How did Britain do a complete 180 from a social democracy to a completely neoliberal one?Like wtf happened in the 70s there, it can't just be the strikes because they were strikes all around the world at the time as well.
something about socialism not working and strangling the UK's economy and someone had to save the UK from becoming a post-soviet bankrupt shitholeshe did nothing wrong
>>6126264is that her vagina?
>>6125744The left split over Europe and the Social Democratic party hoovered up enough votes that the the right stayed in power for over a decade.
>>6125744Britain was always neoliberal. The collective suffering experienced during WW2 is what made them embrace aspects of socialism for a while.
>>6126141If not for the Falklands she'd be fucking despised desu
People were afraid of another Great Depression in the 70s. That's also why Reagan got elected.
>>6125744Britain only ever adopted social democracy to ease class struggle in the aftermath of WW2 and because the Soviet Union had mall these things capitalism didn't like free healthcare and free education. As the Soviet Union became less of a threat, the impetus to have social democracy went away.This isn't just true of Britain, its true for the whole of Europe. Social democracy in Europe is dying a rapid death because the capitalists don't need it anymore.
The capital destruction of WW1 and WW2 meant that from the 1950s to 1970s there were high rates of growth as the level of capital stock recovered. The volume of trade only reached 1900s levels in the UK in the late 80s. This high level of growth and industrial output made welfare-capitalism sustainable.As the UK reached the 1970s, the positive relationship between growth and inflation began to break down causing something called "stagflation" which is stagnation/recession with inflation. Growth was slowing down as post-war boom ended, and the UK suffered regular balance of payment crises. The above meant that the economy was vulnerable to an increase in inflation, or stagflation... The structural economic conditions which were arguably present before WW1 (excluding unions' power rather than their anger) made the UK vulnerable to an inflationary disaster....Governments had always been able to target full employment during the post-war boom. The Phillips Curve, which was derived empirically in the 50s, suggested to policy makers that there was a trade off between unemployment and inflation. Much of conservative and labour post-war economic polices targeted full-employment, which was an inflationary pressure. The price of oil was the most significant structural cause of inflation in the 1970s. If the price of oil rises, almost all firms' costs will rise, and so they will raise their prices. The world oil market was effectively controlled by OPEC during this period.
>>6127046Edward Heath's Conservative government had been in power since 1970, and his government deregulated the mortgage market in a bid for quick growth, but this added inflationary a disproportionately large inflationary pressure to an already vulnerable economy. Unions were powerful, which meant that they would demand pay rises in line with inflation as a minimum. Powerful unions are a good thing, but difficult for governments if they are unions in nationalised industries. These nationalised industries were on the whole profitable, but the unions and the conservative government were almost always antagonistic.The disaster began in 1973 when OPEC embargoed the US and its allies in response to their support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War. This negative aggregate-supply shock pushed up prices in the economy--coupled with the tendency of oil demand to rise over the previous decades it was a catastrophe. There was an inflationary crisis from the oil crisis. This inflationary crisis came at a time of low growth and productivity causing stagflation.Heath dissolved parliament and called a crisis-election in February 1974. Enoch Powell infamously encouraged Tory Eurosceptics to vote Labour. The result of the February 1974 election was that Harold Wilson's Labour was the largest party, but had no overall majority. Wilson himself would need to call another election. The embargo ended in March, and Wilson had inherited a 400% rise in the price of oil. It would remain high throughout the 70s. In October, Wilson called an election, and won the final Labour victory until Blair almost 25 years later. His government had a majority of three. Heath resigned, and Thatcher became leader of the opposition.
>>6127069It's wrong to argue that powerful unions and socialism caused inflation, the unions were responding to it. The inflation was caused by high oil prices. When unions went on strike in 1975 to demand a large increase in pay it was because inflation was at 27%. The solution was that the unions agreed to moderate increases in wages. Many union workers were still having pay cuts in real-terms, while overall living standards rose moderately over the 70s. The overall economic problem of the 70s, though, was of rising unemployment and inflation--the opposite of what governments expected.Wilson resigned; from the paranoia he was going to be assassinated; so that in 1976 Labour's James Callaghan became PM. Free collective bargaining was ended, and oil prices began to stabilise. Inflation actually fell somewhat for the next two years too. Callaghan's solution to runaway inflation and rising unemployment was to cap income rises at 5%. Inflation was racing into double figures, and union workers were effectively taking huge pay cuts. The result... public sector strikes.Callaghan's government refused to budge as the strikes intensified. In the winter of 78-79, rubbish was not being collected, essential services were closed, and lorry drivers refused to transport petrol. The government declared a state of emergency, and the military transported essential goods. The winter was the coldest for many decades and was called the "winter of discontent." Callaghan, in an act of supreme misjudgement, decided to join world leaders at the Guadeloupe Conference in the Caribbean. Newspapers printed photos of him on the beach, as the country froze. It was deleterious.
