Traces the development of my 2017 book published by Pluto Press

Replacing Starmer/Reeves with another captive of the finance sector will change nothing

Successive governments in the UK – Labour and Tory – have pushed the nation to the brink where there is little capacity left for progressive policy. And I am not referring to Brexit. Rather, the elevation of the financial sector as a primary force in the economy, dating back really to the Callaghan Labour government and then fast tracked by Thatcher and Blair, has resulted in almost every important part of the economy being devoured by the greed machine. This is relevant to the leadership struggle in the UK Labour government, which should see the lamentable Starmer replaced by the (to be assessed) Andy Burnham. The latter would be the first Prime Minister to hail from Lancashire since David Lloyd George (1916-22) although Harold Wilson came from nearby Yorkshire. The problem the new leader will face apart from his own misguided notions about fiscal capacity and the need for ‘strict’ fiscal rules is that the financialisation of the British economy (like most economies in this neoliberal age) is so pervasive that the spheres of resistance to change are everywhere.

Read more

Towards a progressive rebuttal of the far Right narratives

I saw a clip from John Stewart’s Daily Show yesterday where he showed some Fox News commentators (I think) talking about how they hate ‘woke’ and how they now have to put up with public events featuring “half naked men” (their slight against the gay community). Stewart then showed the next clip – the cage fight at the White House where two half naked men were featured. The way he presented it was (as usual for the show) very funny. Yesterday (June 17, 2026), the leader of the far Right party in Australia (One Nation) gave her first ever – Speech – to the National Press Club in Canberra and apart from several outrageous statements (such as “Businesses also tell me you can’t sack people these days, they’re on their phones, they don’t work, they don’t turn up, they actually are lazy” and the “hoax of global warming”), she announced that Australia cannot be a multicultural society and that “we must be monocultural”. The fact checkers have already exposed her lack of honesty with respect to the actual data surrounding many of her assertions. But the question of culture and national cohesiveness is a subject that I am working on as part of my aim to publish a sequel to my 2017 book – Reclaiming the State: A Progressive Vision of Sovereignty for a Post-Neoliberal World – which I co-authored with Thomas Fazi. The question that the sequel begins with relates to what defines a viable currency area and what legitimates government fiscal policy. I see this issue as a central extension of the work on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) because it provides a sociological basis for currency sovereignty. One needs to develop a concept of the – Demos – to answer that question. I use that concept in the original sense.

Read more

Can capitalism survive? Not if we want to solve the climate and poverty crisis

The opening line of Part II of Joseph Schumpeter’s 1942 book – Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy – was “Can capitalism survive? No, I do not think it can”. His thesis was not that capitalism would perform badly, quite the opposite. Rather the considered that “its very success undermines the social institutions which protect it, and inevitably creates conditions in which it will not be able to live and which strongly points to socialism as the heir apparent.” The climate crisis facing the world is combining with the other outcomes of neoliberalism to create what is now called a poly crisis. Recently, a group associated with the United Nations Human Rights Council has released a – Roadmap for Eradicating Poverty Beyond Growth (published June 10, 2026) – which proposes a series of policy shifts designed to address aspects of the poly crisis. While it recognises that we must “escape the trap of growthism”, it fails to articulate that the fundamental logic of capitalism is capital accumulation that requires growth. To escape the trap, we must move beyond that mode of production. Merely tweaking policy structures within capitalism will not solve the problem.

