Indeed. I suspect the only thing Glasman truly knows & “loves” about his “beloved working classes” is that they bring atmosphere to football games & fit nicely into armament factories. Same reason he “loves” Bevin. Certainly nothing to do with meaningfully standing up for trade union/workers rights.

Not impossible, if the good residents of Stoke Newington & Stamford Hill have had enough of his shit…

Oh no, my mountain of free money is slightly smaller than I would have hoped! To the papers!

They don’t like Bevin because they like working class people. They like Bevin because they like armament factories.

(Explaining what I’m driving at a little more - thanks for prompting me to think about this! bsky.app/profile/caro...)

TL:DR - neoliberalism is a real thing

(Whilst ofc not mandating business to do anything much)

Also very much prompted by the current reflection on COVID lockdown - which, as I wrote extensively at the time, was neither “too soft” nor “too hard” but just *entirely the wrong mix of mandating ordinary people to do very difficult things without adequately supporting them to fulfil that mandate”

Prompted by this discussion… am thinking aloud here, really bsky.app/profile/davi...

/the mandates without the funding (ask any nhs manager or local government person)…. Perhaps in the past we got rather more funding without the mandates, without the Blairite NPM micromanagement that disempowered professionals as a block on the free market?

Just a thought, what do others think?

(And from this relatively secure base they attained education alongside their peer group, social mobility, and professional careers, in a way that kids in today’s b&bs and insecure temporary and private accommodation are gonna find tricky)

/ a secure & predictable (& democratically controlled) roof over their heads at a time when it would have been hard for them to achieve that without public housing. Status was not the most important thing (& anyway these were proper homes with gardens surrounded by people of similar status)

but
1. intervention =/= ”taking care of”, as per our discussion at the end of my reply thread, &

2. Praps but depends who’s writing the history. Anecdote =/= evidence but both my parents grew up in council houses (my mum for a while, dad, his whole childhood) & whilst not at all perfect, there was/

I have seen it 6 times (and I’m not really a repeat film watcher) and this scene makes me cry every time 🌹

/ and of course the difference between control/mandate and fund/provide is made hugely more complicated by its locus often between central & local government, no surprise that a lot of the anger coheres against the latter

/ exploited by the anti-government right, ruthlessly (“state education means Them indoctrinating Your family!”), and which we need to avoid (good funding *can* co-exist with appropriate subsidiarity & professional autonomy, even if Blair used the former as a tool to smash the latter & open biz opps/

Hm, I feel like now we’re starting to get towards the nub of it - there‘s a difference between your original framing (“take care of it”, “support” - ie, provide) and this explanation (”control”, ie mandate). It’s an elision that I suspect correlates with much current dissatisfaction, & has been /