Podcasts about Thatcherism

In this episode of Believe in People, playwright Ed Edwards joins us to discuss The Political History of Smack and Crack - his award-winning play exploring addiction, recovery, Thatcherism, political unrest, and Britain's heroin epidemic.Drawing on his own experiences of addiction, prison, relapse, and long-term recovery, Ed reflects on stigma, Narcotics Anonymous, consumer culture, creativity, and the human realities behind substance use. Ed is brutally honest about relapse, including the “relapse before the relapse” signs like pulling back from meetings and turning irritation into isolation. We also explore why Narcotics Anonymous can feel like a higher power even if you are an atheist, and how belonging acts as a real-world protective factor in a consumer culture that competes for our attention.This episode explores addiction recovery, trauma, peer support, mental health, politics, and the lived experiences that shaped a generation.Links & Resources

If the polls are right, ReformUK could be in Downing Street in three years. So what would they do with the country? We know they don't like immigrants or Europe or windfarms, but what DO they want? How would they shape Britain's economy, foreign policy, health service? Dr Vladimir Bortun, lecturer in politics at Oxford University, tells Phil and Roger it would be some form extreme Thatcherism, but with policies shaped to please the party's billionaire backers, rather than their mainly working-class supporters. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cold War Protest Songs, Punk Anthems, and Nuclear Pop Culture CollideWhy did the Cold War produce generations of unforgettable protest songs while today's crises barely inspire a mainstream anthem? In this electrifying episode of History Rage, host Paul Bavill welcomes back historian, author, and Imperial War Museum senior manager Fraser McCallum to trace the history of protest music from folk ballads and Bob Dylan through punk, hip hop, Live Aid, and Cold War pop classics.From Two Tribes and 99 Red Balloons to Fortunate Son, London Calling, and Born in the USA, Fraser explores how music became the soundtrack to nuclear fear, civil rights, Vietnam, Thatcherism, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Along the way, the pair discuss why protest songs once dominated Top of the Pops and ask the big question: where have all the decent protest songs gone?Expect passionate debate on:Bob Dylan and the birth of modern protest music Folk traditions, skiffle, and anti-war ballads Vietnam War classics like Fortunate Son and Paint It Black Punk, Thatcherism, and London Calling Nuclear anxiety in Two Tribes and 99 Luftballons Bruce Springsteen, David Bowie, and Cold War Berlin Why modern artists rarely risk overt political protest songs Fraser also shares fascinating insights into how pop culture and Western music seeped through the Iron Curtain, influencing East Germany and the wider Cold War world.Fraser is the author of Cold War Britain.Buy the book from the History Rage Bookshop here: https://uk.bookshop.org/a/10120/9780008743994Listen to Fraser's specially curated Cold War soundtrack playlists: Apple Music Playlist: https://music.apple.com/gb/playlist/cold-war-britain-the-soundtrack-to-the-book/pl.u-NRp7s3pq7oSpotify Playlist: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2lZ7HBrKKyBj31wXKXx2nq?si=-jyLeTguToieWb87K3CG3A&pi=0lbsCZu1SV2xV&nd=1&dlsi=0de49b8d828a4db0Fraser will also be hosting the IWM History Festival at IWM Duxford on 13–14 June 2026, featuring leading historians, authors, and live discussions surrounded by iconic wartime aircraft. Tickets available here: https://www.iwm.org.uk/events/iwm-duxford/iwm-history-festivalFollow Fraser McCallum and the Imperial War Museum online: https://www.iwm.org.uk/Love the show? Support History Rage by subscribing, leaving a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, and sharing the episode on social media.Follow and contact History Rage: Website: https://historyrage.com/ X: https://x.com/historyrage Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/historyrage/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/historyrage/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comAdrian is a journalist and an old friend. We arrived in America on the same plane in 1984 and spent the first few days together in the same hotel room. After more than 20 years writing for The Economist, he became the global business columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. He's the author of several books, including The Aristocracy of Talent, and the co-author of many more with John Micklethwait, including The Right Nation. Adrian's new book is The Revolutionary Center: The Lost Genius of Liberalism. It's a terrific tonic for a philosophy as vital as it is in eclipse.For two clips of the episode — on how Enlightenment ideas got corrupted, and Big Tech's threat to liberalism — head to our YouTube page.Other topics: raised in rural Shropshire; his parents both teachers; his dissertation on the 11-plus (an exam that changed my life); when IQ tests were a liberal cause; Luther and the Reformation; the religious civil wars leading to the Enlightenment; Hobbes as a proto-liberal; the humanism of Erasmus; Montesquieu and the spirit of liberalism; John Stuart Mill and utilitarianism; Isaiah Berlin and pluralism; Graham Wallas and the Great Society; Lippmann; Leo Strauss; Thatcherism; consumerism vs. self-improvement; meritocracy threatened by the left; Foucault's folly; the EU and managerial liberalism; Brooks' bobos; affirmative action and DEI; why liberal democracy in Iraq didn't work; Oakeshott; Schmitt and friend-enemy; Trump's stark illiberalism and neo-royalism; King Charles; Putin ushering in a strongman era; Biden's open borders; the migration crisis and Brexit; the buffoonish Boris; the struggling Starmer; high culture and other upsides to elitism; Abundance; Deneen and post-liberalism; and Europe stepping up for Ukraine.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. We have some real stars coming up: Ben Rhodes on Iran and speech-writing, Harvey Mansfield on modernity, HW Brands on the life of George Washington, John Gray on Trump's new world, Bob Wright on the evolutionary force of AI, Tiffany Jenkins on privacy in a liberal democracy, Jerusalem Demsas on the state of the left, Daniel McCarthy on conservatism, Stephen Grosz on the struggles of love, and Robby George on pretty much everything. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, I examine the slow-motion collapse of the political order that has defined British politics for a century – and what is likely to replace it.The term "political earthquake" gets overused. What is happening in Great Britain is more like a once‑in‑a‑century end of a political order. It began in 2024 with the death of the Conservative Party – a party that is unlikely to restore itself. And it will continue over the next few years with the death of the Labour Party.The May local elections, just a week away, will mark a major step. Labour is almost certain to lose two of the places it has dominated for generations: Wales (for a century) and London (for half a century). But this isn't just about one bad election night. It is the culmination of decades of neoliberal economics, deindustrialisation, austerity, and the systematic destruction of any alternative vision within the mainstream parties.I draw a historical parallel with the last time Britain's party system realigned: the years after the First World War, when the Liberal Party – the party of 19th‑century capital, free trade, and limited government – collapsed, replaced by a two‑party system of Labour and Conservatives. That system, cemented in 1945, survived for nearly eighty years. Now it is dying.The culprits are not just individual leaders. Thatcherism broke union power, atomised communities, and left Britain poorer and more unequal. The 2008 financial crisis blew up the economic assumptions of that model. Brexit smashed Britain's role as a transatlantic bridge between Washington and Brussels. Austerity killed hundreds of thousands, collapsed public services, and turned the country into a nation in de‑development. The Labour right's merciless destruction of the Corbyn movement left the party in the hands of a centrist technocrat, Keir Starmer – a man who, despite his blandness, has gleefully embraced racist rhetoric on immigration, supported Israel's genocide in Gaza, and handed state functions over to private equity vultures.Starmer's Labour has tried to tack to the right, hoping that voters will hold their noses and vote for "not far‑right". But that strategy is failing. In recent by‑elections, voters ignored Labour's warnings and voted Green or Plaid Cymru – proving that the old "vote for us or you'll get the fascists" threat no longer works.So what comes next? The beneficiaries are two very different parties. Reform UK – funded by a reclusive Bitcoin billionaire, backed by the propaganda channel GB News – offers a populist, proto‑fascist nationalism. The Green Party – untainted by private donations, hostile to the tabloid press, and offering a genuine left‑wing economic alternative – has already won a stunning by‑election on an anti‑racist, cost‑of‑living platform.The next decade could see Britain's political landscape transformed. A two‑party system of Reform and Greens is possible – though each would feel like an enemy occupation to the other side's voters. What is certain is that the old order is being taken out to a field and put out of its misery. And what caused it? Five decades of neoliberalism – an economic project that both main parties embraced, whose contradictions they are now incapable of addressing.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Get access to The Backroom (100+ exclusive episodes) on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OneDimeIn this episode of 1Dime Radio, I sit down with my friend Artin Salimi for a nuanced debate on immigration, what the right gets wrong, what the left gets wrong, and why the issue cannot be reduced to either xenophobic panic or liberal denial. We get into labor markets, Thatcherism, Brexit, brain drain, asylum, nationalism, class politics, and the ways neoliberal capitalism both drives migration and weaponizes it politically. This is a serious attempt to think through one of the most explosive political questions of our time without demonizing immigrants or parroting elite talking points.In The Backroom exclusive on Patreon, we continue our debate on immigration, and I put forward some of my more controversial hot takes, pushing further on borders, nationalism, class power, elite blind spots, and what a serious alternative to both neoliberal globalism and right-wing scapegoating might actually look like.Timestamps:00:00:00  The Backroom preview (Patreon): Socialism, Borders & Brain Drain 00:03:19  Nuanced Discussion on Immigration00:05:00  Why immigration dominates politics00:11:33  Thatcherism and the neoliberal immigration trap00:16:56  Brexit and why immigration still rose00:21:26  Labor demand, empire, and who actually benefits00:24:01  What both the right and left get wrong00:32:35  Immigration is economics, but not only economics00:39:37  Borders, deportations, and pathways to citizenship00:42:22  Refugees, asylum, and what integration actually requires00:50:10  Migrant labor, unionization, and the underclass problem00:55:02  Rootless cosmopolitans, nationalism, and elite blindness01:05:05  Empire, colonial history, and migration blowback01:14:02  PMC politics, Bernie, AOC, and why the left sounds alien01:17:51  Full Backroom episode on PatreonGUEST:Artin Salimi, YouTuber, rapper, and academic• YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ArtinSalimi• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/artinsalimi666/• SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/artin-salimi-208799242FOLLOW 1Dime:• Substack (Articles and Essays): https://1dimereview.substack.com/• X/Twitter: https://x.com/1DimeOfficial• Instagram: instagram.com/1dimeman• Check out my main channel videos: https://www.youtube.com/@1DimeeLeave a like, drop a comment, and give the show a 5-star rating on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen to this.

