The moral economy of post-lockdown Britain. A history of the present
A report in the Guardian (15th June) indicated that the advice of the World Health Organisation is that lockdown should not be lifted in the UK until an effective track and trace system is in place.
If Johnson bothers to respond to this at all he will no doubt meet it with the usual Johnsonian obfuscation that either it is or it will be shortly.
More needs to be said and done. It should not be a choice between a risky lifting of lockdown or condemning millions to perpetual tough times. Those who have had little or no income since March and more that soon won’t have as Government help is phased down.
It is a moment for people to be put before profit and for proper Government support to be put in place over a sustained period as is the case in a number of other European countries. The cost of sustained support for those likely to be hardest and longest hit, from airline workers to freelancers in broadcasting and entertainment and those in hospitality will be but a fraction of the bank bailout in 2008.
It must be a case of a new normal rather than a return to the old usual. If the Government wont act, the people must.
There is an historical example. In the summer of 1839 the Chartists called a Grand National Holiday a disengagement with the system involving a general strike, closure of pubs and withdrawal of savings from banks.
The aim was to get the early market economy tempered by a moral economy. The term attributed to E P Thompson refers to a system where profits are not abolished but constrained and everyone has enough to live on. It is might be seen as a variant on a universal basic income now. Perhaps it might be something Sir Keir Starmer could have a look at, although obviously with maximum caution in due course.
The Chartist strategy didnt work in 1839 but another try now must be worth a go, with the kind of energy for change from below we’ve seen in the Black Lives Matter movement it might just work now.
Leave a Reply