Who Is Your Top Political Blogger?

As various people have noted, its voting time for the Total Politics Top 100 Political Blogs.You're not suppose to publicise who you've voted for in case a pattern of 'voting by slate' emerges. Which is sort of fair enough if it stops the net libertarians all piling in behind Guido Fawkes, but I suspect it won't. & Paul is right to point out it is largely unenforceable. The blogs have to be 'based in the UK, run by UK residents are eligible or based on UK politics'.

Anyway, this has provoked me to reflect on what exactly is it that I value in other people's blogs. It's certainly not ideological conformity or confirming my ideas: I voted for people who are considerably to both my Left and to my Right, though I drew the line at voting for purely academic sites or anyone associated with the Tories or LibDems. So what criteria did I use?

Firstly, the ability to not shout. This is rarer than it might seem on the internet. The default mode at CIF, for example, is shouting - and this is replicated in discussions at Harry's Place and Socialist Unity. Bloggers can't be blamed for the 'rats in a sack' attitude of people who comment on their posts of course, but they can set a tone I think. & I'm just too old to take any notice if the tone is shouty.

My second pre-requisite is a two parter: good blogs must know what they're talking about, but also know the limits of their expertise. This combination is more uncommon than you might imagine. The blogosphere is full of sites which 'own a hammer and therefore think every problem is a nail' as it were. Avoiding this is perfectly compatible with political commitment and ideological fervour. It's really about having a curiosity about the world as opposed to just a preset plan to reshape it.

Because I've become fascinated by economic issues since last autumn's economic crisis I regularly enjoy a variety of blogs dealing with matters of political economy, from the austere but rewarding Willem Buiter on the establishment wing,through the gifted Paul Mason to the wonderfully eccentric unorthodox Troskyist Boffy. John Ross is always readable, be it on his own site or Ken's. But my current favourites are the Left-Labourish Duncan and, pre-eminently, Stumbling and Mumbling, both of whom have a commitment to opening up complex economic debates to us non-specialists. Tom at Labour and Capital deserves a mention for his sheer 'stickability' on a very narrow brief (or so it seems to we non experts) - and for the best single political comment in less than 200 words on the economic crisis I've read anywhere. & Anne Pettifor is a routinely worthwhile reference point over at Debtonation. Bubbly Alice lets me peek at the economic world as the Right see it - a strangely fascinating experience if one takes it with a sense of moderation.

But I also like folk who know stuff I don't know that much about - people like parliamentary insider Hopi, the gorgeously phrased writing of Fat Man On A Keyboard and that foreign policy specialising far left humourist, Blood and Treasure. Splinty is also well informed on foreign policy, amongst other things, and regularly funny; he should be considered a national treasure for one or other of the national traditions he reports on from Belfast, and perhaps for both of them. Jim at the Daily (Maybe) is my gateway to greenery, while Flipchart Rick prowls along the other side of the politics-management border from me.

Lastly, there are two people I regularly read who know about stuff I once knew about but have forgotten. A Very Public Sociologist reassures me that the subject matter of my 30 year old undergraduate degree hasn't changed that much, whilst Potlatch convinces me it has. They're both good writers with a hinterland of interests I find fascinating.

That's 16 people, none of whom I've ever met and none of whom know my real name. Go vote and keep them all in mind in choosing your ten. Remember: anyone but Guido...

Don't Look At Me, Here's Three Other Messengers To Shoot

I'm rather flattered to be part of an interesting discussion starting over at Duncan's. The other participants seem to be all Labour people, whereas I'm a....what was the last mouthful I concocted to describe my current position now? Oh yeah, 'politically-homeless-once-upon-a-time/Ex-Eurocom- and-probably-ex-Marxist-altogether-but-still-lefty-with-greenish-tinges-sort-of-thing'. I don't suppose this matters greatly in terms of the discussion except insofar as I don't see influencing Labour policy as the aim of the game - I'm at least as interested in seeing Plaid, SNP and, in England, Green policy evolving along plausible lines. Ideally the ultra Left would join in as well. There's a not dissimilar - and quite clear-eyed - discussion going on over at Spiked influenced Rob's, but its a bit stunted by the characteristic anti-Greenery and 'cultural libertarianism' which make me so very uninterested in all those post RCP think tanks/campaigns/astroturf organisations.