Are we seeing the emergence of a new conjuncture for urbanism? The final part of our mini series asks whether authoritarian neoliberalism has created the conditions for a more illiberal and distinct type of urban governance . Authoritarianism is not new to neoliberalism – the Pinochet regime, Thatcherism in the UK – these were evidently authoritarian and neoliberal, and given crises and stagnation it is no surprise to see these tendencies re-animated. But is something more also happening? The high point of neoliberal hegemony was associated with the development of technocratic, often obscure, market systems as well as notions of ‘sustainable development and even at times ‘participation' and ‘consensus' even if these were highly circumscribed. When we look at some new urban projects today, and those envisaged by leading powers, there seems to be less room for both markets, preventing climate breakdown or ‘woke' notions of democracy and instead a more naked focus on iconoclastic real estate projects regardless of the social and ecological cost. The episode is hosted by Gareth Fearn with guests Jason Luger, Miklós Dürr, Aysegul Can and Oksana Zaporozhets. This episode is one of a three-part series which cover different aspects of ‘authoritarian neoliberal urbanism', based on a special issue in the Urban Studies Journal edited by Guldem Ozatagan, Gareth Fearn and Ayda Eraydin.

Does the negotiator of Britain's exit from the EU accept Brexit has failed? What in Liz Truss's disastrous mini budget does he still endorse? What are his plans to revive the think tank that gave us Thatcherism? In this episode, Steph and Robert sit down with Lord David Frost - the Brexit negotiator turned head of the Institute of Economic Affairs. They examine whether his climate “realism” is in fact climate denialism and his arguments that the British state has grown too big, too intrusive, and too expensive Email: ⁠⁠the⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠restismoney@goalhanger.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TheRestIsMoney⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TheRestIsMoney⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@RestIsMoney⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In case you missed them, over Christmas we're bringing you some of the best editions of the year. Our first selection: It's February and Labour legend and former leader Neil Kinnock joins us for the FIFTEEN HUNDREDTH edition of The Bunker. On the agenda: the story Labour should be telling… what his battles against Thatcherism can teach Starmer about fighting the rising right wing… the dangers of a radicalised Conservative Party… and how to hit Reform UK where it hurts. With Andrew Harrison and Alex von Tunzelmann. www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Tom Taylor. Art by James Parrett. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Productionwww.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In case you missed them, over Christmas we're bringing you some of the best editions of the year. Our first selection: It's February and Labour legend and former leader Neil Kinnock joins us for the FIFTEEN HUNDREDTH edition of The Bunker. On the agenda: the story Labour should be telling… what his battles against Thatcherism can teach Starmer about fighting the rising right wing… the dangers of a radicalised Conservative Party… and how to hit Reform UK where it hurts. With Andrew Harrison and Alex von Tunzelmann. www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Tom Taylor. Art by James Parrett. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production www.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Andrew and John discuss John's book ‘Jungle Days', exploring the deep connections between Celtic Football Club, Irish identity, and political consciousness. They reflect on the historical significance of Celtic as a cultural institution, the role of community in shaping identity, and the ongoing tensions between fans and the club's leadership. The discussion also touches on the club's anti-racism stance and its relevance in today's socio-political climate, as well as personal memories of supporting Celtic during the 1980s.By the author of This Boxing Game: A Journey in Beautiful Brutality, this engrossing book is perfect for all Celtic fans and anyone interested in social history.During the tempestuous 1980s, when Thatcher and Thatcherism ruled the roost, Wight found sanctuary and meaning in Celtic FC.The book is out now and you can pick it up in most good book shopsEnjoy…Apple podcastsSpotifyAmazonPlayer.fmSpreakerAudioboomYoutube This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thecelticunderground.substack.com/subscribe