Read more

Apparently the UK government is about to do the impossible – run out of sterling

Go back to the headlines in 2010 – – “Countries with debt over 90 percent of GDP enter a danger zone”. The 90 per cent threshold entered the media coverage as a result of a paper released by Harvard economists Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart – Growth in a Time of Debt. That paper talked about “debt intolerance limits” arising from “sharply rising interest rates” – and then “painful fiscal adjustments” and “outright default”. It also talked about the “obvious connection” between inflation and high public debt ratios – which had me laughing at the time because no-one has really shown that to be a robust relationship at all. Everyone started quoting the paper, even though at the time it had obvious flaws. The predictions failed to materialise as did all the previous predictions that economists like them had failed. But the press keeps giving their views a public platform because the lurid predictions attract audiences. It is a pity because lame politicians seem to regard the predictions as being based in fact and change policies for the worse. Anyway, Rogoff is back in town predicting that the British government will run out of sterling and be forced to bring in the IMF to address the fiscal crisis. That is what the headlines say. But if you delve more deeply, his position is a little different and exposes the chicanery of mainstream economics which holds itself out as a consistent body of theory but regularly uses that pretence to bully governments into political shifts that help the elites and damage the rest of us.

Read more

Latest changes to Australian privatised job service industry are just window dressing and the sociopaths remain dominant

In the 1990s, a new industry was created in Australia. It produced nothing. But it was the federal government’s response to the political fallout from the high unemployment that had persisted since it abandoned its committent to full employment in the 1980s as neoliberal ideology became dominant and the corporate sector took control of public policy. The industry was the ‘unemployment’ industry and took the form of a privatised job services system which was paid billions of dollars in public money to ‘manage’ the unemployment. It produced nothing beneficial and has destroyed millions of lives. It has been a public policy disaster for more than 28 years yet successive federal governments have persisted with it. Yesterday (May 27, 2026), the Federal government announced what it claims are the first major reforms in decades of this failed system of job services provision. Unfortunately, the changes announced by the Australian government yesterday are just window-dressing and behind the hype remains a deeply flawed system that will never produce positive outcomes for disadvantaged Australians. What it will continue to achieve is the enrichment of the privatised operators and their shareholders or stakeholders, while the unemployed are forced to live on income support payments that are well below the poverty line and be subjected to sociopathological obligations that do nothing to advance their job prospects. The whole privatised system should be abandoned.

Read more

Article 4 of the Bank of Japan Act 1997 ensures fiscal and monetary policy must work together

Last week, the RBA increased interested rates claiming there was a growing capacity constraint (even though there is 10.2 per cent labour underutilisation) and inflationary expectations were increasing and in danger of propelling inflation even further. The RBA governor once again threatened the Treasurer along the lines of ‘unless you cut net spending we will continue to hike rates’ – which not only demonstrates that the central bank is not politically independent but also reveals how poor monetary policy then compromises fiscal policy. The double jeopardy of New Keynesian macroeconomics – pretend monetary policy is effective and then cripple fiscal policy (which is effective) by subjugating it to the central bank whims. If we look at what is going on in Japan at present, we get a different angle to this. The Bank of Japan is certainly worried about inflation but it is being tethered to some extent by the Prime Minister who is placing a specific emphasis on Article 4 of the Bank of Japan Act. The resulting policy dynamics stand in sharp contrast to the way the RBA acts and thinks it is appropriate to bully the government into pursuing austerity when there is massive wastage of available labour resources.

Read more

A classic case of the Australian government denying that it is the Australian government

Most of the examples of fiscal austerity leave one puzzled as a result of the sheer myopia that is usually present – the ‘save a penny today to spend a dollar tomorrow’ sort of nonsense that history tells us repeats when governments try to reduce spending in areas that it should not. But sometimes one encounters examples of the government pretending not to be the government and making decisions that are just absurd on any basis. Here is one example that is current in the Australian context but which carries general principles that apply everywhere. I am currently doing some work on the proposal of Airservices Australia (ASA) to outsource the provision of its infrastructure to a private partner in the financial sector under what it calls a ‘Value-for-Money’ partnership. The details of this proposal, inasmuch as there is public information released makes you wonder how far the neoliberal lunacy has gone. It is a case of a government deliberately constraining itself in its responsibilities to provide an essential service – essentially denying its unique capacities – then proposing that it can ‘save taxpayers money’ by delivering profits to a private speculator (in essence) and get a better deal. But the arithmetic that delivers this ‘better deal’ is only possible if the government denies that it is the government and tilts the playing field so far that a terrible deal becomes the preferred one. Lunacy exemplified. And all the parties to this deal produce glossy PowerPoint slide shows, and have meetings and all the rest of the ‘private consultancy capture of government’ hoopla that is played out on a daily basis in these days, pretending that it is just normal business. Yet, anyone who actually understood what was going on would realise that this is a scam of all proportions.

