Is Donald Trump a Socialist? #2: some readers responses

A few months ago(LSS 7 4 25) we published a blog called Is Donald Trump a Socialist? It was one of those end-of -the -day tired pieces which we expected to be soon forgotten, by ourselves and everybody else. Instead it turned out to be one of the most read, and remarked-upon pieces we have put out in months. Sadly, much more so than our ones on antibiotic resistance ones which was what this blog is supposed to be all about.

The essence of the piece boiled down to this. Capitalists, Liberals, Neo-liberals, call them what you will, believe that individual liberty is the only true basis of a healthy society and a prosperous economy. People making their own choices on how to spend their money, whom to hire and whom to fire, where to live, etc will allow the optimum possible outcome in the supply of Capital, Goods and Labour. The essence of socialist belief is that people cannot be trusted to make those decisions and that the state must often step in to ensure the best possible social and economic outcomes. In that sense, Mr Trump’s attempts to control the supply of Labour by immigration controls, and of Goods by tariff controls are socialist policies, not capitalist ones. The responses have been coming ever since. Here are a few which are broadly representative . (We protect the respondents anonymity for all sorts of reasons)

MC from Edinburgh pointed out that if a Communist like Mr Xi could run a capitalist economy in China, why shouldn’t a Capitalist like Trump run a socialist one in America? (intriguing!)

DG from Texas said that Mr Trump’s policies were not Socialist, they we Nationalist (that doesn’t make them Capitalist, we thought)

JS from Massachusetts said he had studied economics at Princeton. And that essentially we had “placed Trump on a New Deal continuum, with fewer unions and more nationalisation” (We are still struggling to understand this)

V. from Mumbai wondered “if all leaders become Socialist when it comes to steel and swing states”

As we write an actual self-proclaimed Socialist called Zohran Mamdami is running for Mayor of New York, that Holy Ground Zero of Capitalism. If we are right, he and Mr Trump may find more in common than they realise. Maybe it’s all about what you do, not what you call yourself, that counts.

But we feel exceedingly grateful for your reactions. Keep ’em coming.

#Donald Trump #Xi Jinping #Capitalist #communist #socialist #liberal #neo liberal #free market #tariff #immigration control

Why Keir Starmer can never be Clement Attlee

We apologise to overseas readers for the parochial references in this blog: but are our problems so different from yours?

As we write BBC Radio 4 is running a series about the 1945 General Election and the marvellously successful Labour Government that followed it.[1] For six years the United Kingdom had the most serendipitously achieving administration it had experienced since Elizabeth I. As he listens (assuming he has time) our current Prime Minister must ask himself “Why can’t I do what Clement Attlee did? Why is the concatenation of problems-defence, economy, social policy- so absolutely, stupendously overwhelming that even my own backbenchers are in such overwhelming revolt? [2]

No one doubts Starmer’s intelligence. Or courage. Or good intentions. However,the problems run too deep, and in our opinion are insoluble if the nation state is the means chosen to solve them. Clement Attlee inherited a world where companies, and the financial structures that supported them essentially existed at a national level (or within the imperial frameworks those nations had created) So the writ of Westminster really did run, and no one could afford to ignore it. Legislation passed by a British Government really did have the power to shape lives. Improve them sometimes,even, as the creation of the NHS and NATO so admirably demonstrated.

If Starmer’s government fails it will fall to Reform UK to make the necessary budgetary adjustments which Labour could not. A hint of the difficulties they may face comes from Warwickshire where a brave 18 year old has bravely taken the reigns of their new Council.[3] He states his belief as “Brexit, sovereignty and a strong and united family unit”.

Perfectly admirable and defensible beliefs, even if one disagrees with one or more of them intellectually. Unfortunately his manifesto raises many questions. Like : what is sovereignty? How far can it be sustained in a world where almost half of all available investment capital is in private hands? Can a country the size of the UK create and sustain its own industries against production runs in the power of giant corporations, or countries the size of China and India? How long did City States like Milan and Florence sustain their sovereignties against giant antagonists like Spain and France? Your Renaissance history will help here, but don’t worry: you won’t have to read it for long.

Antagonists they may seem, but both Starmer and Reform are two of a kind. A national government may have some power to alleviate, sometimes, if enough of its supporters let it. Its days of initiative and creation are long gone. Keir Starmer will never be Clement Attlee. And no one will be Winston Churchill either.