In this special episode Grant shares his personal memories of photographer Martin Parr and reflects on his influence on contemporary documentary photography. Martin Parr Born in Epsom, Surrey, Parr wanted to become a documentary photographer from the age of fourteen and cited his grandfather, George Parr, an amateur photographer and fellow of the Royal Photographic Society, as an early influence. However, it was not until he was introduced to the work of Tony Ray Jones by Creative Camera and Album editor and writer Bill Jay (www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd47549knOU&t=74s) at a talk whilst Parr was studying photography at Manchester Polytechnic that he identified how his career as a photographer would develop within documentary practice. Parr studied photography at Manchester Polytechnic from 1970 to 1973 with contemporaries Daniel Meadows and Brian Griffin.  Parr and Meadows collaborated on various projects,including working at Butlin's holiday camps as roving photographers. They were part of a new wave of documentary photographers, and the 'New British Photography'. In 1975 Parr moved to Hebden Bridge in West Yorkshire where he would complete his first body of work and spent five years photographing rural life in the area. He photographed in black-and-white, creating his series The Non-Conformistswas widely exhibited at the time and published as a book in 2013. In 1980 Parr married Susan Mitchell and, for her work, they moved to the west coast of Ireland where he set up a darkroom in Boyle, County Roscommon. In 1982 they moved to Wallasey, England, and he switched permanently to colour photography. During the summers of 1983, 1984 and 1985 he photographed working-class people at the seaside in nearby New Brighton. This work was published in the book The Last Resort: Photographs of New Brighton (1986) and exhibited in Liverpool and London. He and his wife moved to Bristol in 1987, and he began his next major project, on the middle class, who were at that time becoming increasingly affluent under Thatcherism. He photographed middle-class activities such as shopping, dinner parties and school open days, predominantly around Bristol and Bath which was published as his next book The Cost of Living (1989). Between 1987 and 1994 Parr travelled internationally to make his next major series, a critique of mass tourism, published as Small World in 1995. Between 1995 and 1999 he made the series Common Sense about global consumerism. Common Sense was an exhibition of 350 prints, and a book published in 1999. The exhibition was first shown in 1999 and was staged simultaneously in forty-one venues in seventeen countries. Parr joined Magnum Photos as an associate member in 1988. The vote on his inclusion as a full member in 1994 was divisive, with Philip Jones Griffiths circulating a plea to other members not to admit him. Parr achieved the necessary two-thirds majority by one vote. Alongside his photography he was a passionate collector and critic of photobooks. His collaboration with the critic Gerry Badger, The Photobook: A History (in three volumes) covers more than 1,000 examples of photobooks from the 19th century through to the present day. The first two volumes took eight years to complete. The Martin Parr Foundation was founded in 2014 and opened in Bristol in 2017. The Foundation houses Parr's own archive, and his collection of prints and book dummies made by other photographers—mainly British and Irish photography, and work by several photographers from abroad who have photographed in the UK. There is a gallery open to the public—its first exhibition was Parr's Black Country Stories —and it is a hub for talks, screenings and events. Parr was the Foundation's main source of income. He was diagnosed with cancer in May 2021, and died at his home in Bristol on 6 December 2025. https://martinparr.com ©Grant Scott 2025

Gerald Diffey was born in the UK & slowly rode a bicycle to Australia in the Thatcherism days. Opening a local neighbour jaunt in Carlton, Melbourne a couple of decades ago- Gerards Bar is his ode to the hospitality industry. Later opening in San Sebastián & more recently locating to a larger space in Lygon St Melbourne, tu casa es mi casa'https://www.geraldsbar.comhttps://www.travellingsenorita.com

In this episode of Explaining History, Nick takes a hard look at the state of the British Left in late 2025. With the Starmer government firmly entrenched in "continuity Thatcherism," the opposition has splintered. We analyze the chaotic founding conference of the new left-wing coalition, "Your Party," led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana.From walkouts and factional disputes to the return of the "spectre of entryism" by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), we explore why the Left seems addicted to infighting at the moments it is needed most. Is the new Green Party under Zack Polanski the only viable home for progressives, or can the new Independent alliance survive its own birth?Key Topics:The Post-2024 Landscape: How Labour abandoned the Left.The "Your Party" Crisis: Inside the chaotic first conference and Zarah Sultana's walkout.The Return of Entryism: How the SWP and open membership could kill the new party.Green Shoots: The rise of Zack Polanski's Green Party as a serious socialist alternativeExplaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's episode is the second part of David's conversation with historian Robert Saunders about the life and legacy of Margaret Thatcher. What is the meaning of Thatcherism in the twenty-first century? Why is she still such a polarising figure? Was she a distinctively British political phenomenon? Which politicians can plausibly claim to be channelling her example today? If you are looking for Christmas presents, how about a gift subscription to PPF+? You can choose between 6- and 12-months subscriptions – giving access to our entire archive of bonus episodes, plus two new bonuses every month, ad-free listening and automatic sign-up to our fortnightly newsletter – to be delivered to the recipient of your choice on Christmas Day. All the details you need are here https://ppf.supportingcast.fm/gifts Next Time: Novelist Ian McEwan on imagining the present as a future past   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this, his first Bernard Samson narrative, Len Deighton gives us the story of a weary MI6 veteran who's pulled back into danger when a suspected mole threatens London's Berlin intelligence network. As Cold War pressures intensify, Samson is forced to negotiate frayed loyalties and return to the divided city of his youth, where nostalgia threatens to cloud his professional judgement further. Deighton's prose balances the tight rope of moral uncertainty while softly critiquing early Thatcherism - the result being a portrayal of Britain as a nation losing coherence... not to mention its secret intel!Fast Facts@12:30; Summary@38:00; PIPES@58:00

