David talks to Ed Miliband about the thinking behind his new book Go Big. What are the ideas that have the power to change British politics? If they have been shown to work elsewhere, why are they so hard to make happen? Is it the politicians or the public who are reluctant to make the shift? Plus, we discuss whether the Tories might be better at the politics of change than Labour.

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• Ed’s new book, Go Big: How to Fix Our World
• Ed’s podcast, Reasons to be Cheerful

Further Learning: 

• Ed on why the Labour Party should think big for the Guardian
• More on the Vienna model of social housing
• Matthew Brown on what Preston council can teach Labour

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

This week David and Helen take stock of the state of British politics, looking at how the big themes of the last year fit together. They try to join the dots between the pandemic and the fraying of the Union, the weakness of the Labour party and the fraught politics of climate change, along with the lingering impact of Brexit on everything. We are also looking for your questions on these topics too - please let us know what you would like David and Helen to discuss next: https://www.talkingpoliticspodcast.com/contact

Talking Points: 

Incumbents, under the conditions of vaccine politics, have done well. 

• The next phase will be about the economy, but we aren’t out of the vaccine stage yet.
• When an inquiry happens, there will be some tough questions about the British state.
• If the economic recovery goes well, there will be space for critical reflection. But if recovery stalls or is skewed, that will be the main focus.

The Northern Ireland question may pose a real challenge to the politics of the Union.

• This may be the government’s number one problem right now.
• The UK government is extremely constrained. 
• The EU has invested a lot of its credibility in defending the single market.  
• The perverse consequence of Brexit is that it embroiled the EU into the politics of Northern Ireland.

Is the First Past the Post system propping up a moribund Labour Party?

• The electoral system works to Labour’s favour when compared to continental centre-left parties.
• But the thing that Labour has to deal with that is unique is the Union question.
• Labour has always struggled to win a majority of seats in England.

In 2020, Britain and the EU diverged on the question of China. 

• Biden wants to bring the EU toward the American position. And the EU has moved a bit already.
• This might dilute the advantage that Johnson thought he might gain with the Biden admin by being tough on China.

The geopolitics of climate change are bound up in the EU/US position on China.

• Merkel has been inclined to treat China as more serious about climate change.
• Johnson wants to put Britain at the head of ‘green finance.’
• Climate change is not currently an electorally contested issue in Britain. But that might not be true for much longer.

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• Our Union series… on Scotland
• David Frost’s FT column on the Northern Ireland Protocol

Further Learning: 

• Helen on Labour and the ‘English Question’ for the New Statesman
• More on Johnson’s ‘green finance’ plans
• Talking climate change with Helen and Adam Tooze

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

David talks to historian Linda Colley about her new global history of written constitutions: the paper documents that made and remade the modern world. From Corsica to Pitcairn, from Mexico to Japan, it's an amazing story of war and peace, violence, imagination and fear. Recorded as part of the Cambridge Literary Festival www.cambridgeliteraryfestival.com

Talking Points:

Swords need words: conquest generates a demand for writing and explanation.

• In the mid-18th century, literacy began to increase in many societies and printing presses became more widely available. There’s not much incentive to circulate political texts if you can’t have a wider audience. 
• The cult of the legislator fed into the idea that iconic political texts could be useful in new and divergent ways.

By the mid-18th century, big transcontinental wars were becoming more common. 

• Hybrid-warfare is expensive. Navies are hideously expensive.
• Shifts in warfare fed into constitutions because constitutions function as a kind of contract.

Constitutions can do a lot of things. They can be used to claim territory, for example. 

• They can extend rights, but they can also withdraw them. 
• Once something is written down, it becomes harder to change. In addition to spreading democracy, constitutions codified exclusion and marginalization.

Constitutions are sticky; even failed constitutions leave a legacy.

• People get used to having a written agreement.
• The Tunisian Constitution of 1861 only lasted until 1864 but it remains important in Tunisian political memory. 

The U.S. constitution had a disproportionate impact, not just—or even primarily because of its content.

• Because the U.S. press was so developed, hundreds of printed versions emerged very quickly and traveled across the world.
• When new powers started drafting constitutions, however, they looked at many constitutions, not just the American one. Most modern constitutions are a hodge-podge. 