[1]https://www.bing.com/search?q=bbc+radio+series+1945+election&form=ANNTH1&refig=6F075FD8E25341758E4FFB72C8969982&pc=HCTS

[2]https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/26/no-10-government-talks-labour-rebels-attempt-quash-welfare-bill-revolt

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jun/26/reform-warwickshire-council-head-rob-howard-quits-after-five-weeks-leaving-18-year-old-in-charge

#Labour #Reform UK #politics #economic #nationalism #finance #trade #economics

No that last blog does not make us a bunch of Communists

Every so often one of our blogs engenders some intriguing feedback . Alongside the usual welcome comments with all their nods and frowns, we occasionally get one that is a little-uh- longer, yet expresses its views with passionate clarity, to push euphemism to its limits. Such was the case today, when a reader alleged that our criticism of fossil fuel and tobacco companies was a sure sign that we were under the influence of Communists, who aim to tear down the free market system and replace it with a “nightmare of bureaucratic state socialism” of the sort found in places like Venezuela and North Korea. In particular the reader observed:

“What you’ve got to remember is that markets not governments are best at allocating resources. Intervening in fossil fuel markets is crypto socialism- it will only distort price signals, stifle innovation and lead to unintended consequences”

When we asked if this was true for immigration control as well, they replied

“Absolutely! Free markets mean the free movement of labour. Anything else is protectionism in disguise.

So, where does that leave us at LSS? Having worked for many years in the Government Employ and thereby known the ways of Civil Servants, we can more and more share the view that Free Markets really do work better. No, it’s the “unintended consequences” that pulls us up. Free markets can have those too. Totally unregulated sales of tobacco produced an epidemic of cancer. We suspect that over enthusiastic marketing of certain foods and drinks will one day produce an epidemic of obesity. As for gushing out vast quantities of poisonous mineral oil and burning it with heedless abandon-well we wish people had been better informed before this was started. To call for better product information, and to ask that consequences of free markets are cleaned up, or at least controlled, does not make one a Communist. Or anything like it.

Thanks for the feedback, and we appreciate that in view of this respondent’s employment, they must remain anonymous

#climate change #free markets # global warming #immigration #communism #socialism #capitalism #hayek #marx

Climate Change denial: latest round in a long war of deception

First deny there’s a problem. Then do all you can to delay a solution. Buy up politicians, scientists, bloggers, and bots. The tactics of the fossil fuel industry and outriding nations as they seek above all to protect their comfy lifestyles and exorbitant profits. It’s not just made abundantly clear in this report by Damien Carrington in the Guardian: it nails down every last nail to be had into the coffin lid. [1]

But we’ve seen it all before gentle readers. We recall walking down an alley in London in 1971 with a close relative who assured us there was no definite, provable link between smoking and cancer, OK!? (he died of the latter) Why was he able to state this? Because for decades the tobacco industry had managed a huge campaign of deception, obfuscation and general misinformation designed to give him and his peers every excuse they needed to continue their tragic addiction. Using exactly the same techniques now employed by climate change deniers, funnily enough.. The only difference was that they didn’t have the Interweb to turbocharge their propaganda and illusioning. This rather depressing link to the WHO explains the ghastly details to anyone who may want to know more about the fundamentals of human nature [2]

And what are these fundamentals, by the way? We don’t know them all But we can hazard a guess at some, provisional though we may well be

1 Some people will do anything to make some quick cash, Anything at all.

2 Many people will do anything to avoid facing the consequences of the vile little habits which they have acquired in the course of a lifetime of self indulgence and self deception.