On what would have been her 100th birthday, Freddie Sayers chairs a spirited debate on Thatcherism and the Iron Lady's place in Britain's story. How should we understand her legacy in 2025? Did she transform the country for the better — or does she bear responsibility for many of today's problems? In this all-star debate, journalists Peter Hitchens and Suzanne Moore go head-to-head with former Conservative politician and Spectator editor Michael Gove, and political analyst Reem Ibrahim, in a lively clash over the most divisive figure in modern British history. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fifty years since Margaret Thatcher became leader of the Conservative Party, her face, and even some of her iconic outfits, were all over this year's party conference. Not everyone was happy about that. Hot takes and tweets grumbled about it being time to move on, to pack away the old clothes and put out something a bit more 2025.At CapX, however, we're proud to still fly the Thatcherite flag. Not just because, as part of the Centre for Policy Studies, the think tank she co-founded, Thatcher's ideas are in our DNA. But, as Marc Sidwell argues, because Mrs Thatcher remains the woman for this moment, with the ideas that Britain still needs to get back on the right track.Stay informed with CapX's unmissable daily briefings from the heart of Westminster. Go to capx.co to subscribe. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 1925, on the 13th October, a daughter was born to Alfred Roberts and his wife Beatrice Stephenson - she was named Margaret Hilda Roberts. The world would get to know her as Mrs Thatcher or ‘The Iron Lady' and 100 years later, whether you loved or hated her, she is still being discussed and her influence is evident in the economics and politics of today. In this special episode by Pete and Gav, your friendly neighbourhood economists, you will dive into the economics of ‘Thatcherism' and discover what made her economic world tick! Not only you will learn about MV=PT and the Laffer Curve but you'll also be able to hear two limericks about her rise and fall and have a go at the obligatory quiz. Technical support comes from Nic, the Norman Tebbit of the team!!! 

Sanae Takaichi is the first woman to be elected to lead Japan’s conservative Liberal Democratic Party, and the country’s probable next PM. Can she hold onto the top job? You can read more about this story, plus see photos, videos and additional reporting, on the website or on The Australian’s app. This episode of The Front is presented and produced by Kristen Amiet and edited by Joshua Burton. Our regular host is Claire Harvey and our team includes Lia Tsamoglou, Tiffany Dimmack, Stephanie Coombes and Jasper Leak, who also composed our music.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The former Labour leader gives his views on patriotism, Keir Starmer, the upcoming Budget, inequality, child poverty, raising taxes, the left behind, the future of British manufacturing, charisma in politics, the survival of the Tory Party, Nigel Farage, populism, Donald Trump, proportional representation, the legacy of Thatcherism, and what it was like facing Margaret Thatcher at the despatch box. In an emotional moment towards the end, Kinnock weeps as he remembers his late wife, Glenys, Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead.  (Note in reference to mention of Nigel Farage's plans for mass deportations, there was uncertainty about exactly which people illegally in Britain the Reform leader was referring to, and he made clear he didn't want a repeat of the Windrush scandal). 

First of a double podcast episode about the successful mass direct action campaign against the UK poll tax in the late 1980s and early 1990s. In conversation with Dave Morris from the Tottenham Anti-Poll Tax campaign and Haringey Solidarity Group.This part covers the background, Thatcherism, introduction of the tax in Scotland, the beginnings of resistance, and the poll tax riot.Our podcast is brought to you by our Patreon supporters. Our supporters fund our work, and in return get exclusive early access to podcast episodes without ads, bonus episodes, two exclusive podcast series – Fireside Chats and Radical Reads – as well as free and discounted merchandise and other content. Join us or find out more at patreon.com/workingclasshistoryListen to part 2 early and without ads by joining us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/e111-poll-tax-2-138013003Listen to an exclusive bonus episode by joining us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/e111-1-poll-tax-138554022More informationHaringey Solidarity GroupDanny Burns, Poll Tax Rebellion (AK Press, 1992).Sources, photos, more information and eventually a transcript on the webpage for this episode: https://workingclasshistory.com/podcast/e110-111-poll-tax-revolt/AcknowledgementsThanks to our Patreon supporters for making this podcast possible. Special thanks to Jazz Hands, Fernando López Ojeda, Nick Williams and Old Norm.Episode graphic: Courtesy James Bourne/Wikimedia Commons CC by SA 4.0Our theme tune is Bella Ciao, thanks for permission to use it from Dischi del Sole. You can purchase it here or stream it here.Edited by Engin HassanBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/working-class-history--5711490/support.

https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/ " Techno-optimism is the belief that rapid technological progress is the main driver of human prosperity and should be pursued as a moral imperative. It argues that: Growth = Good: Innovation creates abundance, longer lives, and better living standards. Barriers = Bad: Regulation, caution, and pessimism slow down progress and should be resisted. Technology as Solution: Challenges like poverty, disease, and climate change are best solved by accelerating science and technology rather than restricting them. In short: Techno-optimism sees faster innovation as the surest path to human flourishing — and treats resistance to technological progress as harmful. " Here's a structured overview of the major schools of economic thought, mapped across time, followed by an estimate of which views dominate public and policy thinking today.

Bottle films, films made predominately in one location, are like playing with fire. There's not a lot of room to make a good film if you don't cast well, for instance, or if the location of your bottle isn't fantastic. My guest, director Nicolai Schumann, understood all this….because he watched a bunch of the previous bottle films…and went ahead with THE LONELY MUSKETEER (2024) anyway. And I'm so glad that he did. The film tells the story of “the psychological downfall of a man who is highly traumatized by life.” Along the way, it's earned numerous awards, including cinematography at the 2025 Raindance Film Festival. And Nico is here to talk about it with me today. In this episode, Nico and I discuss:The clausterphobic nature of his film and what people should expect to see when they watch THE LONELY MUSKETEER?The pairing of investment bankers and hooligans in London that made this film;The secret to success for the feature film that won best cinematography at Raindance 2025;Why they cast Edward Hogg for a film that centers around a man locked in a box;How he feels about bottle films;Utilizing color throughout the film as well as putting important scenes in the credits;Whether he can trace awards won to tangible benefits for the film;London as an indie filmmaking location;What he's working on now” — “three teenagers who decide on a suicide pact in the backdrop of Thatcherism”;Nico's Indie Film Highlight: JAMES (2024) dir. by Max TrainMemorable Quotes:“The next decision I made, stylistically or creatively, is that there is not a single camera movement in the whole movie. So our big role model for that was a shower scene in PSYCHO;“ If there's not a hundred percent certainty that the actor can put it off, we wouldn't have done it.”“ The other thing which was really important for us is that we got the visuals right…that we started with wide lenses and then we went to long lenses over the movie so that the walls were literally closing in on the actor.” “The credit sequence is there to keep the audience guessing.”Links:Follow Nicolai On InstagramSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/first-time-go/exclusive-content

