Meeting held on Monday 20 February 2017
Twelve members were present.
The meeting discussed the idea of an internet forum to develop our conversation outside the group meetings and draw other local people into our discussions, either ‘on line’ and/or at meetings. Such a development could also be of interest to people in other regions and communities who shared our aims who might set up similar ‘Whatsleft’ groups. We also thought that our group could provide a model which could be used as a means for generating such discussions as the Progressive Alliance, which necessarily are not based within any one political party. Moreover, it could appeal to many who are interested in politics but have little sympathy with the established political parties.
We envisaged a web site which would have a public face; pages where interested individuals could read the online discussions; and members’ pages for those group members. We considered what might be on the public pages (to include description of the group, its way of working, notes of its meetings); the pages for interested individuals (to include access to the online discussion, but not the ability to take part in it); and the members’ page (details of meetings, of members, the ability to take part in the online conversation). Any personal details or details of specific times/places of meetings would appear only on the members’ pages.
The web site would have administrator(s) who managed the technical aspects, gave (or denied) access to those who wished to become ‘interested individuals’ or group members. Group members would have to be from the Hope Valley area. They would also have to share our broad aims.
We decided to give the idea a go and hope, for the March meeting, to have drafted a front ‘public’ page introducing the group. We felt it was very much an experiment which we hoped would stimulate political conversation, but would be prepared to drop the idea if, after a trial period, it didn’t seem to fulfil our hopes. We thought it was important that the development of this did not unduly distract us from the main purpose of our meeting: to engage in political conversation.
The rest of the meeting related to Brexit. We were critical of Blair’s recent intervention, just before important bye-elections, even where some agreed with what he had to say. Like most conversations about Brexit, however, it was not particularly coherent. This is partly through lack of knowledge about many technical and administrative details; partly because so many different economic and social issues are interlinked. We (again) discussed the need for raising taxation and the difficulties of initiating such a policy. We wondered whether Brexit (and Trump) foreshadowed the end of neoliberalism, and whether that would necessarily be a good thing; whether they would address or, more likely, exacerbate rising inequality. If that happened, how would the poor, many of whom voted for Brexit or Trump, respond to their yet greater impoverishment? Are we in a state of impending disaster, or is there hope for a new way of managing limited resources: a new economics?