>>6125744where 2 cop jumper?
>>6127106>>6127106In 1979 the government climbed down, and the strikes thinned out. The damage had been done, though. Callaghan lost a vote of no-confidence in the House of Commons and was forced to call an election.Now, in the light of all this. ANY alternative to the status-quo was preferable. People were not voting for Thatcher as much as they were voting against the status quo. The mood was "surely there's got to be something better than this." When Thatcher was elected, the second oil crisis was starting. Between 1979 and 1980 oil prices doubled and reached record highs; however, Oil prices then fell for the next 20 years. This coupled with a monetarist obsession with controlling inflation by any means necessary did result in inflation falling over the 80s and 90s. Massive oil reserves were discovered in the North Sea. Thatcher's government used the revenue from it to cover tax cuts for higher earners and the middle class. Now, many people were not infact aware of the radical neo-liberal restructuring of the economy that was planned when they voted for Thatcher. The situation is very similar to Brexshit, in that people were simply voting against the status-quo, and listened to those who reduced all complex structural economic problems to "the unions" or "the EU". Most brexiters really don't know or believe all of the horrid shit that is about to happen. "The winter of discontent" will happen again, and the tories are literally planning for a state of emergency just as Labour did all those years ago.Thatcher also blamed the problems on brown people and infamously absorbed the votes of the neo-nazi, National Front, into her base, which then ceased to be a significant force as it had been in the 70s.... sound familiar?So to sum up:OPEC domination of oil market -> high inflation -> strikes -> government collapse.
>>6125744Britain is the birthplace of liberalism, and neoliberalismNot sure why the idea that britain was more socialist than anyone besides the US pops upIf anything it has been these last couple decades where britain has stopped being liberal as fuck and went into socialist leaningsInb4 muh welfare means socialist
>>6127152>If anything it has been these last couple decades where britain has stopped being liberal as fuck and went into socialist leanings>Inb4 muh welfare means socialistWhat do you mean? You're really arguing Britain has become more socialist recently?
>>6127152>Not sure why the idea that britain was more socialist than anyone besides the US pops up>If anything it has been these last couple decades where britain has stopped being liberal as fuck and went into socialist leanings>Inb4 muh welfare means socialistOP is asking about social democracy, not socialism.
Because quite simply the plan was to De-industrilize Britain, and turn it into a tax-haven for the super-rich while focusing on consumer services and high-end products. Thacher was there so that the social state would be dismantled for the working class people. Torries are pure fucking evil, Even today the torries that manufactured Brexit all have links to the City. British people who vote for them put a whole other meaning to cuckservative.
The industries in the u.k dried up. So there were huge problems with that. The unions destroyed 2 or prime ministers before she came around or something along those lines. She stopped the hemorrhaging and really saved their reputation during the Falklands war
>>6127146>Now, many people were not infact aware of the radical neo-liberal restructuring of the economy that was planned when they voted for Thatcher. The situation is very similar to Brexshit, in that people were simply voting against the status-quo, and listened to those who reduced all complex structural economic problems to "the unions" or "the EU". Most brexiters really don't know or believe all of the horrid shit that is about to happen. "The winter of discontent" will happen again, and the tories are literally planning for a state of emergency just as Labour did all those years ago.We're also at the time of a key demographic change, as they were then. In the 70s and 80s, the Boomers grew into the majority voting demographic, and that has remained true to this day. It all seems set to change though, and the demographics really are doing the Tories no good at all. I put it down as the biggest factor in 2017: the majority of working people, and people under 50 as a total, would have elected Corbyn by a landslide. I don't know what causes such radical differences in generations, but it seems to be the factor to everything.
>>6126440she is despised.
>>6127202>I don't know what causes such radical differences in generations, but it seems to be the factor to everything.It's because you delineate generations by changes in material conditions. You're not observing a causality as such, but just your own definitions.
Press P to piss on her grave.
>>6127146Good contribution, hard to encounter anyone these days who understand how the OPEC crisis changed everything and we could have avoided it by reining in Israel.
>>6127171Besides the initial 50s burst I'd say yeah, not that it means very much because I dont personally think theyve been very socialist everHonestly pardon my ignorance though, I may be full of shit>>6127192SorryWhat is social democracy?
>>6127363Social democracy is free markets, high taxes, a lot of public services, and very strong unions.