The essence of the matter is how can we explain to people the good times are gone and a new national direction is necessary. This is going to be very unpopular. The messenger is very,very likely to get shot as it were. Paul has posted on his blog to take the matter forward but I think it would be best to concentrate the discussion at Duncan's, otherwise we'll all be flying hither and nither to follow the debate.

So all I intend to do now on this site is reproduce three quotes I've used before which give some clue as to how very bad the economic future might be even if we do climb out of recession. I think everyone should read them.

John Lancaster in the LRB:

"....the cost of the financial crisis is going to be paid not over a few years but over a generation, we have a perfect formula for a deep and growing anger. Expectations have risen a lot, over the last three decades; that’s going to have a big impact on how furious people feel about the hard years ahead. The level of future public spending cuts implied in Darling’s recent budget – which included the laughably optimistic idea that the economy will grow by 1.25 per cent next year – is greater than the level of cuts implemented by Thatcher. Remember, that’s the optimistic version. If we’re lucky, it won’t be any worse than Thatcherism."

Martin Woolf in the FT:

Ratios of public sector debt to gross domestic product seem likely to double in many advanced countries: the fiscal impact of a big financial crisis can, we have been reminded, be as costly as a large war. This, then, is a disaster that governments of slow-growing advanced economies cannot afford to see repeated in a generation. The legacy of the crisis will also limit fiscal largesse. The effort to consolidate public finances will dominate politics for years, perhaps decades. The state is back, therefore, but it will be the state as intrusive busybody, not big spender.

Will Hutton:

"Britain is going to feel very different in the years ahead. .... Like the empires of Venice, Spain, the Netherlands and Austria before us, Britain no longer has an economy large enough to finance our ambitions and overseas commitments.

The next government, of whatever hue, will surely raise the basic rate of income tax; 22 pence is certain, 25 pence likely. Public sector pay and pension benefits will be frozen or cut. The state pension will not be indexed to earnings growth. The national ID card scheme is dead. We will need a network of public infrastructure banks to finance capital investment, otherwise it will be goodbye to CrossRail and a modernised rail system and any hopes of improving our housing stock. But all this will still be insufficient.

There is no way that Britain's defence, overseas aid and foreign commitments can survive the next decade without swingeing cuts. Trident, the Eurofighter and the planned aircraft carriers must go. A review will cut the defence budget by a third, the aid budget by a similar proportion. Embassies will be shared or sold. Our permanent seat on the UN Security Council will become indefensible. The special relationship will be a joke; Britain will not have the capacity to invade anybody. Suddenly, the European Union will seem a more attractive way of retaining influence.

An urgent debate will begin about how to grow, because unemployment is going to rise by at least another one and half million by 2012 and fall only very slowly thereafter. The Faustian deal New Labour struck with the City cannot be repeated."

"

Political Blogging v Political Commentating

Not normally an argument I'd care to enter: every one else seems to have their positions worked out and nicely packaged up with a whole set of buzzwords I'm still getting to grips with.

But today at least, the bloggers are wining hands down. They're talking about the welfare reforms - Stumbling's playing Devil's Advocate, Harpy most definitely isn't, Osler tells us it won't work in Rochdale, the Plump one sees scary historical parallels and even the Ipswich French Connection is taking a break from his usual travels around the Anglo-French ultra-left to say something sensible.

Meanwhile, Kettle and the BBC think a slip of the tongue in a ritualised Commons 'ya-boo-sucks-to-you' exchange is the key issue of the day.