled in issues that in many cases are more properly the province of councillors and local authorities. Some MPs in marginal seats actively prefer to devote their time to acting as fairy godmothers to their constituents. I’m in favour of constituency-based MPs. That’s not the problem. I was one myself. I wonder, however, if the balance has tipped too far. Scrutiny of the executive is what Parliament is supposed to be about……….

John Bercow, Speaker of the Commons since 2009, has proved robust in promoting the rights of Parliament at the expense of the executive, grown overmighty in the last half-century. Up to March this year he had granted a staggering 439 urgent questions, each requiring an appearance, at short notice, by a minister at the dispatch box. This compares with the handful granted by his predecessors. No wonder he is cordially loathed by the government, or that he has earned the grudging respect of backbenchers. 

Another advance has been the rise of the select committees, which were established by the then Leader of the House, Norman St John Stevas, in the first year of Thatcher’s reign. Had she had any idea where the introduction of select committees would lead, she would have strangled them at birth.
They have the power to summon ministers and officials and to poke their noses into any aspect of policy that takes their fancy. This, combined with the televising of Parliament, has made them an important part of the political landscape.
 In recent years they have flexed their muscles in areas previously undreamed of. The only reason we have seen the bankers, or Rupert Murdoch or Philip Green having to account for their sins is that they have been summoned by select committees. These days there is even a committee to which the intelligence and security services are supposed to be accountable – an imperfect one (it reports to the prime minister rather than Parliament and its reports are censored) but light years ahead of where we were thirty years ago, when the public was not even permitted to know the names of the service heads, never mind what they got up to. Chairing a select committee is now remunerated, making it an alternative to a ministerial career. The chair of one of the main select committees has more influence than most junior or middling ministers. 

………………..many MPs can only be bothered to turn up for two days a week. A government that is allowed to function more or less unchallenged will become a law unto itself. And, after all, if MPs don’t take Parliament seriously, why should anyone else?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/27/take-back-control-brexit-remain-mps-indicative-votes

Update

During this past 3 years it’s been remarkably difficult to find clear and well-written material which would help the concerned citizen understand what was going on….3 months ago I tried to explore the reasons for this shameful state of affairs.

The BBC link at the top of this post is an unusually clear guide to the 16 motions which were tabled by MPs. And the People’s Vote has just published an exceptionally clear Guide – Weighing Up alternative Brexits

an English typology

It’s difficult to believe I know - but the UK is now only 4 days away from crashing out of the European Union – and the only appropriate way to describe the country’s leadership is that of running around like a headless chicken……

To calm myself, I have been using this month to explore what Brexit tells us about the English sense of identity – or… “who do you think you are?” – which I had speculated about in a post just over a year ago

Brexit is, of course, a deep political statement – so the question is what set of socio-political values is it which finds expression in this apparent rejection of association with Europe? And in particular does it signal a calculation of cost-benefit (as would befit a nation of shopkeepers” in Napoleon’s dismissive term) or is it more emotional – as most commentators tend to argue?

The Road to Somewhere is also quite clear about the answer to such a question……

Every now and then, the blog gets into a discussion about the continuing usefulness of the left-right spectrum in politics…And these days we have, generally, to concede the difference between the New and Old dimensions of the classic division. 

But how long can we keep using the term “new”? The UK “New Left” started all of 60 years ago – and the “New right” at Mont Pelerin a few years earlier..We are surely, therefore, overdue another term…..and the one I suggest is “emergent”  (which Mintzberg, I think it was, first used to distinguish one meaning of strategy)

And, as few people relish being labelled as either left or right, we need a mid-way point for them….That then gives a 3x3 matrix and the question is what terms to use for the resultant combinations……??? This is what I’ve come up with as a first shot…..

Core phrases of the various points of the British political spectrum

	Left	Centre	Right
“Old”	Mass strike	Family values	Traditional authority
“New”	Liberation struggle	Consumerism	Competitive individualism
“Emergent”	the sharing economy	Identity	narcissism

But the Acorn Guide to Consumers which I mentioned in a previous post probably offers some alternative terms…..

Let me know what you think…….

The Decline and Fall of the great British nation

I’m surprised that Danny Dorling’s “Rule Britannia – Brexit and the end of empire” which I recently mentioned does not make the connection between Brexit and the first word in the official name of our country – “Great”……Not even America has (so far) dared to try that trick…

So it may be the economic historians – rather than their social brethren or novelists - who hold the clue to the question of British identity?

Narratives about national economic performance certainly impact on our collective mind….I still remember the “What’s wrong with Britain” series of Penguin books in the 1960s as the country wrestled with post-war modernization.