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• Linda’s new book, The Gun, the Ship, and the Pen: Warfare, Constitutions, and the Making of the Modern World
• The Meiji Constitution (Japan’s 1889 Constitution)
• The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir
• Also by Linda: Britons: Forging the Nation 1707-1837

Further Learning: 

• The Talking Politics Guide to … the UK Constitution
• Linda on ‘Why Britain needs a written constitution’ for the FT

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

We talk to the historians Robert Tombs and Robert Saunders about the history of England and the future of the Union. Is the size and complexity of England the real problem in holding the UK together? What can England's past teach us about the present state of British politics? Does England have a 'Northern Question' to go with its 'Scottish Question' and 'Irish Question'? This is the final episode in our series about the constituent parts of the UK. Find the others - on Scotland, NI, Wales - at https://www.talkingpoliticspodcast.com/

Talking Points: 

Is the island of Britain a natural seat of government?

• England is not an island; and the English are not an island people.
• The Norman conquest attached England to the continent; leaving Scotland outside.
• As a maritime power, it was useful for England to move its borders to the sea. 
• The strategic arguments for the existence of the UK are perhaps weaker in an era of more diffuse and global security threats and frameworks.

Most people probably don’t know that the Union was a Scottish creation.

• The lack of interest in developing ‘Britishness’ at the English center has had consequences. 
• England is now more dominant in the Union than it used to be.

Governance of the Union has changed: the leadership of both major parties in Westminster is now almost exclusively English and they compete for almost exclusively English votes. 

• There is a separate leadership class in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. 
• The electoral politics of asymmetrical devolution lead to intense secessionist pressure from Scotland.
• No government in Westminster can govern without English support, but it is possible to govern while being insensitive to Scottish or Welsh opinion.
• The dynamics of the Union incline toward Conservative power in Westminster and SNP power in Scotland. This is an unstable dynamic.

The English don’t really have a story about before the Union in part because the English have never really seen the Acts of Union as dividing lines in English history.

• Is the ‘Northern question’ a perennial question in English politics? Right now, this is the heart of the electoral conflict.
• In every part of England that isn’t London, you can find anti-London sentiment. 
• There’s a lot of resentment toward the Union in England, but the Union is a pretty good deal for England.

Mentioned in this Episode:

• Talking … Wales
• Talking … Northern Ireland
• Talking… Scotland
• The English and their History, Robert Tombs
• The Making of English National Identity, Krishan Kumar

Further Learning: 

• This Sovereign Isle, Robert Tombs
• Tim Shippey on Alfred the...

We talk to the historian Niall Ferguson about the politics of catastrophe, from pandemics and famines to world wars and climate change. Have we been worrying about the right things? Why have some countries done so much better than others with Covid? And what can history teach us about the worst that can happen? Plus, how likely is it that a cold war between the US and China turns hot? 

Talking Points:

Niall argues that COVID is more like the Asian flu in ‘57/’58 than the 1918/1919 Spanish flu.

• However the economic response is unprecedented; the Internet made lockdowns at this scale and duration possible.
• Lockdowns were a near panic response that were necessitated by initial political failures in the West.

When we’re trying to assess the political impact of a disaster, the body count is not the most important thing.

• A disaster can kill a lot of people and be virtually forgotten if it doesn’t have cascading consequences.
• We will probably remember the experience of lockdown more than the mortality rates.

What did we get wrong about the COVID response?

• Controlling travel early on made a difference, and most Western states did not do that.
• The network structure of a polity is the most important thing in a pandemic, especially in an era of globalized travel.

The distinction between natural and manmade disasters is a false one.

• The scale of impact is a function of how we, collectively and our leaders, individually make decisions.
• Humans do not seem to be very good at thinking pragmatically about risks; we tend to ignore them in practice while simultaneously constructing apocalyptic fantasies. 

Mentioned in this Episode:

• Niall’s book, Doom: The Politics of Catastrophe
• Larry Summers and David Cutler on the costs of COVID
• Graham Allison, Destined for War

Further Learning: 

• More on Taiwan’s COVID response
• Why do so many people live near active volcanoes? 
• ‘The Really Big One’ (the earthquake that will devastate the Pacific Northwest) 
• The Talking Politics Guide to… Existential Risk

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

We talk to Michael Lewis about his new book The Premonition, which tells the story of the people who saw the pandemic coming and asks why they couldn't get a hearing. It's a tale of short-term failures and long-term trends in US government and it follows on from his previous book about the risks America has been running in hollowing out the administrative state. A sobering account with glimmers of hope for the future. 

