It\’s something that really bugs me about the British left:
So there is a value to industrial action that is innate to the process, regardless of the outcome: it keeps the vocabulary, the mechanics and the muscle of conflict alive. These are things we\’re going to have more and more use for.
They can be so concerned about the process that little is left to consider the outcome. Here it\’s that strikes never seem to achieve very much but as long as they keep alive the the process of conflict they\’re great.
In other areas it\’s that markets create winners and losers….ignoring the way in which they make everyone better off over time. Or that capitalism is exploitation, which we shouldn\’t have, again ignoring what happens over time.
And it gets more important than that as well. The claim is that we should be am modern social democracy, more like the Nordics. But no one seems willing to go and look at what the Nordics are, extremely, classically, liberal economies with lots of redistribution on top. But no one on the left here argues for that classical liberalism for that\’s not the desired process…failing to see that you can only actually have the huge redistribution and continued economic growth if you have the classical liberalism underneath to provide the wealth to be redistributed.
I could go on with examples (workers should have greater employment rights to reduce the ability of companies to make them unemployed….yet in aggregate we see that strong employment rights increase unemployment….) but you get the point.
You probably got it first time I whined about it. The British left does much too much whining about the process of doing things and pays far too little attention to the actual methods of reaching the goals they claim to desire.