Here's something that's worth an hour of anyone's time: an intelligent(ish) interview with the super-intelligent Martin Wolf, FT, doyen of economics commentators and billed here as the World's Top Financial Journalist (a title he disowns, BTW, claiming only tangential knowledge of finance).
Mostly, it's a case of listen, learn, reflect: Wolf is impressively thoughtful, not least on the matter of what's genuinely uncertain in our present stressed circumstances. But there were a couple of things he expresses serious interest in, which I'd push back on:
- Citizen's assemblies. Yeah, but who gets to run them? You know perfectly well that a cleverly framed set-up will get any answer that's wanted by the establishment that commissions them**. I mean, seriously, this is bonkers.
- Workers' representatives on Boards: he thinks Germany has done well with this. Hmm. I have some experience, via a lengthy consultancy gig I undertook in Germany, with an archetypal large German co. The workers' board member was given a nice office, and frequent, carefully curated 'briefings' on all manner of topics. He was a nice enough cove, completely out of his depth. Those carefully selected mangers giving him the briefings said he barely understood any but the most basic topics, and was a pushover. Maybe that was exceptionally helpful to the co in question! But I doubt it's what Wolf means.
Enjoy.
ND
_________
** Fair enough, I once reviewed in detail the output of a CA on use of biomass, which was (I consider) fairly well set-up with balanced opening presentations, and which clearly surprised the organisers as to how strongly the majority was against tree-burning (which as not the answer they wanted). HOWEVER, the official take on it mis-used the actual voting data. Having failed to rig it, they still tried to bias the one-liner takeways. And you know they'd have rigged it even more determinedly for a sequel. You'll all keep voting until you give the right answer.
13 comments:
He also seems to be warming to proportional representation..........
Funny that. The chatterati/political classes have swung from laughing & deriding Reform not 18 months ago, to presently running scared, clearly aware that their internal polling gives confirmation that their tenure at the Big Trough is drawing to a close.
What to do ?
Ditch FPTP & bring in Prop Representation as a means to scupper Reform at the next GE. Will it work ? Who cares.......we're way beyond the point of believing voting will change anything
The Post Office board, following the disastrous wrecking of itself and its brand, via the cover up of the Horizon System, now has representatives on the board.
Or
A representative
Appointed by the postmasters and the board.
In effect, the board puts up some candidates. The 11,000 postmasters choose one.
The fact they have no knowledge of who they are choosing is probably deemed a good thing by the board.
As far as I know having a Rep on the board has made zero difference in any way, to any thing.
Contracts are still secret.
Changes are implemented without consultation
Pay is set by PO as before.
The postmasters ‘union’ is still paid from the finances of the post office.
It seems only the most minor of issues are actively addressed.
I.T. Problems. H.R. issues. Advertising.
There IS less of a Do as We Say culture. To a more, Please Do As We Say.
Overall, very minor stuff. A poll that asks ‘ what’s changed since you were all driven to despair?’ Would likely discover, not too much.
You can’t be sent to prison. Even if you are guilty. That’s the main one. But that came in before the man on the board.
When I was young a favourite intellectual for telly people to interview was Bertrand Russell, who had been a genuinely distinguished mathematician and philosopher in his day. He was a clever-clogs: everyone who'd met him said so. He was capable of recounting and interpreting all sorts of historical phenomena in a fascinating way, and doing so in language comprehensible to wee laddies. Look at some of his interview performances on youtube: seriously good stuff.
Well, "good stuff" until he is asked for his recommendations for policy, for actions. Then he immediately becomes a dullard, urging vacuous tosh on a nation that must have been tempted to giggle at the daft old bugger.
I inferred even then that policy must be harder than analysis.
Yes, Russell - an interesting case study
Early years - genuine, ground-breaking contributor to mathematics & formal logic (maths is a young man's game)
Next phase (when he wasn't up to further maths / logic advances) - major inputs to analytic philosophy & the 'logical positivism' of the day: advancing the great tradition of 'British empiricism'
Next phase (when he wasn't up to further original contributions in philosophy) - history of philosophy: sweeping, illuminating comparative studies of western thought
Next phase (when he wasn't up to the sheer amount of reading involved in comparative philosophy) - ... errr ... lame lefty politics!
The 4 Ages of Russell. A sad decline from great intellectual heights, albeit with genuine contributions along the way.