>>6125744The 70's were pretty shit.
>>6127389The more you know, seems like a very odd name
>>6127436Are you new to all of this? The UK is decisively less socialist than at any point since the war. You don't know social democracy either?
>>6126141100% thisBritain was basically going to turn into a heap and everyone but some insistent gibmedats from the north knows it.
>>6127573why do some people cling so viciously to tabloid narratives?
>>6127389>free markets, high taxes, a lot of public services,this is literally impossible
>implying Britain ever was a social democracyTories being lenient with unions and keeping the NHS doesn't mean the UK ever was a social democracy.
>>6127624This is literally the economic model for half of Europe.It's possible to have industries that are mostly deregulated, with very low corporate tax, and combine that with high income tax and extensive government services.
>>6127624It is, and it's proof why political science and economy are phony sciences you shouldn't care with.
Corbynite here. The truth is that there was huge infighting with the Labour party and it's supports.It's called the Winter of Discontent.When people think of strikes, they think of working class Labour fighting middle class Conservatives, but this is not really the case. It was Labour against Labour. The Conservatives were the protest vote. Thatcher was Britian's Trump.She literally got an education in economics from a chicken farmer.
>>6127624>this is literally impossiblego on
>>6127389Markets are not magic. Sometimes they work. Sometimes they don't. I don't like the fundamentalism of insisting that 100% of the economy must be market driven. I mean. I'm a scientist. There wouldn't be science if it was up to the market.
>>6127665>This is literally the economic model for half of Europe.Not really. Most of Europe are not super invested in market fundamentalism. They all have their big exceptions.
>>6127665>>6127673>>6127678>This is literally the economic model for half of Europeimagine then why most of europe has slow growth, high youth unemployement and pretty much no investment in new fields, carreer stagnation and increasing social programs that only succeed in creating more fiscal burden strangling the economy further
>>6127620narrative? I only cling to the fact of historical record
>>6127713Because the current market conditions worldwide don't want to invest in anything with projected returns longer than 5 years in the future.Everyone wants to get rich today. People need to wake up and smell the coffee, but right now our economy is controlled by 70 year old skeletons that need to fucking die already.
>>6127713Yeah, I'm sure all the millions of sand people and Africans drowning in Mediterranean are trying to come to a place that is worse than what they are running from.
Never forget the 6 million mines closed
>>6127721gibzmedat I'm entitle a six figure salary even if I don't want to work hard or work at all>>6127733it's not hard being better that sand people and african countries simply because it's the sand people and africans that make their own countries shit
>>6127146Very good effort-post. Thanks, anon.
>>6127760Lel I don't know why people even try talking to you mongs. You don't understand any of the current economic situations in African countries.
>>6125744Strikes by public-sector workers created hostility against the public sector by private-sector workers who paid high taxes on their low wages to pay higher wages to the public-sector workers - which were denying them service.There is never complete harmony between two people or more, but it was especially bad then. I imagine there might be other possible solutions to the problems then, but I'm not particularly knowledgeable of the recent history of the UK.>>6126733This is your brain on ideology.Germany and Britain were ahead of the curve on healthcare, historically. State sponsored or state admnistered healthcare and disability insurance were things before communism; western states weren't comparing themselves to soviet states but to each other. The soviets weren't even the first to have universal healthcare, since only urban dwellers had the privilege; the UK was 20 years ahead of the soviets with it's NHS.Thatcherism can be explained fully by the internal factors of the UK. Labour governed over growing unemployment and a deterioation of public services (people where getting worse service for more taxes/inflation - both of which reduced their actual economic power). It wasn't like Thatcher snuck her reforms behind the peoples' back; she campaigned on those and conservatives went on to win four consecutive elections.
>>6127913>Germany and Britain were ahead of the curve on healthcare, historically. State sponsored or state admnistered healthcare and disability insurance were things before communism; western states weren't comparing themselves to soviet states but to each other. The soviets weren't even the first to have universal healthcare, since only urban dwellers had the privilege; the UK was 20 years ahead of the soviets with it's NHS.For healthcare it makes sense. Nobody can afford healthcare, it's just not realistic for anyone to pay for the kind of health risks they're likely to encounter. But everybody can afford healthcare, it is realistic for everyone to pay for everyone's healthcare every year, and have that cost be affordable for everyone.
>>6127146Could you explain how Thatcher and Callaghan controlled inflation to a brainlet?
>when your country is being held to ransom by old people
>>6128160the very young don't always have a clear understanding of posterity
>>6128190the very young being anybody who still earns a living?