3 Just because you are educated and slightly more far seeing than others around you does not give you tactical superiority in the current wars between the intelligent and our enemies They are incredibly cunning and well funded

4 This ain’t over yet. Keep a close eye on rising sea levels, if you want to live

We will be ready with further insights. inspirations and bons motifs in future blogs. Keep reading. And thanks for all the recent sigh ups and likes. Keep ’em coming.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/19/climate-misinformation-turning-crisis-into-catastrophe-ipie-report

[2]https://www.who.int/news/item/16-11-2023-new-who-campaign-highlights-tobacco-industry-tactics-to-influence-public-health-policies

#climate change #global warming #ecology #fossil fuels #tobacco #cancer

Forensic Science shows why privatisation doesn’t work

Being an employee of the UK Forensic Science Service used to open doors back in the year 2000. Even if you you were too lowly to personally know the top people, you worked for them,: you saw them in corridors and said good morning. People as far away as San Francisco wanted to know about their pioneering DNA techniques, excellence in evidence handling and preservation, in new intellectual approaches like Bayesian statistics. It was like playing for Manchester United (then popular and successful exponents of the game of Association Football)

But lurking in the background was a disease that would kill this particular goose and the golden eggs it laid. “Private sector good, public sector bad” It was a mantra that had taken deadly root in the Thatcher years. The private sector, it held, was full of hard working go getting, sharp- suit- wearing entrepreneurs who cut through the red tape and got things done. Civil servants(the FSS and its predecessors were Civil Service bodies) were lazy, hidebound, slow, risk averse pen pushers who needed nothing so much as a good kick up the backside The result was that anything and everything (except police and armed forces) was sold to private investors. Eventually even the Forensic Science Service went under the hammer. The results are made clear in this story by Hannah Devlin of the Guardian [1] We cannot begin to do justice to the wasteland of failed justice, loss of expertise and collapsing confidence which has resulted. All we can do is quote this extract-and beg you to read the whole thing

Forensic science in England and Wales as currently configured isn’t working for anyone – not for the police, not for the lawyers or for the courts, not for the scientists themselves, and not for the general public who get caught up in the criminal justice system,” said Prof Angela Gallop, co-chair of the Westminster Commission on Forensic Science.

“Like a plane hurtling downwards in what has become known as a ‘graveyard spiral’, with the pilot in desperation making increasingly erratic decisions, it can only be a short time now before it impacts the ground.”

Perhaps the Manchester United metaphor was not so facile. Things sort of function- but at laughable shadow of their former glory.

This is what happens when a country is seized and held by a single doctrine. When the lazy self interested opinions of journalists and the gin sodden flies who hang around golf club bars are substituted for rational policy No one would deny that Forensic Science under the Government had its inefficiencies, or the odd passenger. It contained more than a few fools who loudly praised the tax cuts and bought the gas shares that Thatcherism created. Its even arguable that some industries did benefit from the injection of private capital and techniques (water is not one of them) But like water, the whole sorry mess now needs clearing up. And none of it ,none of it , needed to have happened. That’s the biggest injustice of all.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/jun/09/forensic-science-crisis-miscarriages-of-justice-england-and-wales-report

#forensic science #justice #police #courts #evidence #economics #privatisation #thames water

AIDS breakthrough shows what science can do

We now live in an age when science (and the rational habits of mind it depends upon) is under attack. Heirs to the rational tradition have always had to live with religious fundamentalists who deny inconvenient truths like evolution. But nowadays attacks come thick and fast from those who wish to deny climate change, the dangers of smoking, the efficacy of vaccines and much besides. From people who nevertheless cheerfully accept other scientific findings which suit them. So, just to redress the balance we thought we’d showcase this breathtaking new advance in AIDS research which, for the first time, holds out the hope of a permanent cure.

It comes from Kat Lay of the Guardian,[1] reporting the work of the Peter Doherty Institute in Australia.[2] The background will be familiar: the great evolutionary survival trick of the HIV was to bury itself deep in certain white blood cells of the immune system, where it was immune to our attack. In the words of Kat:

In a paper published in Nature Communications, the researchers have shown for the first time that mRNA can be delivered into the cells where HIV is hiding, by encasing it in a tiny, specially formulated fat bubble. The mRNA then instructs the cells to reveal the virus. First AIDS was a death sentence: then it could be slowed with drugs. Now at last comes hope of a real cure for its 40 million or so sufferers

Science itself is a process, not a monolithic entity. It evolves, refines, and corrects itself over time. But when people selectively accept only the parts that align with their worldview, they undermine the very foundation of rational inquiry This kind of cherry-picking often stems from cognitive biases, ideological commitments, or economic incentives. Climate change denial, for example, is frequently tied to political or financial interests, while opposition to vaccines or smoking regulations can be fuelled by misinformation or personal convenience. But the deniers should remember one thing: if they do decide to overthrow the rationalists, will they put anything better in our place?