In this electric conversation, Irvine Welsh joins Adam Biles at Shakespeare and Company to discuss Men in Love, the long-awaited sequel to Trainspotting. Picking up moments after Renton's betrayal, Welsh dives deep into the aftermath—friendship, love, addiction, class, and the cultural hangover of 1980s Thatcherism. The pair explore writing authentic historical fiction, how ecstasy (both drug and emotion) shaped a generation, and why mobile phones are killing drama. Welsh also shares insights into masculinity, social mobility, and why Sick Boy might just be the tragic heart of this novel. Expect laughs, gallows humor, biting commentary—and a live reading that's pure, unfiltered Welsh.Buy Men In Love: https://www.shakespeareandcompany.com/books/men-in-love-2Irvine Welsh was born and raised in Edinburgh. His first novel, Trainspotting, has sold over one million copies in the UK and was adapted into an era-defining film. He has written fourteen further novels, including the number one Sunday Times bestseller Dead Men's Trousers, four books of shorter fiction and numerous plays and screenplays. Irvine Welsh currently lives between London, Edinburgh and Miami.Adam Biles is Literary Director at Shakespeare and Company.Listen to Alex Freiman's latest EP, In The Beginning: https://open.spotify.com/album/5iZYPMCUnG7xiCtsFCBlVa?si=h5x3FK1URq6SwH9Kb_SO3w Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Rory Carroll, Guardian's Ireland Correspondent, discusses the life and career of one of the key architects of Thatcherism, Norman Tebbit who has died, aged 94.

What do a barracks for British troops in the Falklands War, a floating jail off the Bronx, and temporary housing for VW factory workers in Germany have in common? The Balder Scapa: a single barge that served all three roles. Though the name would eventually change to Finnboda 12. And then to Safe Esperia. And later on, to the Bibby Resolution. And after that . . . in short, a vessel with so many names, and so many fates, that to keep it in our sights—as the protagonist of this fascinating economic parable—Ian Kumekawa has no choice but to call it, simply, the Vessel.Despite its sturdy steel structure, weighing 9,500 deadweight tons, the Vessel is a figure as elusive and abstract as the offshore market it comes to embody: a world of island tax havens, exploited labor forces, free banking zones, Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and mass incarceration, where even the prisoners are held offshore. Fitted with modular shipping containers, themselves the product of standardized global trade, the ship could become whatever the market demanded. Whether caught in an international dispute involving Hong Kong, Nigeria, Indonesia, and the Virgin Islands—to be settled in an English court of law—or flying yet another foreign “flag of convenience” to mask its ownership—the barge is ever a container for forces much larger than even its hulking self.Empty Vessel: The Story of the Global Economy in One Barge is a jaw-dropping microhistory that speaks volumes about the global economy as a whole. In following the Vessel—and its Sister Vessel, built alongside it in Stockholm—from one thankless task to the next, Kumekawa connects the dots of a neoliberal world order in the making, where regulation is for suckers and “Made in USA” feels almost quaint. Dr. Ian Kumekawa is a historian of economic thinking, capitalism, and empire. He is currently an Anniversary Fellow at the Center for History and Economics at Harvard University and a Lecturer in History at MIT. He previously published a book called 'The First Serious Optimist' about Pigou and the birth of welfare economics. His second book, which we will discuss today is called, Empty Vessel: The Global Economy in One Barge, came out with Knopf and John Murray in May 2025. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World by Maya JasanoffThe Toxic Ship:The Voyage of the Khian Sea and the Global Waste Trade by Simone M. MüllerThe Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

What do a barracks for British troops in the Falklands War, a floating jail off the Bronx, and temporary housing for VW factory workers in Germany have in common? The Balder Scapa: a single barge that served all three roles. Though the name would eventually change to Finnboda 12. And then to Safe Esperia. And later on, to the Bibby Resolution. And after that . . . in short, a vessel with so many names, and so many fates, that to keep it in our sights—as the protagonist of this fascinating economic parable—Ian Kumekawa has no choice but to call it, simply, the Vessel.Despite its sturdy steel structure, weighing 9,500 deadweight tons, the Vessel is a figure as elusive and abstract as the offshore market it comes to embody: a world of island tax havens, exploited labor forces, free banking zones, Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and mass incarceration, where even the prisoners are held offshore. Fitted with modular shipping containers, themselves the product of standardized global trade, the ship could become whatever the market demanded. Whether caught in an international dispute involving Hong Kong, Nigeria, Indonesia, and the Virgin Islands—to be settled in an English court of law—or flying yet another foreign “flag of convenience” to mask its ownership—the barge is ever a container for forces much larger than even its hulking self.Empty Vessel: The Story of the Global Economy in One Barge is a jaw-dropping microhistory that speaks volumes about the global economy as a whole. In following the Vessel—and its Sister Vessel, built alongside it in Stockholm—from one thankless task to the next, Kumekawa connects the dots of a neoliberal world order in the making, where regulation is for suckers and “Made in USA” feels almost quaint. Dr. Ian Kumekawa is a historian of economic thinking, capitalism, and empire. He is currently an Anniversary Fellow at the Center for History and Economics at Harvard University and a Lecturer in History at MIT. He previously published a book called 'The First Serious Optimist' about Pigou and the birth of welfare economics. His second book, which we will discuss today is called, Empty Vessel: The Global Economy in One Barge, came out with Knopf and John Murray in May 2025. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World by Maya JasanoffThe Toxic Ship:The Voyage of the Khian Sea and the Global Waste Trade by Simone M. MüllerThe Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

