Comments 14

Tony Blair’s Democratic Insurrection

Feb 24, 2017 Anatole Kaletsky

The former UK leader’s recent call for voters to rethink leaving the EU is an Emperor’s New Clothes moment. Blair is now an unpopular figure, but his voice is loud enough to carry above the crowd of flatterers assuring Prime Minister Theresa May that her naked gamble with Britain’s future is clad in democratic finery.

LONDON – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s recent call for voters to think again about leaving the European Union, echoed in parliamentary debates ahead of the government’s official launch of the process in March, is an Emperor’s New Clothes moment. Although Blair is now an unpopular figure, his voice, like that of the child in Hans Christian Andersen’s story, is loud enough to carry above the cabal of flatterers assuring Prime Minister Theresa May that her naked gamble with Britain’s future is clad in democratic finery.

The importance of Blair’s speech can be gauged by the hysterical over-reaction to his suggestion of reopening the Brexit debate, even from supposedly objective media: “It will be seen by some as a call to arms – Tony Blair’s Brexit insurrection,” according to the BBC.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To access our archive, please log in or register now and read two articles from our archive every month for free. For unlimited access to our archive, as well as to the unrivaled analysis of PS On Point, subscribe now.

Featured

Our Infant Information Revolution

Jun 15, 2018 Joseph S. Nye
The Anatomy of Global Debt

Jun 15, 2018 Howard Davies
Can the Euro Be Saved?

Jun 13, 2018 Joseph E. Stiglitz
The Divine Right of Donald

Jun 11, 2018 Elizabeth Drew
The Republicans’ Protectionist Pedigree

Jun 13, 2018 Jeffrey Frankel

Anatole Kaletsky

Writing for PS since 1995
50 Commentaries

Anatole Kaletsky is Chief Economist and Co-Chairman of Gavekal Dragonomics. A former columnist at the Times of London, the International New York Times and the Financial Times, he is the author of Capitalism 4.0, The Birth of a New Economy, which anticipated many of the post-crisis transformations of the global economy. His 1985 book, Costs of Default, became an influential primer for Latin American and Asian governments negotiating debt defaults and restructurings with banks and the IMF.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 18 in all 18 Comments on this article

Richard S. Stone May 5, 2017

I can't do it. As my teen-age daughters say, I can't even... In this case read the whole essay. Labeling the current "popular" uprisings as populist or Peronist or anti-globalist is just too much. The anti-globalist part is particularly too much: People are planning to leave the globe? Not easy. The problem is quite simple, and the first part of it is in trying to convert the whole world into a Harvard business school model of ever increasing yields, entirely contrary to even what Adam Smith was saying. Remember the quotes of the pernicious effect of "profits?"
It's even worse than that: the simple part is that the profits from "globalization" are NOT being fairly distributed. Instead a group of greedy pigs are sucking up all the profits. Hence pernicious: The actions of the masses of people are not well directed perhaps, but it is a movement for those profits to be more equitably distributed. I fail to see how this is difficult to understand.
simon noble Feb 27, 2017

The problem is that this is 9 months too late. Remain has spent the time complaining and even (libDem) calling for a second vote. that as time when it could have accepted the decision and moved in to debate the terms
Louis Stouch Feb 26, 2017

Translation. Waaaahhhhhhh, we lost.
I wanna do over.
PS: If you had won I'll bet there would be no do over.
Gunnar Eriksson Feb 26, 2017

For the hard core right, like the UK PM, the "Brexit" is a rational project. The increase in poverty is always top priority taking preeminence over the second goal, feeding the rich. Brexit will give arguments both for lowering salaries, deletion of benefits and freeing the rich of taxes so maybe both aims can be served.
For the rest of the political spectrum, including the Labour Party, it is hard to see any upside in the project and it appear to be completely irrational.
- Gunnar Eriksson Feb 28, 2017
  
  Words rung hollow as deeds condemn.
- simon noble Feb 27, 2017
  
  Gunnar, do try to let facts get in the way of your prejudices. May is not and never has been part of the right wing of the Tories. Rees-Mogg and the rest regard her with suspicion only tempered by her periodic pronouncements that keep Brexit in track. Far from wanting poverty, her campaign and conference speech was focused in the have nots. She is keenly aware of the populist risk and also of the opportunity to steal Lab's base. Whether Brexit will undo this remains to be seen. But do show at least a basic grasp if UK politics.
manuel werner Feb 26, 2017

The problem with referendums is that one side (the Leave) need win only once, while the other must win all the time. This is the best reason, fairness, to hold another vote and see if circumstances and minds have really changed.
Petey Bee Feb 26, 2017

(to ed.:) Ouch, it hurt, didn't it.
Andrew (Andy) Crow Feb 26, 2017

Tony Blair has admirably demonstrated his contempt for anything other than his own interests and appetite for power and influence.

