Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

Well, you can't be really surprised that Greens are not keen on nuclear. Also, their measure of improving home insulation should be pretty popular, given that it'd also help raise property values. 

You'd think

We had a very good program on it going which got cancelled during austerity because the easy things to cut are capital expenditure - and then we end up here

That's an issue indeed if they oppose everything. There's a clear divide between utopians and pragmatists in the green movement, regarding how they envision future developments. If they don't allow for anything to be done, how do they actually want things to go forward? By magic? The "no to everything" attitude of some groups should be challenged.

I think it's the key division in our politics for the next thirty years - although I'm not sure if I see it as utopian v pragmatist

There's a few dividing points but conservationism is not the same as environmentalism. In my view the necessary solution is fundamentally about development - it's the Green New Deal, Green Industrial Revolution, AOC. For want of a better word it's a modernist politics of progress based on technology and building. On the other hand I think there's a politics that's about conservation, consumption reduction, degrowth, immediate action not the delayed impact (that will have a carbon cost) of development, the Greta side, Extinction Rebellion etc. My view is that it's a reactionary politics of apocalypticism with some dodgy allied view (a bit of crude Malthusianism). And if you're facing apocalypse there's no point in progress or hope or building. For now, they're allies but I think that's the core division that will run through a lot of politics for the next thirty years. And clearly I'm on one side because I think basically one is a left-wing politics of collective action to improve our lives and save the planet, while the other seems to me about the moralistic counting of atomised individual carbon footprints - it's atonement not politics

Over here we're only recently starting to experience backlash against certain renewables projects, and some of the complaints are reasonable, but they start to veer worryingly into green NIMBYsm, but luckily no large orgs support that, only smaller grassroots orgs.

Yeah I mean here people are pointing out that Greenpeace has been doing a lot on the German train ticket idea and big campaigns about wanting public transport. But they campaigned against HS2 because of "ancient woodland". One of the reasons we couldn't do something like that German train ticket is that on huge chunks of our rail network, the system is already running at 100% - there is no spare capacity.

But fundamentally England's one of the most densely populated parts of Europe. It's at 424 per square km, which is basically the same as the Netherlands (421 per sq km). So that article about is the Netherlands hitting the limits of growth to a large extent also applies to England (except we have far worse economic conditions than the Netherlands).

The vast majority of England is not developed or built on, but that density means that doing anything is probably ruining someone's view, someone's nearby green space etc. Practically I think development is easier and NIMBYs less likely if you have Spanish levels of population density (92 per sq km).

[Iormlund]

Most Green or Green-adjacent folk I've talked to share that magic tech syndrome.

Everything is just a step away, be it cheap lightweight batteries, power distribution networks to enable recharing millions of BEVs, cheap renewables that somehow are not affected by weather, and so on.

Perhaps playing Rule the Waves should be mandatory at school, to teach people that you've got to build what you have NOW, not what you might have in ten years.

[The Larch]

Most Green or Green-adjacent folk I've talked to share that tech-as-magic syndrome.

Not just greens, many politicians seem to also gamble into magic tech solving all current and future problems.

[Sheilbh]

Most Green or Green-adjacent folk I've talked to share that magic tech syndrome.

Everything is just a step away, be it cheap lightweight batteries, power distribution networks to enable recharing millions of BEVs, cheap renewables that somehow are not affected by weather, and so on.

Perhaps playing Rule the Waves should be mandatory at school, to teach people that you've got to build what you have NOW, not what you might have in ten years.

And the thing is there are areas where we will need a new technological solution. There are areas which are really difficult to decarbonise and we can't do it now. But I find the waiting for the perfect solution or taking the time to design the perfect policy mix is to my mind just totally wrong-headed.

You're absolutely right we should be focusing on what we can do now and for the UK that definitely includes (but isn't limited to) nuclear. It's why I like the New Deal or Industrial Revolution framing. I'm not sure what the perfect answer will be but I don't think we have time to find out and, to nick the FDR line, we need "bold, persistent experimentation".

[Tamas]

This thing with dumping asylum seekers in London and leaving to their own stinks of me of Orban's 2015 stunts executed in an incompetent way, to build government support by scaring people with the unwashed masses invading London.

[Sheilbh]

This thing with dumping asylum seekers in London and leaving to their own stinks of me of Orban's 2015 stunts executed in an incompetent way, to build government support by scaring people with the unwashed masses invading London.

Also it's London probably the area of the country most open.

On the dumping - I've mentioned it before but the change under New Labour that stopped allowing asylum applicants from working is one of the worst bits of policy in the system. Because they can't legally work while their application is processed (which is taking a lot of time now - deliberately, in my view) all the tabloid ideas of people living on benefits is true. Not because that's what they want but because they are legally banned from working. But it also means that the government which is paying, tends to house asylum applicants in the poorest areas of the country (and in the poorest areas of those areas) because they're cheaper - so the North-East has vastly more asylum applicants than anywhere else in the country, while having far fewer other immigrants.

And I'd add that the housing is generally outsourced to companies like Serco and G4S who don't have a record of providing high quality services to government - so I imagine that's a whole other horror story.

If asylum applicants were able to work I think it would obviously allow them to live where they wanted - probably not Middlesbrough (the areas with most asylum applicants), but in areas where there's a diaspora and jobs. Plus obviously they'd very likely be able to earn more than they currently receive in benefits and have a better quality of life.

What makes it all even crueller is that the UK, in recent years, actually ends up accepting the vast majority of asylum applications. On first application it's about 50%, most of the other 50% appeal and and the overturn rate is about 50/50 as well. So in total, around 70-80% of asylum applications are eventually accepted and asylum granted. We just make them live in a very cruel system for months if not years in the interim.

