Meeting held on Tuesday 20th August 2024 at 7.30pm.
Eight people were present. Five gave their apologies.
Thinking of the November election for US President, we did not know a lot about Kamala Harris’s policies except that she appeared to be to the left of Biden, probably more supportive of Palestine, and keen on women’s rights. Her Vice Presidential partner is Tim Walz who served in the National Guard. We were dismayed at Elon Musk who is raising money for Trump and using AI to spread disinformation. Some instances, obviously humorous to many (like Harris presiding over a communist conference) would nevertheless be believed by many uninformed Trump supporters. Increasing use of fake AI generated material leaves one wondering what is to be believed. And Trump has no regard for truth, it seems.
We were concerned that Trump said “vote fo me and you won’t have to vote again” and Project 2025, led by Trump supporters, makes democracy in USA appear to be under threat. A Republican government would also put an end to legislation on Climate Change. Considering Trump supporters we were uncertain about what informs voters’ views.
Relating to the war in Gaza,Trump has been a strong supporter of Netanyahu, with the backing of most of the Jewish community (there being more Jews in New York than Israel, it is said) though many Jews are raising their voices against Israel’s policies.Trump is also pro-Putin. However, he actually has little interest and knowledge about foreign affairs and so his polices may be unpredictable. Furthermore foreign policies – even the war in Gaza – are unlikely to be central to people’s voting decisions.
Turning to UK we were, on the whole, still optimistic about Starmer, but noted that there was some indication of a decrease in his popularity since the election. We were concerned that he follow through with proposed reforms to Trade Union legislation which has undermined workers’ rights. Despite some criticisms from Tory press, his response to recent riots has appeared to be decisive and firm. But would he seriously address the issue of inequality by, for example, raising a wealth tax?
A final discussion of the issue of localism led us to consider that some policies are best acted upon at a local level, while others may be more sensibly decided upon at a national level. The question of electricity pylons needed to improve the national grid was a case in point where nimbyism should not obstruct the need for pylon construction, yet there should be some consideration of local views. What we rejected, was the Tory ideological view that all matters are best left to the market which, they claim, is the best means for allocating resources. Planning is essential and has been lacking recently.
Our next meeting will be held from 7.45 – 9.15 on Tuesday 17th September.