Skip to main content

A shared progressive agenda?

There is a real threat of Britain taking a hugely regressive step next year, and electing a Tory government at a time when our country and world desperately need something better, more suited to the times.
What I think we really ought to be talking about is what we can agree on as a progressive agenda for fighting back against the tories (in whatever party they are, not just in the Conservative Party - e.g. New Labour and the LibDem leadership are tories too!). The kind of thing that Neal Lawson, James Graham, John Harris etc have been doing.  I think that the basic minimum parameters are something like:
>A real Green New Deal http://www.greennewdealgroup.org/, and serious action on dangerous climate change (and other major environmental threats) more generally.
>Public ownership of _some_ form or another of at least some major bank(s), and re-regulation of the financial sector.
>NO to public service cuts and further privatisations.
>A thorough set of constitutional reforms, incl PR; a new political settlement to genuinely clean up politics.
Something along these lines can perhaps be accepted by green-hued LibDems, leftish Labourites, Salma Yaqoob's Respect Party, the Scots and Welsh Nats, the Green Party (of course), and independents such as Martin Bell and Richard Taylor.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reasonable manners, in the blogosphere

Dear readers of Rupert's Read; One thing I am pleased about about this blog is that when we have had debates or disagreements here, they have virtually always been good-tempered. Because the norm out there in the blogosphere is often not like that. Take 'Comment is Free', for example, on the Guardian Unlimited site: the level of debate on CIF is pretty awful, frankly, in terms of civility. It is a very unpleasant place to take part in any debate, generally, unless perhaps (as most commenters do) one hides behind the veil of anonymity (which 'ain't allowed' here). And the truth is, in case any fellow commenters reading this don't realise it, that there are many many people who get put off even reading (let alone posting to) CIF because of the volume of plain nasty comments that they risk getting, when they do. I am slightly singling out CIF here, because I believe that this is actually one of the worst places on the blogosphere in terms of this kind of ...
15 comments
Read more

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...
16 comments
Read more