Talking Points: 

Old timers at the CDC say that things began to change after the 1976 swine flu outbreak.

• The CDC rushed a vaccine program, and some people got sick. Then the swine flu basically vanished.
• After that, under Reagan, the head of the CDC became an appointed, political job. This made the CDC overall more political and less independent. 
• Most people who interacted with the CDC before this pandemic realized that it wasn’t very good at managing disease.

Doing a public health job well carries a high risk of getting fired.

• The experts in Michael’s story are consistently right about the trajectory of the disease; but they are often wrong about politics.
• Should experts pay more attention to politics? 
• Experts can create discomfort for politicians, or they can give them cover—but that’s not their job. Michael thinks that politicians should be providing cover for the experts.

Why was it so hard to learn from the experiences of other cities in the heart of the crisis?

• In the 1918 pandemic, the difference between Philadelphia and St. Louis was the timing of the intervention. 
• It’s hard to see the effect of the interventions in the fog of battle.
• The failure of testing in the US at the start of the pandemic meant that there was no way to identify where the virus was.
• Just-in-time manufacturing and taut-supply changes made the ‘health industrial complex’ less able to respond quickly.
• Will the pandemic make Americans care more about how the government actually functions?

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• Michael’s new book, The Premonition, a Pandemic Story
• Richard Neustadt and Harvey V. Fineberg, The Swine Flu Affair
• The Nuclear Threat Initiative 2019 report
• Our last episode with Michael

Further Learning:

• David J. Spencer, ‘Reflections on the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccination Program’
• Lawrence Wright, ‘The Plague Year,’ The New Yorker
• How some cities ‘flattened the curve’ during the 1918 flu pandemic
• More on the San Quentin COVID epidemic

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

We talk to Hans Kundnani about the prospects for German politics in the run-up to September's federal elections, now that the cast list of possible successors to Merkel is known. Can Laschet escape from her shadow and does he want to? Would a Green led government be radically different from the alternatives? Is the age of the 'grand coalition' over? Plus we consider the historical parallels, from Bismarck to Adenauer to Kohl: do long-serving leaders ever manage a successful transition?

Talking Points:

To wrap up the second season of History of Ideas, on 11 May, the LRB is hosting a conversation between David and Pankaj Mishra. They’ll discuss the thinkers we did—and didn’t talk about. To book tickets, follow this link.

Armin Laschet is the new CDU leader.

• So far, his candidacy has been underwhelming. He is generally seen as being a Merkelite candidate who would probably continue her centrist, grand-coalition style.
• Is the CDU pinning its hopes on the vaccine? If Germany gets it together in the next few months, the party in power will likely reap the benefits despite current polling woes.
• The personality of the lead candidate is less of a determining factor in German politics; you don’t vote for an individual chancellor. 

Is the era of grand coalition politics between the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats coming to an end?

• There is a real possibility that the party that has run Germany for the last four electoral periods might not get a fifth.
• Of course it’s still likely that the Christian Democrats will stay in power, but even the possibility that they won’t contributes to a new sense of dynamism. 

The German Greens hope to be in power too—with the Christian Democrats.

• There’s been a convergence during the Merkel Era.
• The Christian Democrats have moved to the center on social issues. 
• It’s no longer clear that the Greens would prefer to be in coalition with the Social Democrats. They have moved to the right, especially on economic issues.
• Geopolitics may push the Greens more toward the Christan Democrats, especially re Russia.

Mentioned in this Episode:

• Hans’ book, The Paradox of German Power
• Our last episode with Hans
• The letter written by French generals

Further Learning: 

• 5 things to know about Armin Laschet
• The Astonishing Rise of Angela Merkel, from the New Yorker
• More on the German Greens

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

As part of our series about the future of the Union, David and Helen talk to Dan Wincott of Cardiff Law School about the history of Welsh devolution and the possibility of Welsh independence. How has English dominance shaped Welsh attitudes to the Union? What did the Brexit vote reveal about the different strands of Welsh and British identity? Has the pandemic made the case for more devolution and even independence for Wales stronger? Plus, what happens to Wales if Scotland votes to leave the UK?