Truth is compared in Scripture to a streaming fountain; if her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition.”

Milton: Areopagitica

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/jun/05/breakthrough-in-search-for-hiv-cure-leaves-researchers-overwhelmed?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[2]https://www.doherty.edu.au/

#HIV #AIDS #disease #mRNA #medicine #science #climate change #smoking

Why we agree with Liz Truss

Its not often that we agree with Liz Truss, our erstwhile Prime Minister. The one who, you will recall, received such harsh criticism for her brief stewardship of the British Economy. And who has since spent their time since trundling the rounds of right wing meeting rooms and assembly halls reprising her old lines.. Typical of her critics is one Rafael Behr of the Guardian [1] who asseverates:

Apparently her big lesson from government was” to learn that British institutions have been captured by a leftist doctrine and that they “hate western civilisation”. She couldn’t possibly counter this threat …..because supposedly the real power was wielded by a well-financed “globalist network”, operating through such engines of anti-democratic subterfuge as the International Monetary Fund and the World Health Organization.

Harsh words, bro! In one sense we think Behr is right. There are no conspiracies .Human beings do not have the cognitive ability nor attention span, nor ability to keep their mouths shut, to organise any worthwhile conspiracy. But there are people who think and act like globalists. Because it is their job to turn a profit for their shareholders. From everyday things like drinks and clothing, to cars and IT successful corporations operate at a global scale. Almost half available investment funds are now held in shadowy entities like sovereign wealth funds, hedge funds, family trusts and shell companies. Where Truss and co are right is that they are acutely aware of this at a subconscious level. And see the dangers more clearly than most . That the nation state is rapidly ceasing to be an effective vessel to effect the dreams and aspirations of its members. Hence the inefficacy of voting and the despair in democracy.

It’s happened before. Think if you were an inhabitant of a small but substantial little state like Mercia in the Middle Ages. Around the time it was being slowly absorbed into England. Suddenly your King has to worry about foreigners in far off places like Sussex or the City of London. Suddenly your church must accommodate the views of parishioners in Canterbury and York as well as those in Litchfield. Suddenly power is exercised through a well financed English network through such subversive organisations as the Church and the Assize courts. It’s easy to see how such changes may seem unfamiliar, bewildering: frightening even. This is the problem of our time too. Truss and her kind should not be laughed at. Like the canary in the coal mine, their fears should be taken very seriously indeed. Or we shall all blow up,

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/04/liz-truss-british-politics-nigel-farage-kemi-badenoch

The spirit of Liz Truss, ridiculous but relentless, still stalks British politics | Rafael Behr | The Guardian

#gloablisation #democracy #capitalism #nationalism #nation state #corporation #liz truss #finance

Is Keir Starmer becoming a Socialist?

Because he’s certainly acting like one. Forget the labels that people apply to each other, and to themselves. They’re mostly rubbish anyway. Look at someone’s actions. Today, Sir Keir (great name, by the way) has announced that his government has announced major new controls on the flow of immigration into the United Kingdom.[1] In support of this action, he cites the social problems caused by uncontrolled immigration and the harm it does to the social fabric. In doing so he makes the classic socialist case for controlling the laws of supply and demand. The same argument that socialists of all kinds from the most milk-and-water Social Democrats way out to the crazed ravings of Maoists and Trots.

The Capitalist argument is quite different. The law of supply and demand is the best approximation we have to the way people live in groups. Any restriction of free movement of anything such as taxes, business regulation or migration controls is contrary to nature, and must therefore lead to long term harm. After all, what is more socialist than civil servants telling employers whom they may, and whom they may not, hire to do a job? The socialist riposte is clear: the State should ban your desire to hire foreign workers if by doing so you harm the well being of members of our community here.