Correlli Barnett became a favourite of Thatcher and her Ministers with his critique of the economic priorities of the Atlee government and its role in the British decline which has been a theme of economic writing for longer than I can remember - Larry Elliot has been a prominent exponent of “declinism” for the past couple of decades

In 1996 one of Britain’s foremost Scientific historians, David Edgerton  gave a critical assessment of one of Barnett’s books and has now published what looks to be a definitive analysis of the Rise and Fall of the British Nation

“Alone” became a word of lusty and emotive power at the core of a central national myth which privileged British destiny over that of other nation states. The glorification of “standing alone” in 1940 continues to pervert the United Kingdom’s sense of its place in the world and of foreigners’ obligations of respect and gratitude to its citizens.

Labour, Edgerton shows, consistently presented itself as a national rather than socialist party. Labour’s 1945 manifesto for the general election of 1945 promised to “put the nation above any sectional interest”. “Socialism” was mentioned once, “socialist” twice, “Britain” fourteen times, “British” twelve times, and “nation” or “national” nearly fifty times. Similarly, Labour presented itself in its general election manifesto of 1950 as “the true party of the nation”. The progressive Left has been more insidious in forming this mindset than the blimpish Right. The wearisome protests of historical exceptionalism and institutional distinctiveness are linked to another governing theme of Edgerton’s book: exaggerations of British inventive genius and the consequent tactical errors in research and development spending. Hark to Margaret Thatcher in her first speech as party leader to the Conservative Party conference in 1975.
 “We are the people who, among other things, invented the computer, refrigerator, electric motor, stethoscope, rayon, steam turbine, stainless steel, the tank, television, penicillin, radar, jet engine, hovercraft, float glass and carbon fibres. Oh, and the best half of Concorde.”

The false pride in supposedly being “the single inventor of . . . key parts of the atomic bomb, not to mention parliamentary democracy and the welfare state” is punctured by Edgerton. Barnes Wallis’s bouncing bomb and the PLUTO petrol pipeline, long celebrated for triumphant ingenuity, “were technical extravagances rather than necessities”, he judges.

The sorry tale of the Bloodhound, Skybolt, Blue Streak and Trident missile systems is recounted with devastating fairness. The government decision to build numerous advanced gas-cooled nuclear reactors (AGRs) and to persevere with a financially exorbitant but profitless development programme was “the crassest techno-nationalism trumping respect for efficiency”. There was ardent faith that unique British technical genius would renew and invigorate the national economy. Edgerton debunks the myth that the Westminster government failed to support its aircraft manufacturers sufficiently. The Ministries of Supply, Aviation and Technology backed numerous aircraft projects. “Far from the home sales being a springboard for export success, they were often the only sales, to an unwilling customer. The nationalized British airlines had to be forced to take on, or were indeed given, every large British aircraft produced.” Despite the Comet IV, the Britannia, the VC10 and Concorde, the nationalistically named airlines formed under Attlee’s Civil Aviation Act of 1946 preferred US aircraft for most long-haul flights.

No one dared to challenge the insistent propaganda that British high-tech inventiveness would yield lucrative exports. To oppose huge R&D expenditure on first-tier national projects was to hobble the export drive. “But the exports never came – no large hovercraft, no AGR, no Concorde was ever sold abroad”, writes Edgerton. “By the late 1960s, in private, within government, this was already known to be likely, but this truth was too scandalous, too unpatriotic to utter.”

One of my recent finds in second-hand bookshops here was an excoriating analysis of New Labour which came out in 2003 - Pretty Straight Guys. And Edgerton is fairly savage with that legacy too -

…. New Labour devised “a story of British exceptionalism to justify a newly global orientation of British armed force”. The UK was “reinvented . . . as a global contender”. It was implied that 10 million UK citizens living abroad needed to be defended – “presumably from the Americans, French, Australians and Spaniards among whom they lived”. The spin “even claimed dependence on foreign oil, when the UK was still a major oil producer”. Blair’s frenzy to establish global leadership, in alliance with a Republican President in the United States, resulted in the deaths and chaos of British military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan. “These extraordinary failures destroyed the last vestiges of a belief that the British state and its agencies told the truth if not the whole truth”, writes Edgerton. “They also showed that the British state machine had lost the capacity for rational and critical examination of policy.”

A Brexit “Lucky Dip”

English Culture and the Decline of the Industrial Spirit; M. Wiener 1981

Routledge Handbook on the Politics of Brexit (2018)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/20/pathetic-incoherent-chaotic-europes-verdict-on-brexit-shambles

https://mondediplo.com/2019/02/01brexit

john harris; https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/18/bitain-brexit-crisis-public-schools

https://centreforbrexitstudiesblog.wordpress.com/

OU Course https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=72026

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/culture/2013/01/meeting-our-makers-britain%E2%80%99s-long-industrial-decline

http://www.oecd.org/regreform/regulatory-policy/35258828.pdf (OECD 1997)

http://www.lse.ac.uk/globalGovernance/publications/workingPapers/regulationInAnAgeofAusterity.pdf

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/60805/1/Gough_Theories-of-the-welfare-state_1978.pdf

Prisoners of the Past - Nostalgia and the Post-War Labour Party:; Richard Jobson (2018).