The United Kingdom must reform for the 21st century
If you told a young man standing in London at the end of the First World War as hostilities ended on the European front, that within thirty years the once mighty British Empire would be a debt-ridden shell, hollowed out by over-spending and ill-judged policies you would have been laughed out of town. But that is exactly what happened.
After the end of World War II the UK, which had been the world's dominant economic and military power for two centuries went into a death spiral. If you told a young man at VE Day in 1945, that not only would Britain soon lose the empire, but within 30 years be a quasi-socialist country which needed an IMF bailout, you would again have been laughed out of town.
Again, that is what happened. Contrary to some analyses, Britain never lost its empire because of the actions of men like Mohandas Ghandi. Instead, it was the actions of short-sighted and arrogant politicians in London who believed that the status quo was immutable and eschewed flexibility in public policy.
Sound familiar? It should, because this is exactly the thinking now in the United States and Europe. Contrary to every piece of data slammed on their desks, many politicians in the West cannot even begin to imagine a world where Western dominance is no longer the norm.
The consequences for Britain of the stupidity of its political leadership in the early to mid twentieth century were phenomenal. Aside from the €guilty men€ who appeased Adolf Hitler, there were those who did not capitalise on Britain's early economic lead. Today, there are still people in Britain €" few, it should be said €" who really believe the country has a future in a demographically and economically bankrupt Europe.
Yet in spite of all the problems, Britain has emerged from the twentieth century stronger than one would have feared in the late 1970s. London has regained its crown as the world's financial capital; the country has the world's fourth largest defence budget (after the US, China and Russia) and has constitutionally at least, kept its relationship alive with Australia, Canada, New Zealand and 13 other Realms. It still has a formidable higher education sector.
But, as happened in the 1930s and 1940s, there is a danger that Britain falls prey to short-termism and a received wisdom not able to adapt to a changing world. Put simply, whether we like it or not, China is rivalling and could very reasonably overtake the United States as the world's number one stand-alone power in the very near future.
This is not far-fetched and the evidence suggests it will happen. Simultaneously Europe cannot possibly recover to the position it held in the 20th century, as things stand. There are simply too few people entering the labour markets of Eurozone countries, net emigration often of the most educated and no appetite for further immigration.
To complicate matters, the model of EU supranationalism is being copied in South America and Eurasia. The West still believes that Brazil is geopolitically a stand-alone power. It is not. It is moving fast to integrate into a Bolivarian union of nations. Likewise Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus are moving towards economic and political union. For people who think this is all fantasy €" look it up, it has happening right now.
The United States poses an even bigger conundrum. If the United States can slash its public debt within the next five to ten years and crucially, admit to the American people that they are not going to receive the health and social security benefits promised to them, then the US as we know it, will survive. But the political stomach to admit this will be tremendous.
America cannot inflate or grow its way out of its debt. More interestingly, if and when China becomes as dominant (if not more so) than America, then (contrary to the €peaceful rise€ rhetoric), the nation state system which the US guarantees will no longer have the US to guarantee it. It has already broken down in Europe, South America and Eurasia. China is now adopting a quasi-imperialist position in Africa.
Britain cannot continue a 20th century foreign policy in the 21st. Not only are China, Russia and South America rising, but the nation state system is buckling. Globalisation, the internet and international migration are calling into question what a country really is anymore.
The €guilty men€ of the 1930s would not adapt to a changing world. Likewise Britain in the late 19th century lost its economic lead to the US and Germany because it refused to adapt to a changed reality. The 20th century might as well have been 500 years ago for all the guide it will serve in the 21st. If the West truly believed its future could be this dystopian maybe it would actually do something about it.
After the end of World War II the UK, which had been the world's dominant economic and military power for two centuries went into a death spiral. If you told a young man at VE Day in 1945, that not only would Britain soon lose the empire, but within 30 years be a quasi-socialist country which needed an IMF bailout, you would again have been laughed out of town.
Again, that is what happened. Contrary to some analyses, Britain never lost its empire because of the actions of men like Mohandas Ghandi. Instead, it was the actions of short-sighted and arrogant politicians in London who believed that the status quo was immutable and eschewed flexibility in public policy.
Sound familiar? It should, because this is exactly the thinking now in the United States and Europe. Contrary to every piece of data slammed on their desks, many politicians in the West cannot even begin to imagine a world where Western dominance is no longer the norm.
The consequences for Britain of the stupidity of its political leadership in the early to mid twentieth century were phenomenal. Aside from the €guilty men€ who appeased Adolf Hitler, there were those who did not capitalise on Britain's early economic lead. Today, there are still people in Britain €" few, it should be said €" who really believe the country has a future in a demographically and economically bankrupt Europe.
Yet in spite of all the problems, Britain has emerged from the twentieth century stronger than one would have feared in the late 1970s. London has regained its crown as the world's financial capital; the country has the world's fourth largest defence budget (after the US, China and Russia) and has constitutionally at least, kept its relationship alive with Australia, Canada, New Zealand and 13 other Realms. It still has a formidable higher education sector.
But, as happened in the 1930s and 1940s, there is a danger that Britain falls prey to short-termism and a received wisdom not able to adapt to a changing world. Put simply, whether we like it or not, China is rivalling and could very reasonably overtake the United States as the world's number one stand-alone power in the very near future.
This is not far-fetched and the evidence suggests it will happen. Simultaneously Europe cannot possibly recover to the position it held in the 20th century, as things stand. There are simply too few people entering the labour markets of Eurozone countries, net emigration often of the most educated and no appetite for further immigration.
To complicate matters, the model of EU supranationalism is being copied in South America and Eurasia. The West still believes that Brazil is geopolitically a stand-alone power. It is not. It is moving fast to integrate into a Bolivarian union of nations. Likewise Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus are moving towards economic and political union. For people who think this is all fantasy €" look it up, it has happening right now.
The United States poses an even bigger conundrum. If the United States can slash its public debt within the next five to ten years and crucially, admit to the American people that they are not going to receive the health and social security benefits promised to them, then the US as we know it, will survive. But the political stomach to admit this will be tremendous.
America cannot inflate or grow its way out of its debt. More interestingly, if and when China becomes as dominant (if not more so) than America, then (contrary to the €peaceful rise€ rhetoric), the nation state system which the US guarantees will no longer have the US to guarantee it. It has already broken down in Europe, South America and Eurasia. China is now adopting a quasi-imperialist position in Africa.
Britain cannot continue a 20th century foreign policy in the 21st. Not only are China, Russia and South America rising, but the nation state system is buckling. Globalisation, the internet and international migration are calling into question what a country really is anymore.
The €guilty men€ of the 1930s would not adapt to a changing world. Likewise Britain in the late 19th century lost its economic lead to the US and Germany because it refused to adapt to a changed reality. The 20th century might as well have been 500 years ago for all the guide it will serve in the 21st. If the West truly believed its future could be this dystopian maybe it would actually do something about it.
Source...