[Iormlund]

Most Green or Green-adjacent folk I've talked to share that tech-as-magic syndrome.

Not just greens, many politicians seem to also gamble into magic tech solving all current and future problems.

Being a cynic, I feel that's just their way through the path of least resistance.

Perhaps nobody exemplifies this as well as Merkel, who traded away Germany's energy security despite having first-hand education and experience in actual scientific research. Most politicians at least have the excuse of being mere lawyers.

[The Larch]

Being a cynic, I feel that's just their way through the path of least resistance.

Oh, for sure, it's the easiest way out, so no hard choices have to be made at all.

[Josquius]

To the northern investment talk... Well yes. We voted for brexit. That was a vote to fuck over the north and make the UK even more London centric.
Those who believed the attempts to spin it as the opposite were daft and I'd like to say they get what they deserve but most of the people in the north are innocent.

This thing with dumping asylum seekers in London and leaving to their own stinks of me of Orban's 2015 stunts executed in an incompetent way, to build government support by scaring people with the unwashed masses invading London.

Also it's London probably the area of the country most open.

On the dumping - I've mentioned it before but the change under New Labour that stopped allowing asylum applicants from working is one of the worst bits of policy in the system. Because they can't legally work while their application is processed (which is taking a lot of time now - deliberately, in my view) all the tabloid ideas of people living on benefits is true. Not because that's what they want but because they are legally banned from working. But it also means that the government which is paying, tends to house asylum applicants in the poorest areas of the country (and in the poorest areas of those areas) because they're cheaper - so the North-East has vastly more asylum applicants than anywhere else in the country, while having far fewer other immigrants.

Conspiracy mode but I do wonder the extent to which this is intentional to push voters in these traditional Labour areas into far right support.
I doubt it was the original thinking behind it but the tories aren't stupid. They will recognise it can be used that way now.

And I'd add that the housing is generally outsourced to companies like Serco and G4S who don't have a record of providing high quality services to government - so I imagine that's a whole other horror story.

This is what really pisses me off. Typical penny wise pound foolish stuff, no doubt ideologically driven.
Happens with homeless housing too.

[Duque de Bragança]

Being a cynic, I feel that's just their way through the path of least resistance.

Oh, for sure, it's the easiest way out, so no hard choices have to be made at all.

Also, the hard choices will have to be made when they are no longer in office. 

[Sheilbh]

Conspiracy mode but I do wonder the extent to which this is intentional to push voters in these traditional Labour areas into far right support.
I doubt it was the original thinking behind it but the tories aren't stupid. They will recognise it can be used that way now.

[...]

This is what really pisses me off. Typical penny wise pound foolish stuff, no doubt ideologically driven.
Happens with homeless housing too.

Both started under Labour. It was outsourcing and as you say penny wise, pound foolish.

Those who believed the attempts to spin it as the opposite were daft and I'd like to say they get what they deserve but most of the people in the north are innocent.

Don't think you can have it both ways

The North-East and Yorkshire and Humber went 58% for Brexit, the North-West 54%.

[Zanza]

Most Green or Green-adjacent folk I've talked to share that tech-as-magic syndrome.

Not just greens, many politicians seem to also gamble into magic tech solving all current and future problems.

Being a cynic, I feel that's just their way through the path of least resistance.

Perhaps nobody exemplifies this as well as Merkel, who traded away Germany's energy security despite having first-hand education and experience in actual scientific research. Most politicians at least have the excuse of being mere lawyers.

Over here, the Greens seem far more realistic on tech than say the Liberals - with their known blind spot on nuclear. Which is why they actually advocate reducing energy consumption together with building renewables. The Liberals are the ones that pretend that some future tech will save us and the invisible hand of the market will bring us that tech quick, cheap and without government intervention. 

Merkel and generally her Conservatives are completely passive. They neither believe in new tech, nor in energy savings. They just pretend we can continue our old ways forever, i.e. burn fossil fuels. Without regard to either energy security or climate change.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Apparently about half the recent asylum seekers are from Albania. I'm finding this very mysterious. We now have about 140,000 Albanians living in the UK; which may not sound much but is about 5% of Albania's population. Many are coming over via the dangerous boating route but...most strange...they have visa-free entry into the EU 

Albania is considered to be a safe country, but even so about 50% of initial applications are granted. The other big group on the boats are from Afghanistan.

The BBC has an explainer https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-63473022

The tories are making out that they are all gangsters, but it is invariably Albanian women and children that are granted asylum, so the gangster argument can only be applied to a minority.

I do wish some enterprising journalist would go and ask them why they want to come here 


Agree with shielbh about the cruel stupidity of not allowing asylum-seekers to work, especially since the granting of asylum is generous if unforgiveably slow. Most of these poor sods we are incarcerating in the arse-end of Middlesborough are future citizens, let them work and let them join their families/communities.

[Iormlund]

Merkel and generally her Conservatives are completely passive. They neither believe in new tech, nor in energy savings. They just pretend we can continue our old ways forever, i.e. burn fossil fuels. Without regard to either energy security or climate change.

I was thinking specifically of Merkel's shift after Fukushima.

[Syt]

Merkel and generally her Conservatives are completely passive. They neither believe in new tech, nor in energy savings. They just pretend we can continue our old ways forever, i.e. burn fossil fuels. Without regard to either energy security or climate change.

Merz recently basically said, "Well, at this point reducing emissions is useless anyways, so we have to trust in tech."