Talking Points: 

The Anglo-Welsh union is a story of conquest and incorporation.

• Wales was integrated into the English legal system under Henry VIII. 
• There are strong cultural institutions in Wales, and the persistence of Welsh as the vernacular language limited the reach of English laws for a long time.

It’s hard to understand the rise of the Labour Party at the beginning of the 20th century without seeing its relationship to questions about the Union.

• Welsh Labour politicians played a critical role in tying the UK together during that period. 
• Labour moved away from home rule after WWI, but as things got more complicated in the 1970s, Labour ended up struggling with devolution questions without an English majority. 
• When Labour came back into power in 1997 it set up the first version of the devolution settlements.
• Labour’s weakness in England from 2010 is central to the current situation.
• For New Labour, Welsh devolution was an afterthought. They were more concerned with Scotland.

The majority of Wales who voted in the referendum voted Leave.

• Wales is probably the part of Britain where patterns of national identity are most complex.
• In Wales, those who prioritize British identity tended to vote Leave. But in England, those who prioritize British identity generally voted Remain. 

People are at least curious about what more devolution might look like in Wales.

• Although there is still anti-devolution sentiment in Wales in a way there isn’t in Scotland.
• As long as the Labour Party can’t win a majority in Westminster, there is going to be curiosity about greater independence.

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• From our Union series on… Scotland 
• From our Union series on… Northern Ireland
• Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities
• ‘Analysing vote choice in a multinational state: national identity and territorial differentiation in the 2016 Brexit vote’

Further Learning: 

• More on COVID in Wales
• ‘Crisis, what crisis? Conceptualizing crisis, UK pluri-constitutionalism and Brexit politics’
• More about Weslh independence

And as ever, recommended reading curated by our friends at the LRB can be found here: lrb.co.uk/talking

This week David talks to the celebrated film-maker Adam Curtis about his new series Can't Get You Out of My Head, which tells the history of the rise and fall of individualism. Why do so many people feel so powerless in the age of the empowered individual? How has digital technology turbo-charged our feelings of alienation? And what has all this got to do with behavioural psychology? Plus much more: Nixon, China, Dominic Cummings, complex systems, Max Weber and conspiracy theories. https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/p093wp6h/cant-get-you-out-of-my-head

Talking Points:

In his newest series, Adam identifies the 1970s as the wellspring of a global system that feels irrational and beyond political control. 

• The Nixon shock—when the dollar became detached from the gold standard—was something that Nixon, at the time, saw as temporary.
• But as the Watergate scandal carried on, banks realized they could start trading currencies against each other. Out of this came the global financial system.
• The opening to China was seen as a great stroke of statesmanship.
• But what was happening at that time in China was the collapse of the certainty of Mao’s revolution. What emerged was a system run by Deng Xiaoping who essentially substituted money for ideology.
• Deng turned China into a giant production house of cheap goods. 
• The generation that came out of WWII was terrified of big ideologies. What replaced ideology? Money.

In an age of mass democracy, where individualism reigns, states become extremely difficult to govern.

• By the late 70s/early 80s, politicians started to realize that you couldn’t assemble stable groups behind you. Instead of representing the people, they tried to become managers. 
• Adam thinks that to call this neoliberalism is to oversimplify things.
• Under Thatcher and Reagan, industrial policy essentially failed. The politicians gave up before we realized they had given up.

On the surface, behaviouralism seemed like a challenge to the notion of the rational, self-interested individual.

• But actually, behaviouralists concluded that if people are irrational, we need to find ways to nudge them to behave in rational ways so that the system will work better. 

The Internet, as it is currently constructed, is like a modern ghost story. It’s always looking at patterns in the past.

• The Internet as a feedback system can’t imagine something that hasn’t already happened. 
• It’s a form of management that renders the world static and repeatable. 

Fake stability has led to a kind of blindness: think about the collapse of the Soviet Union, or the financial crisis, or Trump.

• Again and again the people in charge fail to anticipate what’s coming.
• Has the ability of Big Data to predict been oversold? 

Mentioned in this Episode: 

• Adam’s newest series, Can’t Get You Out of my Head
• Max Weber’s ‘iron cage’
• DId eBay just prove that paid search ads don’t work? 

Further Learning: 

• The Talking Politics Guide to... 1970s (with Helen)