What do a barracks for British troops in the Falklands War, a floating jail off the Bronx, and temporary housing for VW factory workers in Germany have in common? The Balder Scapa: a single barge that served all three roles. Though the name would eventually change to Finnboda 12. And then to Safe Esperia. And later on, to the Bibby Resolution. And after that . . . in short, a vessel with so many names, and so many fates, that to keep it in our sights—as the protagonist of this fascinating economic parable—Ian Kumekawa has no choice but to call it, simply, the Vessel.Despite its sturdy steel structure, weighing 9,500 deadweight tons, the Vessel is a figure as elusive and abstract as the offshore market it comes to embody: a world of island tax havens, exploited labor forces, free banking zones, Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and mass incarceration, where even the prisoners are held offshore. Fitted with modular shipping containers, themselves the product of standardized global trade, the ship could become whatever the market demanded. Whether caught in an international dispute involving Hong Kong, Nigeria, Indonesia, and the Virgin Islands—to be settled in an English court of law—or flying yet another foreign “flag of convenience” to mask its ownership—the barge is ever a container for forces much larger than even its hulking self.Empty Vessel: The Story of the Global Economy in One Barge is a jaw-dropping microhistory that speaks volumes about the global economy as a whole. In following the Vessel—and its Sister Vessel, built alongside it in Stockholm—from one thankless task to the next, Kumekawa connects the dots of a neoliberal world order in the making, where regulation is for suckers and “Made in USA” feels almost quaint. Dr. Ian Kumekawa is a historian of economic thinking, capitalism, and empire. He is currently an Anniversary Fellow at the Center for History and Economics at Harvard University and a Lecturer in History at MIT. He previously published a book called 'The First Serious Optimist' about Pigou and the birth of welfare economics. His second book, which we will discuss today is called, Empty Vessel: The Global Economy in One Barge, came out with Knopf and John Murray in May 2025. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World by Maya JasanoffThe Toxic Ship:The Voyage of the Khian Sea and the Global Waste Trade by Simone M. MüllerThe Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

What do a barracks for British troops in the Falklands War, a floating jail off the Bronx, and temporary housing for VW factory workers in Germany have in common? The Balder Scapa: a single barge that served all three roles. Though the name would eventually change to Finnboda 12. And then to Safe Esperia. And later on, to the Bibby Resolution. And after that . . . in short, a vessel with so many names, and so many fates, that to keep it in our sights—as the protagonist of this fascinating economic parable—Ian Kumekawa has no choice but to call it, simply, the Vessel.Despite its sturdy steel structure, weighing 9,500 deadweight tons, the Vessel is a figure as elusive and abstract as the offshore market it comes to embody: a world of island tax havens, exploited labor forces, free banking zones, Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and mass incarceration, where even the prisoners are held offshore. Fitted with modular shipping containers, themselves the product of standardized global trade, the ship could become whatever the market demanded. Whether caught in an international dispute involving Hong Kong, Nigeria, Indonesia, and the Virgin Islands—to be settled in an English court of law—or flying yet another foreign “flag of convenience” to mask its ownership—the barge is ever a container for forces much larger than even its hulking self.Empty Vessel: The Story of the Global Economy in One Barge is a jaw-dropping microhistory that speaks volumes about the global economy as a whole. In following the Vessel—and its Sister Vessel, built alongside it in Stockholm—from one thankless task to the next, Kumekawa connects the dots of a neoliberal world order in the making, where regulation is for suckers and “Made in USA” feels almost quaint. Dr. Ian Kumekawa is a historian of economic thinking, capitalism, and empire. He is currently an Anniversary Fellow at the Center for History and Economics at Harvard University and a Lecturer in History at MIT. He previously published a book called 'The First Serious Optimist' about Pigou and the birth of welfare economics. His second book, which we will discuss today is called, Empty Vessel: The Global Economy in One Barge, came out with Knopf and John Murray in May 2025. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World by Maya JasanoffThe Toxic Ship:The Voyage of the Khian Sea and the Global Waste Trade by Simone M. MüllerThe Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What do a barracks for British troops in the Falklands War, a floating jail off the Bronx, and temporary housing for VW factory workers in Germany have in common? The Balder Scapa: a single barge that served all three roles. Though the name would eventually change to Finnboda 12. And then to Safe Esperia. And later on, to the Bibby Resolution. And after that . . . in short, a vessel with so many names, and so many fates, that to keep it in our sights—as the protagonist of this fascinating economic parable—Ian Kumekawa has no choice but to call it, simply, the Vessel.Despite its sturdy steel structure, weighing 9,500 deadweight tons, the Vessel is a figure as elusive and abstract as the offshore market it comes to embody: a world of island tax havens, exploited labor forces, free banking zones, Thatcherism, Reaganomics, and mass incarceration, where even the prisoners are held offshore. Fitted with modular shipping containers, themselves the product of standardized global trade, the ship could become whatever the market demanded. Whether caught in an international dispute involving Hong Kong, Nigeria, Indonesia, and the Virgin Islands—to be settled in an English court of law—or flying yet another foreign “flag of convenience” to mask its ownership—the barge is ever a container for forces much larger than even its hulking self.Empty Vessel: The Story of the Global Economy in One Barge is a jaw-dropping microhistory that speaks volumes about the global economy as a whole. In following the Vessel—and its Sister Vessel, built alongside it in Stockholm—from one thankless task to the next, Kumekawa connects the dots of a neoliberal world order in the making, where regulation is for suckers and “Made in USA” feels almost quaint. Dr. Ian Kumekawa is a historian of economic thinking, capitalism, and empire. He is currently an Anniversary Fellow at the Center for History and Economics at Harvard University and a Lecturer in History at MIT. He previously published a book called 'The First Serious Optimist' about Pigou and the birth of welfare economics. His second book, which we will discuss today is called, Empty Vessel: The Global Economy in One Barge, came out with Knopf and John Murray in May 2025. Sidney Michelini is a post-doctoral researcher working on Ecology, Climate, and Violence at the Peace Research Institute of Frankfurt (PRIF). Book Recomendations: The Dawn Watch: Joseph Conrad in a Global World by Maya JasanoffThe Toxic Ship:The Voyage of the Khian Sea and the Global Waste Trade by Simone M. MüllerThe Hidden Globe: How Wealth Hacks the World by Atossa Araxia Abrahamian Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Legendarily hot, dry and hedonistic, the Summer of '76 burnt itself into our cultural memory as a kind of Ultimate Summer. But the record temperatures, the soul and disco classics and the sense of youth breaking free took place against a backdrop of economic collapse, political failure and barely suppressed rage. These were the Dark 70s of the Southall Riots, the Ripper and the Black Panther, police queerbashing and simmering hatreds. John L. Williams, author of Heatwave: The Summer of 1976 – Britain At Boiling Point, talks to Andrew Harrison about four months of tension that birthed punk rock, Thatcherism and a more cynical Britain. • Buy Heatwave: The Summer of 1976 through our affiliate bookshop and you'll help fund The Bunker by earning us a small commission for every sale. Bookshop.org's fees help support independent bookshops too. • Support us on Patreon for early episodes and more. • We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker to get your £100 sponsored credit.   Written and presented by Group Editor Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Sara Farolfi. Produced by Liam Tait. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production www.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Legendarily hot, dry and hedonistic, the Summer of '76 burnt itself into our cultural memory as a kind of Ultimate Summer. But the record temperatures, the soul and disco classics and the sense of youth breaking free took place against a backdrop of economic collapse, political failure and barely suppressed rage. These were the Dark 70s of the Southall Riots, the Ripper and the Black Panther, police queerbashing and simmering hatreds. John L. Williams, author of Heatwave: The Summer of 1976 – Britain At Boiling Point, talks to Andrew Harrison about four months of tension that birthed punk rock, Thatcherism and a more cynical Britain.• Buy Heatwave: The Summer of 1976 through our affiliate bookshop and you'll help fund The Bunker by earning us a small commission for every sale. Bookshop.org's fees help support independent bookshops too.• Support us on Patreon for early episodes and more.• We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker to get your £100 sponsored credit.  Written and presented by Group Editor Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Sara Farolfi. Produced by Liam Tait. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Productionwww.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The post war neoliberals were divided over the European Economic Community, some viewing it as a protected enclave of the world economy that would hold back the global economic integration they hoped for. Others saw it as the beginnings of a borderless economic zone that would spread around the world, eventually subsuming all questions of politics and ideology to the logic of the market. It turned out to be neither of those things completely and instead became the target of those inheritors of Thatcherism that wanted to craft their version of neoliberalism in one country. *****STOP PRESS*****I only ever talk about history on this podcast but I also have another life, yes, that of aspirant fantasy author and if that's your thing you can get a copy of my debut novel The Blood of Tharta, right here:Help the podcast to continue bringing you history each weekIf you enjoy the Explaining History podcast and its many years of content and would like to help the show continue, please consider supporting it in the following ways:If you want to go ad-free, you can take out a membership hereOrYou can support the podcast via Patreon hereOr you can just say some nice things about it here Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/explaininghistory. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Iain Dale is a broadcaster, political geek and author of many books, most recent among them Margaret Thatcher: The Prime Ministers Series.He swung by JOETowers on release of his book to sit down with Oli and chew the fat over her legacy, her policies and how her actions as Britain's first female Prime Minister are misunderstood. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We couldn't make The Next Step mini series without including BILLY ELLIOT. Is this the seminal dance coming of age film? How does it hold up a quarter of a century after it was released and became a cultural phenomenon? Bonus film: THE FITS (2015) starts eerily the same as Billy Elliot, but steers firmly away from the predictable halfway through...I'm joined this episode by host of Drinks at the Bar podcast, Paul James Rooney...who apart from being a podcast host and experienced dancer has actually played older Billy Elliot in the very successful stage version! We muse over Thatcherism, homophobia, questionable "ballet" choreography and whether Billy would've realistically had a shot at getting into the Royal Ballet School.LINKSDrinks at the Barre Podcast on AppleDrinks at the Barre Podcast on SpotifySpice Girls, Stop Right NowIndie Wire interview with Stephen Daldry Billy Elliot: Class Traitor  