No, we are not going to say which one we agree with. The capitalists had their time to run the world, particularly after 1991. Their dream of universal prosperity seemed to be a true busted flush after 2008. Since then, the wind has been blowing in a socialist, that is to say, regulated direction. Whether it is to be socialism of the National or International variety remains to be seen

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/may/12/immigration-keir-starmer-labour-reform-visa-foreign-workers-uk-politics-latest-live-news

#socialism #capitalism #sir Keir starmer #immigration #economics #politics

Whatever happens, Donald Trump still matters

President Trump Postlaunch Remarks (NHQ202005300037) by NASA HQ PHOTO is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0

As we write these words, President Donald Trump seems to have run into some largely self-inflicted economic troubles. It is hard to say how serious or long lasting these are, and whether they will permanently affect his ability to govern. But one thing is clear: even if he fell from office tomorrow, his significance, his very presence would last for all time. He and his movement are a symptom not a cause. As two articles in the Guardian, one by Richard Partington, and the other by George Monbiot, make clear what has been going on. [1] ]2]

Globalisation, Neo-liberalism, free movement of capital and people, call it what you will, has brought us unprecedented advances in knowledge, and prosperity for billions of people who would otherwise have been excluded from both these things Yet in the countries where the creed began, especially those free market Anglo-Saxon economies of the USA and UK, it has left millions behind. Whose lives rot in the shadow of decaying factories, crumbling roads and decrepit health systems. While lurid images of good times and progress still flit across their screens, their only link to the bright hopeful world beyond. Some, like the educated and the rich are still doing well. Why not them? In such desperate circumstances it is all too easy to start blaming foreigners, global elites, or the tiny fraction who follow divergent sexual practices. And if the educated become an enemy, how will they adopt our values of reason and evidence?

Trump speaks for millions of these people, and that is why his support not only holds up, it may even grow as the crisis gets worse, as George opines. We don’t agree entirely with his analysis: many people we know who hold populist opinions are securely embedded in well funded pensions or established businesses. For us, the roots of xenophobia and self congratulation are far deeper. But the vast spread of uncertainty, insecurity and above all a pervasive sense of dread, the downsides of economic “efficiency” and ergonomic supply chains are the sea in which these emotions thrive. “Socialists do fine until they run out of other peoples’ money” runs the old saloon bar cliche. To which Donald Trump and others would retort “Capitalists do fine until they run out of other people’s security. And jobs. And eventually their nations.

Why did no one ever make a better case for a mixed economy, surely the answer to our problems?

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/apr/13/trump-bullying-must-stop-but-true-costs-globalisation-remain

[2]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/13/trump-populists-human-nature-economic-growth?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

#USA #donald trump #neo liberalism #globalisation #populism #economics #inequality

Is Donald Trump a Socialist?

Is Donald Trump a socialist, or is he just governing like one? For a man who made his money in the freewheeling and dealing Manhattan property market, it seems an odd term to use. And doubtless he and his supporters would reject it vehemently. But let’s go back to first principles and look at what he does, not what he says.

The very essence of a socialist policy is that an economy should not be run by free market methods. It can and should be run on others, designed to support the welfare of all the groups living in it. If they are poor, money must be found through taxes to alleviate that. If their communities depend on certain industrial conglomerations. such as steel making for example, then money must be found to sustain those industries, to avert the social damage which would ensue/ In Britain the key exponents of this view were people like Arthur Scargill and Tony Benn, who felt public money should be found to support the mining industries, even if those industries operated at less than optimum economic efficiency. In the 1970s Benn went further, suggesting a siege economy protected by tariffs as an alternative to joining the European Community, forerunner of the EU.

The alternative view was pioneered by thinkers such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo. The unhindered operation of free markets, with the lowest possible levels of tax and tariff would facilitate the best possible social outcome. Ricardo developed this in his theory of comparative advantage. By which countries or regions specialising in different products would trade in these to their mutual benefit. His example was Britain and Portugal, which mutually traded manufactured goods and port wine. The same principle holds today.

The key political exponents of this view were Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, whose most memorable declaration was “you can’t buck the markets”. As we write, Mr Trump’s policies seem to be doing exactly that. Unlike others, we judge him to have an honesty of purpose: he is trying to protect the communities that voted for him. Communities whose social structure and very identity depend on the old smokestack industries around which they cluster. Time will tell if he will be successful. But two things worry us. Firstly even if factories are attracted back to the rustbelt, it is unlikely that modern automated plants will need many factory hands. And second: the last twenty years or so of the Communist bloc were spent trying to keep these same sort of plants going. History did not judge that enterprise kindly.

#free markets #socialism #communism #adam smith #david ricardo #margaret thatcher #donald trump #united states of america