His opposition to Brexit is for too many people a ringing endorsement of the wisdom of the 'leave' vote.

There are cogent reasons why it might have been good to remain in the EU, but having TB as 'president of the EU' is not one of them.

The Blair leadership talent is impressive, (he lies with great conviction) but there are only so many times the blind will be led by the one eyed man with his one beady eye on a very faulty compass. His abject failure to lead his country in a progressive direction when he was in position to do so is a significant contributory factor in the Brexit vote result.

If Blair has an ounce of sincerity it is now largely wasted because he has squandered his credibility.

It's a shame because some of his observations are not without merit. The damage is done though. It's too late to recant.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Feb 26, 2017
  
  Robert Coleman I share your frustration. I agree Tony Blair is a 'great communicator'. His conference speech prior to his winning the general Election for Labour in '97 (?) was masterful and gave me hope, but in power he didn't deliver any of it. Ultimately we judge politicians on their works not on their words. In this respect I found TB wanting.
  For me any trust was destroyed years ago. I see only snake oil on offer. I repay his cynicism with my own.
- Robert Coleman Feb 26, 2017
  
  I can't agree with you I'm afraid. If he ran in my district I'd vote for him. Despite the anger many hold for him, so would a lot of other people. He is by far a greater speaker and leader than any of his contemporaries. If he can assist us in getting the message out, I for one am grateful to him. Many sanguine listeners agreed with every word of his Brexit speech, and it was one of hope. Godspeed Tony Blair.
Ian Bebbington Feb 25, 2017

Mr Kaletsky. There are few occasions when I can say with derision you are 100% wrong. I think this is one of them, you write...."And no one seriously expects American opponents of President Donald Trump to stop protesting and unite with his supporters."....Mr Trump and a bunch of others in the Whitehouse certainly do, and he feels the press corps should make it so.
- John Cowan Feb 26, 2017
  
  Of course Trump does. But whether that is a serious expectation is a question.
Steve Hurst Feb 24, 2017

If Blair is for something a huge number of Brits will be against it. Simple as that. He is it would seem regarded by many as a liar and warmonger. Incidentally it was Blairs encouragement of immigration in marked contrast to say Germany's policy at that time that helped create the UK atmosphere for Brexit

The Remain campaign was compromised from the start because to tell the public the hated bankers in the City would suffer from a Brexit outcome was not digestible. Cameron was noticeable in never mentioning it despite the tax revenues the sector generates

There will be no U turn on Brexit in part due to the boorish EU threats and bully-boy tactics to date. Finally as somebody said to me whilst waiting in A&E recently - If the UK was not a member and there was a vote to join the EU in its current form would the vote be join, almost certainly not

So rightly or wrongly it will be full steam ahead on Brexit and the fact T May has moved the border control and free movement to top of the agenda knowing it is a roadblock to the EU tells you the strategy is to have little discussion
- Robert Coleman Feb 26, 2017
  
  "if he's for it, I'm against it"
  
  Unfortunately, that explains the perilous political state of Britain at the moment; emotions are controlling our thoughts.
David Morgan Feb 24, 2017

Referendums or plebiscites are dangerous if the questions are badly written, and as you have mentioned in your excellent article; this one is. No mention was made of remaining in the customs union or the economic area, however, the Prime Minister now insists that it means out of everything.This is probably the biggest mistake that Britain has made since expecting the Soviet Union to keep its promise of free and open elections in the Eastern Eropean countries which they occupied at the time.
Michael Public Feb 24, 2017

I think Britain should have stayed in the EU. I also think it undemocratic to not follow through on a referendum. Finally, I consider the integrity of the democratic process to far exceed the value of any knock on trade effects. So to quote May "Brexit means Brexit".
M M Feb 24, 2017

Anatole, you raised a very good topic. Mixing however, the names that you mentioned confuses some of the good elements in your article. I shall say the following, May is lost in the night, and who can blame her, however she could have had reliable advisers around her to fill in her long list of deficiencies. Another point Anatole, once May triggers Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty without any subjectivity, game is over whether the British Parliament, the House of Lords, Blair, HM, etc like it or not, would become totally irrelevant. If however, article 50 is triggered with subjectivities (which incidentally shall require the agreement of all 27 EU countries), then and only then there would be some hope of a balanced compromise on exit, if there will ever be one in reality at the end of the day. So far, everyone is playing his own game, the irony of it all is that none of the current players shall be around to see the real outcome of any real Brexit!