(and a lot more creditable than that old fraud Arnold Toynbee)
Policy is harder than analysis because everything has undergone enshitification. There is no magic bullet to solve the UKs problems, and it'll take much longer than a 4 year term to even get started. By that point, the hard-of-thinking electorate would be bored of it and vote in someone who promised them everything again (probably by taxing the "rich" AKA everyone who isn't them).
Next election? A nightmare coalition of Labour, Lib Dem and the Greens, to defeat Reform.
God help us.
Maybe Betz's prediction will stop it all...
https://dailysceptic.org/2025/11/01/these-fractured-isles-britains-drift-towards-civil-war/
And the government's cry "No no please don't speculate" simply confirms what we all know.
Islam and the secular West are completely incompatible. I would see THIS at a tipping point, not the nonsense about climate change tipping points...
What is clear is that this government is incapable of doing it's two main requirements.
Protect our borders
Protect us.
This as my granny used to say, will end in tears. Thought I suspect this time round, it will be blood.
Mr Wolf - interesting but cagey about what to do next. We seem to have lost a lot of leverage from the proletariat and lost any ability to tax eBay, Amazon, Temu etc etc who have done for the High Street and most of industry. You would think that having hired all those PPE grads HMG of any stripe would have seen that coming. But neither did the French, Germans etc etc. Third World here we come.
Don't think much of CAs and proportional representation seems just as vulnerable to gaming by the politico/lawyering axis.
We are still mucking about not sorting the Blood Scandal and the Post Office scandal. My advice - a hefty lump of nail studded wood vigorously applied to politicians and civil servants and managers until all paid up.
IMHO Russell (and Wittgenstein) were overrated. If neither had bothered we would be no worse off. I have read around the subject a bit and Aristotle/Plato made a good start but by the time we got to Kant the subject of philosophy qua philosophy has gone a bit wobbly. The worthwhile bits hived off to the mathematicians and physicists etc etc.
Agree with Matt re policy. Too many contradictory aims and too many very well educated and expensive people doing useless things.
"the Blood Scandal" has an aspect I've rarely seen mentioned and never seen explained. The problem was that the English NHS had a shortage of capacity for plasma. (Have I remembered that detail correctly?)
The Scottish NHS volunteered that they had a new plant with spare capacity and would be happy to use that capacity to fill orders from England.
Instead of which the English NHS opted for the high risk supplier viz the USA. Why?
(It couldn't have been simple bribery and corruption, could it?)
Citizens Assemblies could fix the sense of disconnect, and reengage the public with politics. It's not necessarily about the outcomes, but a sense of engagement and investment in the process.
Workers Reps on the board only works if said board listen. I've worked with well north of a hundred companies, across most sectors, and public and private - and the one constant is how horribly inefficient projects are ran due to a disconnect between the coal face and the top levels, and the latter's inability to grasp the former might actually know what they're on about. Manage to rectify that, and the productivity boost would be spectacular.
A particularly nasty example is my current client's projects are running a minimum of 12 months over, mostly due to internal politics and some decisions that can't be allowed to fail despite the sea of red evidencing they are failing. Were their sector truly competitive they'd be toast.
When the most important thing on the manager's plate (as in, most capable of closing the firm down tomorrow) is creating a risk assessment for fire escape usage, or consulting with the company lawyer on a modern slavery statement for the website, some distancing from actual company business is inevitable. Workers' representatives - being, by and large, union officials - are going to make that worse, not better.
"Caeser Hēméra has left a new comment on the post 'Weekend wisdom: interview with Martin Wolf':
Citizens Assemblies could fix the sense of disconnect, and reengage the public with politics. It's not necessarily about the outcomes, but a sense of engagement and investment in the process."
Apart from the fact that they are ALWAUS chosen to ensure the required views are put in place. "Democracy" 21st Century style.
Diversity (of thought in the boardroom) the origins of DIE started with a reasonable premise - get rid of group think at the top of business.
Problem was, that was corrupted to mean get in back faces and wimmins who will agree with the consensus. Basically the opposite of what had been proposed.
@Elby - as I said, it's the engagement that matters. People are getting very detached, which isn't healthy.
Will they be fixed? Sure, but is that much different from any victorious party coming into contact with the Civil Service?
Change doesn't come out of disengagement, it comes from engagement, and developing the tools to play the political games, and that's been a feature ever since someone back in the Stone Age figured out they could avoid actual work and became the first proto-wonk.
Post a Comment