March (2) 2016

Meeting held on Monday 29 March 2016

9 people were present and 5 gave their apologies

Underpinning much of the conversation appeared to be two related themes: a sense of powerlessness; and a hope that things are – or may be about to – change.

A report of the meeting about EU in Grindleford commented that the more articulate speaker was the representative of Brexit; also that the landlord of the pub in which it was held claimed that all his customers would be voting against staying in EU. (This may tell us more about the pub than about Grindleford inhabitants.)

Much discussion related to the disenchantment that is felt towards the political establishment in UK and USA. The success of campaigns for Trump, UKIP and Brexit may draw more upon such disenchantment than upon rational argument. We wondered whether those who had become increasingly disenfranchised (especially the younger generation) were able or likely to lead progressive change. Certainly intergenerational inequality is building pressure for change, but the ‘precariat’ are not in a position to lead this and faith has largely been lost in the established organs of change.

The dominance of the market, and the assumption that this cannot be otherwise, has led to a society of isolated individual consumers/customers rather than any sense of the collectivity of citizens which is needed to create progressive change. In the face of this there is an enormous need for new forms of collectivity so that individuals may live together more creatively.

In a more hopeful vein: it was becoming clear that the neo-liberal requirements for investment, trading and competition were no longer functioning properly. At the same time, professionals and customers were, it seems, becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the tick box mentality of market relations. And also various examples were given (eg from theatre, NHS) of possibilities for creative collective endeavour.

The dominance of the EU Referendum in the political agenda at present has added to confusion in our attempts to articulate a politics of the left. Many political decisions are being taken (such as the move to Academies) with little discussion or opposition. At the same time, while neo-liberalism dominates in Europe, the left finds it difficult to wholeheartedly present the case for remaining in solidarity with other European forces of the left.

We have two more meetings before the Referendum.