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In this punchy episode of Mark and Pete, we tackle three explosive issues shaping the UK today. First, we dive into the shocking statistic that 1 in 10 Britons have no savings, revealing the fragile state of personal finance and what it means for national resilience. With household budgets tighter than ever, are we heading for a savings crisis? Next, we commemorate and critique the legacy of Margaret Thatcher as her 100th birthday is marked with celebratory events in Grantham. Love her or loathe her, the Iron Lady remains one of Britain's most divisive political figures. We explore how Thatcherism reshaped the UK—and whether the celebration is deserved or divisive. Finally, we cast our nets into the stormy waters of the UK-EU fishing rights dispute. With the Brexit fishing deal expiring soon, tensions rise over quotas, sovereignty, and national identity. Will British fishermen be left high and dry while Brussels demands more access? As always, Mark and Pete bring wit, wisdom, and a splash of theological insight to today's most pressing issues. Subscribe now and join the debate.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/mark-and-pete--1245374/support.

Margaret Thatcher sought to revive Britain's fortunes during the 1980s, she was a social conservative and a free market fundamentalist; a contradictory set of ideological positions. The liberation of market forces devastated the social structures that Thatcher claimed to uphold, principally the family, which underwent dramatic transformations throughout the decade as individualism, urbanisation, mobility, rising expectations and declining ideas of deference transformed it. *****STOP PRESS*****I only ever talk about history on this podcast but I also have another life, yes, that of aspirant fantasy author and if that's your thing you can get a copy of my debut novel The Blood of Tharta, right here:Help the podcast to continue bringing you history each weekIf you enjoy the Explaining History podcast and its many years of content and would like to help the show continue, please consider supporting it in the following ways:If you want to go ad-free, you can take out a membership hereOrYou can support the podcast via Patreon hereOr you can just say some nice things about it here Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/explaininghistory. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For decades nationalisation was the great taboo in British politics, while privatisation was deemed the great triumph of Thatcherism. Blair and Brown were opposed to any attempt to renationalise – but now there is cross party support for the nationalisation of British Steel, the railways are being renationalised and there is huge support for the government to take over water companies. What's happening… and why? Rock & Roll Politics is live at Kings Place on May 8th. Tickets available here. Subscribe to Patreon for live events, bonus podcasts and to get the regular podcast a day early and ad free.  Written and presented by Steve Richards. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For decades nationalisation was the great taboo in British politics, while privatisation was deemed the great triumph of Thatcherism. Blair and Brown were opposed to any attempt to renationalise – but now there is cross party support for the nationalisation of British Steel, the railways are being renationalised and there is huge support for the government to take over water companies. What's happening… and why?Rock & Roll Politics is live at Kings Place on May 8th. Tickets available here.Subscribe to Patreon for live events, bonus podcasts and to get the regular podcast a day early and ad free. Written and presented by Steve Richards. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In The Ideological Brain Leor Zmigrod studies the impact of political ideology on the makeup and shape of the brain. She found that those on the political extremes, as well as those with the most dogmatic beliefs, display more cognitive rigidity. The historian John Rees focuses on the small group of firebrand parliamentarians at the heart of the English Civil Wars. The Fiery Spirits describes how the radical republicans influenced more moderate MPs and led to the defeat, and execution, of Charles I.2025 is the centenary of the birth of Margaret Thatcher and fifty years since she became the first woman to lead a major political party in the UK. The political commentator and broadcaster Iain Dale publishes a biography of her later this year, and questions the role of ideology within Thatcherism. Producer: Katy Hickman