>>61257441973 oil crisis
>>6125744Social democracy is a shit meme that doesn't work. Nordic countries aren't even market socialist anymore they are hyper-capitalist and use the wealth from that to fund generous public services.
>>6127146hope someone moments this thread
>>6125744Britain was never a social democracy. Thatcher broke the power of the immensely corrupt and backwards trade unions and privatized a whole bunch of useless under-performing state owned assets, the result was a massive economic boom but yet lefties here in Britain STILL think this was a "betrayal" and that we need to go back to powerful trade unions and state monopolies.
>>6128973why are they so thickly militant over it?
>>6125744British industry was nationalized then began to fail after the oil crisis and at least in part due to union demands like not upgrading technology. It was being subsidized by the taxpayer during a financial crisis.The boomers who were leftists in uni were now trying to start careers and the general zeitgeist shifted towards the right. Thatcher, being the then potential first female prime minister, divided the left further. Thatcher was also the daughter of a greengrocer at a time when conservatives plucked most of their politicians and ministers from the upper class. It created a sense that you don't need to be a hardcore socialist to promote modern liberal ideals and so she gained mass support from all but the most gruff working class northerners.
>>6129725Ideology is a prison for the mind.
>>6129725You could argue that during the 1890s, the TUC (Trade Union Congress) adopted and expected a more militant approach from its union members. The Labour Party was founded through the central body of the TUC, and until Blair and the repeal of Clause 4 from the party constitution they were the party for the working people essentially. Clause 4 is basically for Labour to commit itself to Socialism, and Blair wanted to weaken the influence of Trade Unions within the party by getting rid of it."To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service"So in short, Trade Unions had huge influence politically through the Labour party and had a somewhat militant methodology dating back to the 1890s.
>>6127573>northerner gibsmedats >MFW the south is the capital of gibsmedabts fucking southern fairy
Britain values classical liberalism and individualism, socialism and collectivism are the exact opposite of those virtues.
>>6127146That was an enjoyable read, thank you
>>6125744They never killed their nobility so they stuck around ruining everything.
>>6131199I once knew a good fellow of your number, he unaccountably grew up without electricity.
>>6127146Fuck you traitorbrexit means brexit, we used to rule the world and fought to bloody world warswe're gonna smash through the EU and pretty much rule the bloody continentyou would've probably cried if you had to fight in d-day you snowflake
>>6131199>The south is the capital of gibsmedatsWhat did he mean by this?
>>6125744>social democracyPro-tip it never really existed in any of Europe. It only existed because of the USSR. Now that it's gone welcome to hell world.
>>6132083ah yes, the w*lsh
>>6127146i think they did the same in russia
>>6127203Only by brainlets.
>>6132088are you suggesting that the soviet union was a necessary foil by which we strengthened and edified our own just convictions?
>>6127146>BrexshitCringe and bluepilled. The major EU economies are heading for recession as we speak (or are already there). Anti-EU governments are popping up everywhere. It's over. Britain is merely unshackling itself from a corpse.
>>6129725Because most of them weren't even there at the time.
>>6125744The Banking Class grew offended at the idea that they owed the Working Class Poor anything
>>6127069>deregulated the mortgage market in a bid for quick growthBut then>>6127069>disproportionately large inflationary pressure to an already vulnerable economy.Like poetryThe same sort of sabotage was repeated across the West in Sweden and Japan, and later America. It was also done in pre-Revolution France. Seems to be a pattern
>>6134390I wonder if anyone's been arrested for doing that yet
>>6125744Britain has never been a social democracy, or a neoliberal democracy, it's always been a constitutional monarchy in the modern period.What you are really asking is about the sympathies of the political class, >>6127046 through >>6127146 obviously covers what happened quite well economically, but still fails to identify the Forrest through the trees.>>6126733 more or less hits the nail on the head in if you substitute "capitalist" for "political elites", during the early 20th century it was in vogue to be socialist as the main cultural world powers (France and Germany) where of a socialist bent. After the wars destroyed the old world order America set the tempo, especially since they politically dominated (and in some cases vassalized) most of Western Europe, and since their culture was firmly rooted in the classical liberalism that has slowly rubbed off on all of Europe-- especially so in those nations with a population which understands English. The Brits are for obviously reasons extremely susceptible to this and if you trace back the major political decisions through the past (the abandonment of British rail for motorways, house of lords reform, the rise of the "presidential" premiership, devolution etc.) you will see the Americanization of the British political system and culture into something that is entirely alien to what it was before Suez.Neo-liberalism's growth is an expression of American global dominance, as Nativism returns domestically in the US you see it sweeping through her European satellite-states.