Going
South: Why Britain Will Have a Third World Economy by 2014
They
compare the “beginning of the end” of the British empire on the
eve of the first world war in 1914 to its resultant “wasteland”
of 2014. Rooted in the English civil war, which laid the foundations
for the development of a capitalist economy, they briefly survey the
conditions which were necessary to implement technological advances
and drive the industrial revolution. They describe the turn towards
colonial markets and the subsequent competitive outstripping of
British industry by Germany and the US, along with the decline of the
British empire after the first and second world wars in terms of
naval power and colonial possessions.
By
Larry Elliott and Dan Atkinson
Published
by Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, £14.99
LARRY
ELLIOTT and Dan Atkinson’s latest book, Going South, provides a
description of the “long, steady decline” of British capitalism.
It argues, largely by analogy, that this decline is reducing the
status of Britain to that of a developing nation. This argument is
clearly a sobering thought, although during the course of this
362-page survey the argument is snipped at by caveats.
As
well as providing a useful summary of the decline of British
capitalism, this book suggests the shape the economy will take by
2014. In short: what Britain could look like after nine years of
crisis and austerity. The economic situation, of course, will provide
the backdrop for the likely general election in 2015, unless there is
a breakdown of the coalition before then.
By
2014, the authors predict, Britain will be “a
country that cannot live with debt yet cannot live without it. It is
a country where the trend in the balance of payments is getting
steadily worse, and which has the income inequality of the United
States, without any of America's economic dynamism. It is a country
where the oil wells are drying up and all the state assets worth
anything have already been flogged off. It is a country where
long-term unemployment is having a scarring impact on the young for
the second time in 30 years, leading to outbreaks of unrest each
summer. It is a country where the trend rate of growth has fallen to
around 1% a year, yet the UK is curiously prone to higher inflation
than other nations. It is a country in deep crisis”.
Later
chapters describe the relative resurgence of industry during the
post-war period underlining, however, the inability of British
industry to fully take advantage of new markets, to rationalise
industries or to develop leading companies. Support by the state in
supplying funds and markets to the ‘winners’ is also noted as a
key part in the success of pharmaceuticals and car production.
An
annoyingly non-committal chapter on Margaret Thatcher “suspends
judgment”, although it does go over the role her government played
in attacking trade unions and unleashing the finance sector. The
bonanza provided to the banks by privatisation is noted, followed by
a description of the rise of the finance industry, deregulation and
an eventual reliance on credit to boost demand: “Around
three-quarters of the growth in the boom years that preceded the
financial crash came from financial services, the housing market, the
construction sector, public spending and retail. All of them are
struggling in an environment where household incomes are falling,
banks are not lending, and the government is cutting spending”.
The
book is useful in that it places the rise of the neo-liberal
capitalist economy against the backdrop of the decline of
manufacturing and the breakdown of the post-war boom, instead of as
an aberration of policy. The argument that this amounts to a
‘de-developing' or submerging economy is compelling when looking at
the fate of hollowed-out British manufacturing and the subsequent
weakness of key areas of the economy with a reliance on finance,
services and diminishing wages of the working class: “...
by 2014 the UK will not have run a trade surplus in manufactured
goods for more than three decades”.
In
addition, Elliott and Atkinson attempt to argue that this - alongside
the growth of bureaucratic arrogance, rising unemployment, the
vacuous character of politics, the nervous encroachment on civil
liberties and so on - amounts to a nation that is starting to look
like many ‘developing’ nations around the world. They highlight
the dysfunction of the capitalist class and ruling political elite in
the face of this decline and crisis, as well as Britain's dependence
on foreign investment, food and energy. Yet, a key part of this
process does not even get a mention: the absence of a working-class
party and movement to challenge this decline and the present
political situation.
Chapter
nine is a list of areas of the economic “wasteland” which Elliott
and Atkinson consider would be worth investing in. This includes
cattle and farms, because of food insecurity and poorly stocked
supermarkets, oil and other imported energy supplies, and
face-to-face methods of communication. After the doom-mongering of
the previous eight chapters, this reads like economists fantasising
about the apocalypse and assessing which investment decisions would
yield the highest results. It is a testament to the parasitism of the
capitalist system that this
can be seen as a silver lining!
A
handful of suggestions are put forward once the need for a
development model
has been outlined. Broadly, two models are proposed. One is the
Scandinavian, social-democratic model of high welfare spending, high
taxation and low inequality – although this has largely been
abandoned by recent governments implementing neo-liberal policies.
The other is to turn Britain into a 'special economic zone', where
any regulation of business is stripped away and the conditions of the
working class are degraded blatantly in the interests of big
business, in an effort to attract foreign investment.
The
Greek government’s plans for the 'redevelopment' of its economy –
beyond the immediate bloodletting imposed by the troika (the European
Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund) –
set out a similar growth model. Elliott and Atkinson, however, all
but rule out a social-democratic model due to the “lack of
willpower” and the “lack of an external threat” along the lines
of that faced during the second world war. Their argument is reduced,
therefore, to growth through the destruction of working-class wages
and conditions, a completion of the neo-liberal project once the
store cupboards have been stripped bare through privatisation and
debt.
That
will be the case unless a movement of the working class is built to
replace the capitalist system with democratic control of the economy
by the majority of the population instead of a tiny minority. Some of
the tasks of a socialist Britain would be the genuine redevelopment
of the economy not through the massive exploitation of the working
class but through a democratically planned economy alongside other
socialist states.