Read more

A structured approach for progressive political ambitions – Part 6

This is Part 6 of the short series of briefing notes that arose out of discussions I recently had in London about how a progressive political party might want to break out of the shackles that the British Labour Party has bound itself in with its obsession with fiscal rules and an adherence to the fiscal fictions of mainstream macroeconomics. The thoughts, in my view, are relevant for all aspiring progressive political parties that might have fallen prey to the fictional world of mainstream economics and cannot find a way back. In the first part, I suggested a way forward was to shift the focus of what can be done with fiscal policy away from financial matters towards an emphasis on real resource constraints – that is, what productive resources are available for public use. In this sense, the discussion becomes focused on how much nominal spending growth is possible without sparking inflationary pressures as a result of nominal spending growth outstripping the productive capacity of the economy. In Part 2, I focused on aspects of the institutional structure that should be considered to support that shift in focus, including a planning network and a return to a public employment service. In Part 3, I began an examination of the long debate about economic planning, In Part 4, I continued that discussion. In Part 5, I discussed how the age of rapid, networked communication systems eliminate the basis of the pro-market, anti-planning critics. Today’s discussion focuses on the importance of institutional structure in government with a special case study of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) in Japan and the role that it played in that nation’s spectacular rise out of the ravages of World War 2 and US Occupation.

Read more

A structured approach for progressive political ambitions – Part 5

This is Part 5 of the short series of briefing notes that arose out of discussions I recently had in London about how a progressive political party might want to break out of the shackles that the British Labour Party has bound itself in with its obsession with fiscal rules and an adherence to the fiscal fictions of mainstream macroeconomics. The thoughts, in my view, are relevant for all aspiring progressive political parties that might have fallen prey to the fictional world of mainstream economics and cannot find a way back. In the first part, I suggested a way forward was to shift the focus of what can be done with fiscal policy away from financial matters towards an emphasis on real resource constraints – that is, what productive resources are available for public use. In this sense, the discussion becomes focused on how much nominal spending growth is possible without sparking inflationary pressures as a result of nominal spending growth outstripping the productive capacity of the economy. In Part 2, I focused on aspects of the institutional structure that should be considered to support that shift in focus, including a planning network and a return to a public employment service. In Part 3, I began an examination of the long debate about economic planning, In Part 4, I continued that discussion. In Part 5, I am discussing how the age of rapid, networked communication systems eliminate the basis of the pro-market, anti-planning critics. Today’s discussion is a practical description of how cybernetics can help deal with resource constraints in a planning system.

Read more

The Manosphere fills a void created by neoliberalism which has been largely ignored by progressives

Over the weekend just gone I took some time to watch the latest Louis Theroux documentary – Louis Theroux: Inside the Manosphere – which relates how far we have gone in reverse with attitudes that men hold towards women. This blog post is not intended to be a review of that film but rather my thoughts on where it sits in the history of neoliberalism. The proposition is that neoliberalism creates voids where individuals are left behind and constructed as miserable failures. It also promotes an idea that an individual’s prosperity is a function of their own diligence and that the state fails to advance our well-being. Increasingly, these ideas are then embedded in misinformation and conspiracy theories and movements emerge to give voice to the anxieties that we face. The manosphere serves that purpose and allows young men to gain a sense of purpose and worth – notwithstanding that it is the world of scammers and oppressors. But it is another way in which neoliberalism is driving our societies into system-failure.

Read more
Back To Top