Donald Trump is looking pretty invincible right now, and it's easy to lose hope that Democrats will ever be able to regain power. But back in the '90s, liberals in Britain were in a similar predicament. Alastair Campbell, right hand man to former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and co-host of the podcast "The Rest Is Politics," joins Tommy to discuss how the Labour Party vanquished the iron grip of Thatcherism, the importance of party rebranding, and how Democrats can reclaim populism in the age of Trump.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com and include the name of the podcast.Get your copy of WOODWORKING: http://crooked.com/books

Is it really five years and 1,500 editions since we launched The Bunker? It is! For this special episode, Labour legend and former leader Neil Kinnock joins us to talk about the story Labour should be telling… what his battles against Thatcherism can teach Starmer about fighting the rising right wing… the dangers of a radicalised Conservative Party… and how to hit Reform UK where it hurts. With Andrew Harrison and Alex von Tunzelmann. • Support us on Patreon for early episodes and more • We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker for £100 sponsored credit. www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Tom Taylor. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Productionwww.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Is it really five years and 1,500 editions since we launched The Bunker? It is! For this special episode, Labour legend and former leader Neil Kinnock joins us to talk about the story Labour should be telling… what his battles against Thatcherism can teach Starmer about fighting the rising right wing… the dangers of a radicalised Conservative Party… and how to hit Reform UK where it hurts. With Andrew Harrison and Alex von Tunzelmann.  • Support us on Patreon for early episodes and more • We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker for £100 sponsored credit.  www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Andrew Harrison. Audio production by Tom Taylor. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production www.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Was Margaret Thatcher the greatest British Prime Minister in history, or was she the worst? In this UK politics debate, we dive deep into the legacy of the Iron Lady, exploring her economic policies, leadership style, and impact on Britain. From the Thatcher era of privatization to the controversial miners' strike, poll tax, and the Falklands War, we examine both sides of the argument.

Adam and Suzanne are in love, but a question about their sexual past leads to jealousy and mistrust, which they must somehow overcome if the relationship is to survive. However the specter of Thatcherism casts a long shadow across the decades, highlighting the class divide between the couple, as they both have to come to terms with their own expectations from life, and each other… Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Institute of Economic Affairs is one of the most powerful and secretive think tanks in the UK, known for promoting free-market Thatcherism as a solution to all of our economic woes. Who's behind it? This week, Kristian Niemietz, a director at the IEA and a long-time Novara Media hater, sits down with Aaron for […]

Stance visits London to explore the Tate Gallery show The 80s: Photographing Britain with campaigner Marc Thompson. The exhibition examines how photographers used the camera to respond to the seismic social, political, and economic shifts of the era, including the rise of Thatcherism, race uprisings, and the AIDS epidemic. It highlights photography as a vital tool for social representation, cultural celebration, and artistic experimentation, spanning landscapes, self-portraiture, and social documentary during this pivotal and highly creative period. Marc Thompson, a Brixton-born cultural leader and prominent British campaigner with over three decades of experience in HIV activism and education, joins Chrystal for a tour of Tate Britain. Together, they engage with the works of photographers such as Ajamu X and Rotimi Fani-Kayode, discussing the legacy of Black queer voices in shaping modern Britain, the cultural significance of Brixton as a hub for activism, creativity and nightclubs, and the ongoing fight for healthcare equity faced by marginalized communities today. If you like what you heard, please write us a review and check out more of our work at stancepodcast.com and all podcasting apps @stancepodcast This podcast was produced by Etay Zwick. Referenced In This Podcast & Show Notes Mark Thompson Linktree Marc Thompson IG London HIV Prevention Resident Survey Black & Gay Back InBlack & Gay Back In The Day IGThe Day Black & Gay Back In The Day Podcast Lost Spaces Podcast - Queer Nation (with Marc Thompson)  PrEPster Love Tank Black Health Matters Do It London - HIV Prevention Interview with Marc Thompson in London Friend  Article about Marc Thompson in The Voice We Were Always Here Podcast hosted by Marc Thompson Tate Britian The 80s: Photographing Britain at the Tate Artists include: Online Gallery of Rotimi Fani-Kayode's Photography Black British Artists 1980s Archive Pogus Caesar  Martin Parr's Ajamu X's website Dave Lewis's website  Susanne Roden Anna Fox's website Derek Bishton's website Jason Evans website  Reflections of the Black Experience: Brixton Art Gallery, 1986. PV Card, Poster, Catalogue, Time Out, Echoes & LAM Reviews A Review of an exhibition of Rotimi Fani-Kayode's work  

Oasis in the UK are more than just rock royalty. They are the foul-mouthed, big riff, council estate kids with unibrows and bad attitudes that helped lift the UK out of it's 1980's/Thatcherism malaisse and into the Cool Britannia of the 1990s. Out was the doom and gloom of American grunge, in were melodic songs that kids could relate to. Anthems like Rock N Roll Star, Columbia and Cigarettes and Alcohol spoke directly to the young generation who were anxious to make their own mark on the world. Led by the songwriting and riff borrowing of Noel Gallagher and the sheer strength of the vocals of his younger brother Liam, Oasis debut Definitely Maybe became the fastest selling debut album in the UK at the time. However, in the US, though Oasis debut hit the charts and eventually went platinum, the band never took off to the heights they would enjoy in the UK and around the world. Maybe it was Creation Records lack of solid backing by the US record industry or maybe it was the brothers snarling and nasty attitudes (and those unibrows) that turned enough people off during the age of grunge that would soon give way to softer sounds like Hootie and the Blowfish. But Oasis were the spokesmen of their generation in the UK and knew who to borrow from (The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, T Rex, The Jam) to make a big, bright, loud sound that would have them headline Knebworth just 2 years after the release of this debut in front of 250,000 people over 2 nights. Oasis are also the masters of the b-side (a lost art in the US) and as CD singles with 4 tracks on them were all the rage, Oasis hit the playlists and sales from singles as well as anyone in the UK. So relive the big hits (Live Forever & Supersonic), enjoy the album tracks (Slide Away, Bring It On Down) and unearth some b-sides as we celebrate Definitely Maybe as it turns 30. Ugly American Werewolf in London Website Ugly American Werewolf in London Store - Get your Wolf merch and use code 10OFF2023 to save 10%! Visit our sponsor RareVinyl.com and use the code UGLY to save 10%! Twitter Threads Instagram YouTube LInkTree www.pantheonpodcasts.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices