Podcasts about tories

This is a catch-up version of James O'Brien's live, daily show on LBC Radio. To join the conversation call: 0345 60 60 973

Beau, Steven and Nate discuss how open borders inevitably ends up exploiting children, how the police in the UK fail car owners, and how Dominic Cummings dunked on Kemi and the Tories. Sign up to join our free webinar here: https://courses.lotuseaters.com/products/live_events/Webinar Get Our Course here: https://courses.lotuseaters.com/bundles/the-trivium

Give Nigel Farage the Job NOW – Britain's Had Enough!  #NigelFarage #ReformUK #KeirStarmer #UKPolitics  Angela Rayner says she doesn't want Keir Starmer's job as Prime Minister. THANK GOD – she'd be an even bigger disaster! The lies, the spin, the smug non-answers… Her TV interviews today reeked of pure political BS. Why even bother airing this nonsense? Jon Gaunt says that Labour is a charisma-free zone—an incompetent circus of liars, truth dodgers, and power-hungry bureaucrats. And the Tories? Not much better! Kemi Badenoch is grasping at thin air, and now even she's on the chopping block. The Lib Dems? Don't make me laugh! Meanwhile, Nigel Farage and Reform UK are DOMINATING the polls with real ideas: ✅ Bring back the Winter Fuel Allowance for ALL pensioners ✅ Scrap the unfair Two-Child Benefit Cap ✅ Tear up Starmer's sellout EU deal ✅ End the Chagos betrayal ✅ Deport illegal migrants—appoint a Minister for Deportation  ✅ FIX the small boats crisis And what does the political elite do? Squeal that it's “not costed.” As if Labour and the Tories haven't burned billions already! We don't need another 4 years of lies, chaos, and broken promises. Britain needs real leadership, and Farage is the only one speaking for the people.

Matthew d'Ancona and Matt Kelly again respond to your queries. They discuss whether Keir Starmer really believes the Daily Mail can ever be won over, if there's a case for the study of wisdom in the age of AI and whether they share one reader's nostalgia for the dying days of the last Tory government.Plus there's talk about whether the media panders to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, the groupthink of the Lobby and the collective madness over Oasis.EXCLUSIVE OFFER: Get The New European for just £1 for the first month. Head to theneweuropean.co.uk/2matts Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Will the Enhanced Games change the image of drugs in sport? How will autonomous weapons change warfare? And are Reform supporters more dateable than Tories? Olly Mann and The Week delve behind the headlines and debate what really matters from the past seven days. With Felicity Capon, Jamie Timson and Harriet MarsdenImage credit: Morne de Klerk / Getty Images

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

The Tories have fallen to fourth place in the latest Times/YouGov poll - behind the Liberal Democrats for the first time in six years. Plus, Keir Starmer might've landed his EU reset deal, but Boris Johnson has labelled him the 'orange-ball chewing gimp of Brussels'.Hugo Rifkind unpacks the politics of the day with Janice Turner and James Marriott. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Twenty-four hours after Keir Starmer announced a shift on fishing rights and closer alignment with the EU, the backlash has been fierce. Reform are already expecting to take seats from Labour in the next General Election thanks to the Brexit “reset” deal, with deputy leader Richard Tice accusing Starmer of having “surrendered the fishing industry” to the EU.On today's episode, Camilla and Kamal unpack the fallout from the Prime Minister's big “reset” and discuss the key moments from both his statement in Parliament and leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch's fiery response as the Tories slip to fourth place behind Labour, Reform and the Lib Dems in a major poll. And it was one of Britain's biggest medical scandals. Thousands were infected with HIV and hepatitis through contaminated blood products in the 70s and 80s, including children at a specialist school called Treloar's. Camilla speaks to Richard Warwick, a survivor, and journalist and author Cara McGoogan ahead of a new ITV documentary on the scandal and why survivors still haven't had their compensation.Producers: Georgia CoanSenior Producer: John CadiganPlanning Editor: Venetia RaineyExecutive Producer: Louisa WellsSocial Media Producer: Ji-Min LeeVideo Editor: Valerie Browne Studio Operator: Meghan SearleEditor: Camilla TomineyOriginal music by Goss Studio Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The UK, France and Canada are threatening Israel with sanctions for blocking aid to Gaza. Plus: A new extinction-level poll for the Tories; and Andrew Tate faces extradition to the UK. With Aaron Bastani and Kieran Andrieu.

Sky News' Sam Coates and Politico's Anne McElvoy serve up their essential guide to the day in British politics.  It'll be a day when the PM goes again at selling the merits of his EU deal. One former cabinet minister tells the podcast it's all 'concrete and waffle'. Welfare is on the agenda today too - with a DWP committee session on child welfare. And, did someone mention Nick Clegg? The former Deputy PM has used the c-word about the Lib Dems. Sam and Anne discuss coalition after another favorable poll for them - but it's a poll which really isn't good news for the Tories  

Kemi Badenoch has come in for criticism since becoming leader of the opposition – for her energy, her performances at PMQs and her inability to galvanise her shadow cabinet. On this podcast, James Heale hosts the trial of Kemi Badenoch and asks whether someone else might be better placed to take the Tories into the next election and – more importantly – who that prince (or princess) across the water could be. The Spectator's assistant content editor William Atkinson makes the case for the prosecution, while Michael Gove sets out why the Tories should stick with Kemi. Lara Brown, our new commissioning editor, acts as the jury. ‘If your house is on fire you don't wait a year to call the fire brigade,' says William. But Michael argues that political leaders – much like football managers – should be given time and patience in order to implement their direction, philosophy and, ultimately, to become successful. So should she stay or should she go? ... Or should the Tories give it to ‘Big Sam' until the end of the season? Produced by Oscar Edmondson. Have your say, by emailing us at: podcast@spectator.co.uk

Kemi Badenoch has come in for criticism since becoming leader of the opposition – for her energy, her performances at PMQs and her inability to galvanise her shadow cabinet. On this podcast, James Heale hosts the trial of Kemi Badenoch and asks whether someone else might be better placed to take the Tories into the next election and – more importantly – who that prince (or princess) across the water could be. The Spectator's assistant content editor William Atkinson makes the case for the prosecution, while Michael Gove sets out why the Tories should stick with Kemi. Lara Brown, our new commissioning editor, acts as the jury. ‘If your house is on fire you don't wait a year to call the fire brigade,' says William. But Michael argues that political leaders – much like football managers – should be given time and patience in order to implement their direction, philosophy and, ultimately, to become successful. So should she stay or should she go? ... Or should the Tories give it to ‘Big Sam' until the end of the season? Produced by Oscar Edmondson. Have your say, by emailing us at: podcast@spectator.co.uk

It's been another turbulent week for Labour after Keir Starmer announced a crackdown on legal migration. The prime minister gave what has since become a controversial speech suggesting the UK is at risk of becoming an “island of strangers” – and home secretary Yvette Cooper announced an end to all social care visas, tighter rules for highly skilled visas, more rigorous English language tests, and more. Host Lucy Fisher is joined by the FT's Robert Shrimsley and Jim Pickard to dissect the policies, as well as the reaction to Starmer's speech and where Labour's position leaves the Tories on immigration. Plus, the panel delves into the Downing Street briefing about a whole host of new prison reforms set to drop next week.Follow Lucy on Bluesky or X: @lucyfisher.bsky.social, @LOS_Fisher; Jim @pickardje.bsky.social; Robert @robertshrimsley, @robertshrimsley.bsky.socialWhat did you think of this episode? Let us know at politicalfix@ft.com Want more? Free links: Starmer rejects Enoch Powell parallel after ‘island of strangers' speech Democracy's downward spiral leaves Starmer no leeway on immigrationLiz Truss regime's ‘moron premium' still looms over UK economyBadenoch pivots to economy in bid to fend off Reform threatSome prisoners in England who breach release terms face short jail sentencesSign up here for 30 days free of Stephen Bush's Inside Politics newsletter, winner of the World Association of News Publishers 2023 ‘Best Newsletter' award. Presented by Lucy Fisher, and produced by Lulu Smyth. The executive producer is Flo Phillips. Original music and mix by Breen Turner. The FT's acting co-head of audio is Manuela Saragosa. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Heart of the Matter Radio/Podcast, we continue our celebration of mothers. You may not be familiar with this mother. However, she showed resilience and patriotism when under attack. We can learn from her example and love for her family. Enjoy!

Once again we bring news of the good deeds of the Donald.  Tony Blair nearly wins right-wing nut of the week for his crazy pro fossil intervention on behalf of his petro state clients, but he's pipped by the Tories' energy man who probably believes the Earth is flat and definitely won't get to do that which he says he will do. We talk Dale writing for the Telegraph on Gaza and the crazy things our Government says about trade - more important than law apparently….breaking the link rears its head again as the man they call ‘Red Ed' might need more money for his 2030 target.  And if that's not enough our listeners and X rated trolls have a bundle of good, bad and generally fun things to add.

British politics post-local elections resembles less a democracy in action and more a therapy session with occasional shouting. In this episode of Mid-Atlantic, the panel tears into the latest electoral results, with Reform UK bulldozing their way through local councils, Labour sleepwalking through governance, and the Tories doing their best impression of a political hospice.Dave Smith kicks things off with a cold, hard look at Reform UK's momentum. With council control and a surprise mayoral win in Lincolnshire, Reform is no longer on the fringes. Smith calls them a “galvanising force for the working class,” prompting an awkward reckoning from the left. Labour, once the natural home for these voters, is now seen as distant, managerial, and uninspiring. Steve O'Neill admits his past support for Labour's “do nothing and hope” Ming vase strategy was misplaced—an understatement.Tonye Altrade and Leah Brown grapple with Labour's post-landslide hangover. Starmer's white paper on immigration is dissected not just for its policies but for the gaping hole where vision should be. It's tough to sell a national direction when no one can tell what lane you're driving in. Leah Brown underlines the real crisis: Labour may be governing, but Reform is winning the emotional war by peddling a message of hope, however dubious the details.The Tories, according to Brown, are in survival mode. Talk of new leadership is already swirling, with Kemi Badenoch eyed as the phoenix to rise from electoral ashes. But internal division and reformist flirtations risk turning the party into political mulch. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems are cheerfully slicing up the Tory carcass in the South West and beyond. Steve O'Neill calls it “vibes-based campaigning,” and frankly, it's working. While Reform is tapping into disillusionment and Labour fumbles the bag it just won, the Lib Dems are slowly, quietly positioning themselves as the adults in the room—if only anyone knew who Ed Davey was.5 Quotes from the Episode“It's still like being crowned the tallest dwarf.” – on Lib Dems' electoral wins.“Populism doesn't equate to good governance.” – Leah Brown“Labour basically ran on being ‘not the Tories'. Now Reform is running on being ‘not Labour'.” – Dave Smith“Starmer behind a lectern won't fix Britain's sinking ship. He needs to be laying bricks on a building site.” – Royfield Brown“We knew what the last Tory government said it stood for. I have no idea what this one does.” – Steve O'Neill Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

CM faces debt, fraud, and big dreams—rebuilding her finances with grit, support, and newfound intention.

Kemi Badenoch dismisses Keir Starmer's “tiny tariff deal” with Donald Trump, while Keir Starmer called the Tories a “dead party walking.”Hugo Rifkind unpacks all the action from the Commons with Tim Shipman and the comedian Ria Lina. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The clash between David Wolfson KC's “thin” interpretation of legal principle and Attorney General Richard Hermer's “thick” is explained through the experienced legal eyes of Ken Macdonald KC and Tim Owen KC on this episode of Double Jeopardy.   They dig into the political implications of these contrasting views, the role of parliamentary sovereignty, how the UK navigates its obligations under international law, including the Chagos Island dispute and the role of the International Criminal Court, whether the Tories will commit to repeal of the Human Rights Act and leaving the ECHR and ask whether the role and function of the rule of law can ever be approached in a non-partisan way.   Shadow Attorney General David Wolfson KC also joins Double Jeopardy to tackle one of the most pressing questions in UK politics and law today: what does the rule of law really mean - and who gets to define it?    Covering the constitutional crisis created by Brexit/Covid, the right of Parliament to legislate in defiance of international law, the domestic law tensions generated by the expansive approach to human rights law of the European Court of Human Rights and the influence of current political events including the migration debate on attitudes to the rule of law, this episode offers rare, insider insight into the legal and philosophical tensions at the heart of the British system.   If you're looking for thoughtful legal system insights, a deeper understanding of UK politics, or an unflinching look at UK law and legal battles in Britain, this episode delivers it all. Law, politics, and justice - expertly unpacked on Double Jeopardy.   -----   Covering the critical intersections of law and politics in the UK with expert commentary on high-profile legal cases, political controversies, prisons and sentencing, human rights law, current political events and the shifting landscape of justice and democracy. With in-depth discussions and influential guests, Double Jeopardy is the podcast that uncovers the forces shaping Britain's legal and political future.   What happens when law and politics collide? How do politics shape the law - and when does the law push back? What happens when judicial independence is tested, human rights come under attack, or freedom of expression is challenged? And who really holds power in Britain's legal and political system?   Get answers to questions like these weekly on Wednesdays at 6am GMT.   Double Jeopardy is presented by Ken Macdonald KC, former Director of Public Prosecutions, and Tim Owen KC, as they break down the legal and political issues in Britain. From high-profile legal cases to the evolving state of British democracy, Double Jeopardy offers expert legal commentary on the most pressing topics in UK law, politics, and human rights.   Ken Macdonald KC served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2003-2008, shaping modern prosecutorial policy and advocating for the rule of law. He is a former Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, a crossbench member of the House of Lords, and a leading writer, commentator and broadcaster on politics and the rule of law.   Tim Owen KC has been involved in many of the most significant public, criminal and human rights law cases over the past four decades. Both bring unparalleled experience from the frontline of Britain's legal and political landscape.   If you like The Rest Is Politics, Talking Politics, Law Pod UK and Today in Focus, you'll love Double Jeopardy.

Join Matt Kelly and Matthew d'Ancona as they try to make sense of Labour's latest plans for immigration. Are they trying to outflank Farage? What will their core voters think? And does this make their chances of a second term more or less likely? Also - are the Tories finished as a political force? Matt D lays out a compelling case for their terminal condition. What does this mean for UK politics? Enjoy!EXCLUSIVE OFFER: Get The New European for just £1 for the first month. Head to theneweuropean.co.uk/2matts Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sky News' Sam Coates and Politico's Anne McElvoy preview how the day will play out in British politics.  After Labour's migration plans were announced yesterday, Sam and Anne reflect on the Prime Minister's rhetoric and its populist overtones. But how authentic is it?   Also, the Tories launched their own deportation bill in parliament yesterday. What's in it and is it all a bit of a stunt?  And Sam's reflecting on his interview with Nigel Farage, where he pressed the Reform leader on a loophole in the party's manifesto which could allow an unknown amount of people to come into the country.  

Keir Starmer claims soaring immigration has done 'incalculable' damage to the UK and risks creating an 'island of strangers'. But can he deliver on his promise to drive the numbers down? Will Rachel Reeves hold the line on welfare cuts, and will the Tories send for Boris Johnson?Hugo Rifkind unpacks the politics of the day with Patrick Maguire and Jane Mulkerrins. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Keir Starmer has finally unveiled his long-awaited immigration white paper, vowing to bring down the numbers “significantly”. But despite the tough talk, there's still no cap on net migration.At a press conference, the Prime Minister set out plans to tighten the path to citizenship — including a ten-year wait and tougher English tests, insisting he was pursuing the crackdown because he believed it was the right thing to do rather than as a result of political pressure with the continued rise of Reform. But previous comments he has made on immigration say otherwise. So it this all just a political performance from Starmer?Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp joins Camilla and Kamal in the studio to explain why Labour are just tinkering around the edges of the issue and how the Tories would go further to fix Britain's “broken” immigration system. He also fronts up to the “serious mistakes” on immigration policy made by previous Conservative governments, but argues that Reform's proposals for net-zero immigration are “easy promises to make” that “aren't credible”Producers: Georgia Coan and Lilian FawcettSenior Producer: John CadiganPlanning Editor: Venetia RaineyExecutive Producer: Louisa WellsSocial Media Producer: Rachel DuffyVideo Editor: Andy MackenzieStudio Operator: Andy WatsonEditor: Camilla TomineyOriginal music by Goss Studio Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Tories face extinction as a political forceIn the meeting, Nick Cohen and Nick Tyrone, author, activist and political commentator, discussed the potential demise of the Conservative party in the UK. They highlighted the party's ideological confusion and complacency as major factors contributing to their decline. Nick suggested that the Conservative party might be losing its way intellectually and ideologically, and that they are complacent about their situation. They also discussed the rise of the radical right in the form of Nigel Farage's Reform party and the potential impact on the Conservative party. The conversation ended with a discussion on the need for the Conservative party to offer an alternative to the Reform party and the importance of having a strong leader to lead the party forward.Tories' Leadership and Strategy CritiqueThe two Nicks discuss Kemi Badenoch's leadership and strategy for the Tories. Nick Tyrone criticised Kemi's performance, stating she was not good at politics and had a fatal flaw in her strategy. He argued that her focus on culture issues was the wrong approach, as the Tories needed to rebuild their image as competent and pro-business. Nick Tyreone also suggested that Kemi's strategy was the opposite of what the Tories needed to succeed.Conservative Party's Potential Dissolution DiscussedBoth Nicks discuss the potential for the Conservative party to dissolve into the Reform party, led by Nigel Farage, due to their shared right-wing ideologies. They argued that the Conservative party's failure to articulate a unique reason for its existence in the current political climate could lead to its demise.Farage's Departure and Reform Party's FutureThey then discuss the potential impact of Nigel Farage's departure on the Reform Party's momentum. They agreed that Farage's personality cult is crucial to the party's success, and his absence could lead to its collapse.The Tories' grisly dilemmaNick Tyrone says the Tory Party face a grisly dilemma if it decides it has blown its ill-deserved credentials for being the party of business and economic competence thanks to Brexit and Liz Truss. He explains, "If that's the case, just make, just do whatever you need to do with Farage. Make Farage the leader of the conservative party. Melt the conservative party into Reform all the conservative party and just become. Just make Reform the one like right wing vehicle in the country, because that's gonna be more electorally efficient if there's no reason to exist. And what's happening is they are being crushed on one end by the Lib Dems and crushed on the other end by Reform, and they don't appeal to either group. "Read all about it!Nick Tyrone is an author, activist, policy advisor and commentator and keen observer of the Tory party whose Substack column as Neoliberal Centrist Dad - nick.tyrone.substack.com - is a must read for those of us desperate for the return of sanity to our national political discourse.Nick Cohen's @NickCohen4 latest Substack column Writing from London on politics and culture from the UK and beyond. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this week's Espresso Martini, Chris and Matt dig into a wave of elections across the UK, Canada, and Australia, exploring what they signal for populist movements, center-left parties, and Trump-style politics beyond US borders. They break down the rise of Reform UK, growing concerns over Nigel Farage's influence, and why British voters seem caught in a cycle of backlash politics. Then, a pair of liberal wins in Canada and Australia suggest that even the faintest whiff of Trumpism remains a liability overseas. Finally, they dissect the demotion of Mike Waltz, explain why combining the roles of secretary of state and national security advisor is historically fraught, and ask whether the Trump White House has learned anything—or simply become more ruthless in its chaos. All that, plus Larry the Cat for PM, the specter of Musk in British politics, and an earnest thank-you to recent reviewers. Subscribe and share to stay ahead in the world of intelligence, geopolitics, and current affairs. Please share this episode using these links Audio: https://pod.fo/e/2d365f YouTube: https://youtu.be/fenomGCz6Ys Articles discussed in today's episode “Farage claims Reform UK local election gains ‘beginning of the end' for Tories" by Peter Walker, Eleni Courea, and Kiran Stacey | The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/may/02/farage-reform-uk-local-elections-beginning-of-the-end-for-tories "Does Farage own the future?" by Andrew Marr | The New Statesman: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2025/05/does-farage-own-the-future "First Canada, Now Australia: The Trump Factor Boosts Another World Leader in an Election" by Mike Cherney | The Wall Street Journal: https://www.wsj.com/world/first-canada-now-australia-the-trump-factor-boosts-another-world-leader-in-a-close-election-bef1c5a1 “Inside Mike Waltz's White House Exit" by Isaac Stanley-Becker, Ashley Parker, Jonathan Lemire & Shane Harris | The Atlantic: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/05/03/waltz-trump-israel "Inside Waltz's ouster: Before Signalgate, talks with Israel angered Trump" by Michael Birnbaum, John Hudson, Emily Davies, Sarah Ellison & Natalie Allison | The Washington Post: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/05/mike-waltz-trump-fired/682660 Support Secrets and Spies Become a “Friend of the Podcast” on Patreon for £3/$4: https://www.patreon.com/SecretsAndSpies Buy merchandise from our Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/60934996 Subscribe to our YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDVB23lrHr3KFeXq4VU36dg For more information about the podcast, check out our website: https://secretsandspiespodcast.com Connect with us on social media Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/secretsandspies.bsky.social Instagram: https://instagram.com/secretsandspies Facebook: https://facebook.com/secretsandspies Spoutible: https://spoutible.com/SecretsAndSpies Follow Chris and Matt on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/chriscarrfilm.bsky.social https://bsky.app/profile/mattfulton.net Secrets and Spies is produced by F & P LTD. Music by Andrew R. Bird Photos by Daniel Torok/White House Secrets and Spies sits at the intersection of intelligence, covert action, real-world espionage, and broader geopolitics in a way that is digestible but serious. Hosted by filmmaker Chris Carr and writer Matt Fulton, each episode unpacks global events through the lens of intelligence and geopolitics, featuring expert insights from former spies, authors, and analysts.

In the latest episode of The Line Podcast, recorded on May 9, 2025, Matt and Jen round up the week in Canadian politics — and things are getting weird again.They start with Pierre Poilievre's decision to run in an extremely safe riding and tap Andrew Scheer as the party's interim House leader. Matt says both choices radiate loser energy. But he also mounts a reluctant defence of the Tories — agreeing, to his dismay, with the Twitter mob: the CPC can run better campaigns, but it can't beat the bogeyman version of itself that lives rent-free in the heads of many Canadians. He argues that if Poilievre had gone to the Oval Office and done exactly what Mark Carney just did, word for word, the reaction would have been scorched-earth. But when Carney does it, it's praised (and Matt agrees that Carney did well!). Jen pushes back — hard. She says the Conservatives need to stop whining about perception gaps and just fix what they can fix. Fatalism is not a strategy.This episode of The Line Podcast is brought to you by Unsmoke Canada. Canada can be a global leader in reducing the harm caused by smoking, but it requires actionable steps, including giving adult smokers the information they need to choose potentially less harmful alternatives. Learn more at Unsmoke.ca.In the second segment, they turn to the provinces. Matt delivers an update on Ontario, which is — by his account — a smouldering pile of nonsense. He brings a few choice examples. Then Jen takes a deeper dive into Alberta separatism and what's fuelling it. They might take a few detours along the way, but you knew that already.This episode of The Line Podcast is also brought to you by Innovative Medicines Canada. With a new government in place, one thing remains clear: Canada must continue to prioritize patients and healthcare innovation. Innovative Medicines Canada is focused on collaborating with all levels of government to improve access to life-saving medicines and develop a healthcare system that prioritizes patients, ignites innovation, and drives economic growth.Canada's innovative medicines sector plays a critical role—not just in health outcomes, but in keeping us competitive on the global stage. That's why, even during a moment of political change, Innovative Medicines Canada is staying focused on the issues that matter most to Canadians. And as Canada moves forward with national pharmacare, Innovative Medicines Canada believes it's possible to expand access without limiting choice—by strengthening what works and fixing what doesn't.Visit innovativemedicines.ca to learn more.Finally, Jen surprises Matt with a gut-check on a theory she's been turning over — something that crosses the wires between politics and religion. It's going to make someone mad. But after a pause, Matt decides it's probably not cancel-worthy. Probably.All that, and more, in the latest episode of The Line Podcast. Like and subscribe at ReadTheLine.ca, or find us on your favourite podcast app so you never miss an episode. If you're enjoying the show, share it with a friend, post about it online, or shout it across a church pew. We won't judge.

Lots to talk about today, including new polling which puts Reform on 29 points compared to the Tories on just 17. We've also just had the first PMQs since the local elections. But the trade deal announced yesterday between the UK and India is dominating the headlines, with many concerned about some of the concessions made – namely the decision to exempt some short-term Indian workers from national insurance as part of the new agreement. This comes barely a week after the local elections, where immigration has been widely considered the most salient issue. The Conservatives have gone on the attack, despite the fact that a trade deal with India was supposed to be one of the major gains from Brexit – an example of how Britain could ‘venture out into the world' and open up trade with fast-growing economies. Are the Tories now against free trade? Interestingly, Kemi Badenoch omitted to ask about the trade deal at PMQs today, choosing instead to question Keir Starmer on the ongoing concerns around winter fuel and the pressure from many elements within his party to at least water down the policy. Can Starmer afford to U-turn? James Heale speaks to Michael Simmons and Paul Goodman. Produced by Oscar Edmondson.

In today's episode, we cover the US-Houthi ceasefire, India's strikes on Pakistan, the UK-EU youth mobility deal, and the election of the new pope.Watch TLDR's latest videos here (YouTube):Could the EU Join the CPTPP?Is This the Beginning of the End for the Tories?India Strikes Pakistan: What Next?Watch the latest episode of TLDR's World Leader Leaderboard here: https://youtu.be/5JGd7HVM-KETLDR's Daily Briefing is a roundup of the day's most important news stories from around the world. But we don't just tell you what's happening, we explain it: making complex topics simple to understand. Listen to the Daily Briefing for your global news bulletin every weekday.Pre-order the next edition of Too Long, TLDR's print magazine, here: https://toolong.news/dailyProduced and edited by Scarlett WatchornHosted by Georgina FindlayWritten by Nadja Lovadinov and Georgina FindlayMusic by Epidemic Sound: http://epidemicsound.com/creator//////////////////////////////Sources:✍️ US-Houthi Ceasefirehttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/06/us-to-halt-bombing-campaign-against-houthis-in-yemen-trump-says https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250506-%F0%9F%94%B4oman-announces-ceasefire-deal-between-yemen-s-houthis-us https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7050j07gedo https://edition.cnn.com/2025/05/05/middleeast/israel-gaza-expansion-hnk-intl ✍️ India Strikes Pakistanhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cwyneele13qthttps://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/may/06/pakistan-india-attacks-kashmir-live-updateshttps://www.ft.com/content/c03e03ba-fd94-4538-a32b-246d59ecaf0c ✍️ UK-EU Youth Mobility Dealhttps://www.ft.com/content/d2d9afed-9fb1-4b21-90a4-fbfd5391c528 ✍️ Catholic Conclave Begins in the Vaticanhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/07/cardinals-begin-choosing-new-pope-conclavehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cn4we7prv4rt See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

More AI notes for y'all. They're not bad! Episode Link: Find this and other episodes at The Conditional Release Program on RedCircle.Recorded: May 5, 2025 (two days after the Australian Federal Election)Hosts: Jack the Insider & Hong Kong JackIn this episode, The Two Jacks dissect the stunning Australian federal election results, explore a surprising political turnaround in Canada, ponder the next Pope, and touch on global political shifts from the UK to Germany, and the latest from Trump's America.(00:00:00) Introduction & Australian Election: An Orderly Affair Jack the Insider and Hong Kong Jack kick off by praising the smooth and festive nature of the Australian federal election, highlighting the efficiency of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) and the beloved "democracy sausage."(00:02:21) The Pre-Poll Phenomenon A discussion on the increasing trend of pre-polling, with over half of Australians casting their vote before election day. The hosts debate the merits of shortening the pre-polling period, with Hong Kong Jack lamenting the decline of traditional Saturday voting.(00:06:06) Betting Blunders & Historic Results Labor's remarkable journey from $15 outsiders to $1.07 unbackable favourites to form government is reviewed. The episode highlights key historical markers:Anthony Albanese: The first Prime Minister re-elected since 2004.A significant Labor victory, with Albanese leading the first government in Australian political history to increase its majority in a second term.(00:09:17) Seat Swings, Mea Culpas & The Greens' Tumble The hosts reflect on their pre-election predictions against the reality of significant swings to Labor (e.g., a 10% swing in Bennelong). Labor is projected to win around 90 seats.The Greens: A tough election, with leader Adam Bandt likely to lose his seat in Melbourne. Zoe Daniel (Teal) is also in a precarious position in Goldstein. The Greens may lose Ryan back to the Liberals and potentially face no representation in the House of Representatives.(00:13:38) A UK Perspective & Labor's Resurgence Hong Kong Jack shares insights from the UK, where observers noted Labor's landslide and the "leaderless, rudderless, pointless" state of the Coalition. This challenges the narrative that incumbents always lose, citing recent Canadian and Australian results.(00:16:27) Liberal Campaign Catastrophe: A "Don't Do This" Case Study A deep dive into the Liberal Party's "dreadful campaign," marked by:The ill-conceived work-from-home policy, poorly communicated by Senator Jane Hume and lacking consultation.A string of policy backflips and poorly planned announcements (e.g., fuel excise cut, Melbourne airport rail funding announced at a winery).Peter Dutton has accepted responsibility for the campaign's failures.(00:22:46) Trump's Take & The Muted MAGA Effect Donald Trump's reaction to the Australian election (congratulating "Albert" while feigning ignorance of Dutton) is discussed. The hosts agree that MAGA influence was minimal, with Albanese's message of "kindness is not weakness" resonating more strongly.(00:25:13) The Liberal Party's Existential Crossroads A critical analysis of the Liberal Party's future, having lost traditional heartland seats and failed to broaden its appeal beyond an aging demographic.The danger of vacating the political centre and the flawed strategy of chasing a new "working-class" constituency.Hong Kong Jack draws parallels to Labor's wilderness years (1977, 1996), emphasizing the need for honest self-reflection for any chance of recovery.Labor's structural advantages: benefiting from Green preferences and a more unified progressive base compared to a fragmented right-wing, further diluted by entities like Clive Palmer's party.(00:39:58) Senate Snapshot: Stability Prevails An overview of the projected Senate makeup across the states:NSW & VIC: Likely Labor 3, Liberals 2, Greens 1.QLD: Labor 2, Libs 2, Greens 1, with One Nation's Malcolm Roberts likely re-elected.TAS: Jacqui Lambie expected to return.ACT: Independent David Pocock secures his quota alongside a Labor senator.Overall, the Senate composition is unlikely to see dramatic changes. David Pocock is commended for his diligent work.(00:42:25) Who Will Lead the Liberals? A Party in Search of Direction Speculation on the future leadership of the Liberal Party, with few obvious candidates emerging from a depleted frontbench. Dan Tehan is mentioned as a possible moderate caretaker, though the path back to government looks long and arduous.(00:45:58) Albanese: The New "Labor God" & Chalmers' Contribution Anthony Albanese is lauded for his historic achievement, with Jim Chalmers highlighted as a key performer and media operator for Labor, despite Hong Kong Jack's gentle ribbing about his lengthy essays.(00:48:56) Canadian Politics Upended: Liberals' Shock Comeback A look at the Canadian election, where the Liberals achieved a stunning turnaround, with Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre facing a potential seat loss. Donald Trump's inflammatory rhetoric towards Canada is seen as a contributing factor to this shift.(00:52:12) Vatican Watch: Speculating on the Next Pope With Pope Francis's papacy in its later stages, the hosts discuss potential successors. Italian cardinals like Pietro Parolin are frontrunners, but names from Africa and the Philippines also surface. Hong Kong Jack references Morris West's The Shoes of the Fisherman for insights into papal conclaves.(00:55:52) Sir Tony Blair on Net Zero & The Reality of Fossil Fuels Former UK PM Sir Tony Blair's call for a rethink of Net Zero policies due to cost implications is examined. Global fossil fuel consumption continues to rise (gas +2.7%, coal +1%, oil +0.8%), underscoring the challenge of the energy transition.(01:00:24) Trump's First 100 Days (Again): Low Approval, Tariff Troubles & Papal Attire Donald Trump's second term hits the 100-day mark with historically low approval ratings (39%). The economic impact of his tariffs is starting to bite (LA port imports down one-third, US economy shrinking). Adding to the unusual, Trump has been pictured in papal robes on the White House website, even expressing a desire to be Pope.(01:05:49) UK Political Fragmentation: Reform's Rise, Tories' Fall The UK's political landscape remains volatile. Recent local and by-election results project a national vote share that would see the Reform party at 30% and the Conservatives decimated to around 15% and potentially only five seats.(01:08:44) Germany Considers Banning Far-Right AFD Germany is contemplating a ban on the far-right AFD party, the largest single party in the Bundestag. The hosts discuss the problematic nature of banning popular political movements, arguing it often backfires.(01:11:21) Jay Rayner on Media: Mainstream vs. Social Food critic Jay Rayner's comments on the state of media are discussed, questioning the perceived universal informedness of mainstream journalists and acknowledging that both traditional and social media produce "rubbish."(01:15:29) AFL Round-Up: Carlton's Collapse, Collingwood-Geelong ClassicCarlton suffers a 10-goal drubbing by Adelaide, with Jack Silvani's absence keenly felt.Collingwood vs. Geelong is hailed as a "cracker" game, showcasing great skill and sportsmanship.Concerns are raised about key AFL games not being available on free-to-air television, potentially alienating younger fans.(01:22:18) Cricket News: Indian Prodigy & Vale "The Buzz" A 17-year-old Indian cricketer makes waves in the IPL with a century. The hosts pay tribute to Carlton AFL legend Peter Bosustow ("The Buzz"), who passed away after a battle with cancer, remembering his electrifying impact on the game.(01:27:27) NRL Update & Women's State of Origin Shines The Bulldogs continue their strong NRL run, while the Panthers finally notch a win. The NRL is praised for its successful promotion of the women's game, with the Women's State of Origin proving highly watchable.(01:29:51) An Ode to Whale Waste: Ecological Importance Hong Kong Jack shares a fascinating environmental tidbit on the crucial role of whale excrement and urine in ocean ecosystems, highlighting a baleen whale's impressive daily urine output of 950 litres.(01:32:10) Wrapping Up: A Transformative Election & How to Connect Jack the Insider concludes that Australia has witnessed a significant political transformation, with Anthony Albanese poised to be a long-term, impactful leader.Connect with the hosts:Jack the Insider: On X (formerly Twitter) @JackTheInsider (DMs open)Hong Kong Jack: On Twitter and his Substack.

For the latest and most important news of the day | https://www.thecanadianpressnews.ca To watch daily news videos, follow us on YouTube | https://www.youtube.com/@CdnPress The Canadian Press on X (formerly Twitter) | https://twitter.com/CdnPressNews The Canadian Press on LinkedIn | https://linkedin.com/showcase/98791543

It's day five of recriminations after the local elections, with politicians, pollsters and journalists alike still trying to make sense of what just happened. On today's podcast, Rachel Wolf gives her verdict: we should not be shocked by Reform's surge. She argues that Nigel Farage's success should have been predicted – that it's the same, distinctly anti-political silent majority who ‘surprised' us during Brexit, ‘surprised' us in 2019 and are ‘surprising' us now.  How will Labour respond? Will they U-turn on winter fuel? And is Boris Johnson the only one who can win back these disillusioned voters for the Tories? Oscar Edmondson speaks to James Heale and Rachel Wolf, CEO of Public First and former adviser to Boris Johnson. Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Megan McElroy.

The fallout of the local elections have left Labour and the Tories in a tizz, with neither party entirely sure how to react to Farage's gloating. So what way will Starmer end up leaning? Ros Taylor talks Jacob Jarvis through the latest domestic politics, plus we look at elections around the world, and lessons which can be learned.    We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker for £100 sponsored credit.     Listen to the latest podcast from Podmasters, Crime Scene, the truth behind true crime with Alison Phillips and Bernard Hogan-Howe: https://linktr.ee/crimescenepodcast    www.patreon.com/bunkercast       Written and presented by Jacob Jarvis with Ros Taylor. Audio production: Tom Taylor. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Music by Kenny Dickinson. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Smart 7 is an award winning daily podcast, in association with METRO, that gives you everything you need to know in 7 minutes, at 7am, 7 days a week…With over 18 million downloads and consistently charting, including as No. 1 News Podcast on Spotify, we're a trusted source for people every day and we've won Gold at the Signal International Podcast awardsIf you're enjoying it, please follow, share, or even post a review, it all helps... Today's episode includes the following: https://x.com/i/status/1918958192014320066 https://x.com/i/status/1919059447353090231 https://x.com/i/status/1919061257354707114https://x.com/i/status/1919072975388561889 https://x.com/i/status/1919101200298897710 https://x.com/i/status/1919351983233777965 https://x.com/i/status/1919350886985294186 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde21wnlrpjohttps://x.com/i/status/1919396213826199619 Contact us over @TheSmart7pod or visit www.thesmart7.com or find out more at www.metro.co.uk Voiced by Jamie East, using AI, written by Liam Thompson, researched by Lucie Lewis and produced by Daft Doris. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On today's Inside Politics podcast Irish Times London Correspondent Mark Paul joins Hugh Linehan to discuss what Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is already calling “the beginning of the end of the Conservative Party" as Tories lost council seats all over England.And to add icing to Farage's cake, Reform Party candidate Sarah Pochin dramatically won the Runcorn and Helsby byelection by just six votes, the narrowest margin of victory in a byelection since 1944.Labour didn't fare well in Thursday's local elections either - will they now view Reform as a legitimate challenger? And is the clock already ticking for Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Votes are being counted across England, but there is a clear early winner from these local elections: Nigel Farage. His party triumphed in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election this morning, overturning a 14,000-odd majority and winning by just six votes! Elsewhere, Andrea Jenkyns triumphed in Lincolnshire; Reform came second in a number of mayoral races; and their 38 per cent vote share in Runcorn matches the best-ever performance that Ukip achieved in a by-election. So far, the story is one of teal triumph – at the expense of the two main parties. Labour are already pointing to the difficulty incumbents often face at local elections, and will claim victory after narrowly holding out in three mayoral races: North Tyneside, the West of England and Doncaster. The Tories, however, appear to have totally capitulated – but with widespread results for councils across England expected later, that could all change. Oscar Edmondson speaks to James Heale and Lucy Dunn. Produced by Oscar Edmondson.

The word ‘unprecedented' is often overused in politics, but these local elections have proved to be just that. The headline is: sweeping success for Reform.  Nigel Farage's 'teal tsunami' comes at the expense of the main parties – turning the two-party consensus on its head. The recriminations for Labour and the Tories have already begun. On the left, a number of MPs have broken cover and urged the government to shift its position on high-salience issues such as winter fuel. On the right, Kemi Badenoch's leadership is looking increasingly shaky, with Tory MPs and staff warning that a step change is needed. Where do the main parties go from here? And can anyone stop Nigel? James Heale speaks to Isabel Hardman and The Spectator's incoming political editor, Tim Shipman. This episode was recorded as part of The Spectator's local elections live broadcast. You can watch the full coverage here.

The word ‘unprecedented' is often overused in politics, but these local elections have proved to be just that. The headline is: sweeping success for Reform. Nigel Farage's 'teal tsunami' comes at the expense of the main parties – turning the two-party consensus on its head. The recriminations for Labour and the Tories have already begun. On the left, a number of MPs have broken cover and urged the government to shift its position on high-salience issues such as winter fuel. On the right, Kemi Badenoch's leadership is looking increasingly shaky, with Tory MPs and staff warning that a step change is needed. Where do the main parties go from here? And can anyone stop Nigel? James Heale speaks to Isabel Hardman and The Spectator's incoming political editor, Tim Shipman. This episode was recorded as part of The Spectator's local elections live broadcast. You can watch the full coverage here.

Yesterday elections took place up and down the country, for councils, six mayoral contests, and a by-election. What we're looking at today is a big win for Nigel Farage's Reform - and a seismic shift in British politics.Hannah Barnes is joined by senior data journalist Ben Walker and senior editor George Eaton. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tommy Meskill, London Correspondent brings us the latest on the local and mayoral elections in England, where it could be bruising day for the Tories.

I check in with you guys to discuss a huge result in the Runcorn by-election. Turns out punching the public can only be done by John Prescott. I also discuss the Tories drifting into obscurity and why people don't care about Labour enough to truly hate them. CATCH ME ON MY TOUR ‘Basic Bloke 2: There's No Bloke Without Fire'. Book tickets here: https://www.livenation.co.uk/geoff-norcott-tickets-adp1252793 Watch my STAND-UP SPECIAL 'Basic Bloke' on ITVX:  https://www.itv.com/watch/geoff-norcott:-basic-bloke/10a6363a0001B/10a6363a0001 Order the PAPERBACK EDITION of my book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/British-Bloke-Decoded-Everything-explained/dp/1800961308/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= JOIN the Podcast Patreon and receive each episode early, AD-FREE & with bonus content https://www.patreon.com/geoffnorcott?fan_landing=true  Join my MAILING LIST for priority Tour booking & special offers https://signup.ymlp.com/xgyueuwbgmgb Watch my COMEDY SPECIAL on YouTube https://youtu.be/YaxhuZGtDLs  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lucy Fisher, Whitehall Editor with the Financial Times; Peter Cardwell, former special advisor to four UK Cabinet Ministers and Chief Political Commentator on the Talk Network

In the wake of the UK Supreme Court ruling that the legal definition of woman should be based on biological sex, Nish and Zoë speak to LGBTQ+ activist Ellen Jones, author of "Outrage: Why the fight for LGBTQ+ equality is not yet won and what we can do about it" about the implications for trans people and what we can do about it.  They discuss how the campaigning of reactionaries like billionaire author JK Rowling led to the decision that has seen Prime Minister Keir Starmer backflipping on his support for the trans community. Ellen speaks on the dangers of the recent ruling and practical ways to resist and support the trans community. Then, as the Tories flounder ahead of the local elections, Zoë hedges her bets. And we take a look at two shocking attempts to seize the limelight by Liz Truss and Tony Blair. Plus, ahead of the Australian election this weekend, Nish speaks to former Deputy Prime Minister Wayne Swan about how, in the wake of Trump's tariffs and attacks on allies, the commonwealth might be more important than ever and what the US and UK could learn from Australia's compulsory preferential voting system. CHECK OUT THESE DEALS FROM OUR SPONSORS  AURA FRAMES https://www.auraframes.com CODE: PSUK SHOPIFY https://www.shopify.co.uk/podsavetheuk  Guests: Ellen Jones Wayne Swan Useful links: Outrage: Why the fight for LGBTQ+ equality is not yet won and what we can do about it by Ellen Jones https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/ellen-jones/outrage/9781035030606 The Good Law Project Crowdfunder to legally challenge the Supreme Court Decision https://goodlawproject.org/crowdfunder/supreme-court-human-rights-for-trans-people/ Compilation of protests against the Supreme Court Decision https://whatthetrans.com/compilation-of-protests-against-the-supreme-court/  Volunteer at your local trans pride - London Trans Pride call for stewards https://www.instagram.com/londontranspride Write to your MP https://transactual.org.uk/change-actions/write-to-your-mp/ Reclaim the framing of UK trans rights https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTWR6sdj_xWKoOGLmwp0JotSL3NBrYSd1Dy3VZOIIKJKy0Ej6cFPt32IIKan3qCq6fG4lpgrw46ewO0/pub?urp=gmail_link Protect the Dolls T-shirt in support of Trans Lifeline, a US-based charity https://connerives.com/products/pre-order-protect-the-dolls-t-shirt Info on voting in the Australian Election abroad: ALPABROAD.ORG  Audio Credits Sky News ITV News Pod Save the UK is a Reduced Listening production for Crooked Media. Contact us via email: PSUK@reducedlistening.co.uk Insta: https://instagram.com/podsavetheuk BlueSky: @podsavetheuk.crooked.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/podsavetheuk TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@podsavetheuk Facebook: https://facebook.com/podsavetheuk Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@PodSavetheUK Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Voters have gone to the polls today for a historic set of local elections. The polling indicates a rough night for the two main parties and a good showing for Reform, the Lib Dems and the Greens. So be prepared for a lot of election-night spin from both Labour and the Tories. To talk through the various ways in which politicians can claim victory in the face of defeat, James Heale is joined by our editor, Michael Gove – no stranger to the media round himself. They discuss the best candidates to face up to the media from both the Tories and Labour, as well as some of the greatest examples of post-election spin from history. Michael also gives an insight into his own tactics when trying to divert the narrative away from electoral disaster and when encouraging the media to ‘calm down'. Produced by Oscar Edmondson.

Microsoft posted better than expected quarterly earnings on Wednesday, Spain is trying to figure out what caused a massive power outage, and the Conservatives are bracing for heavy losses in local England elections. Plus, the FT's Claire Jones explains what we can take away from the latest US GDP reading. Mentioned in this podcast:US and Ukraine sign natural resources dealMicrosoft shares jump after software giant's earnings top forecastsUS economy contracts at 0.3% rate as Trump tariffs prompt import surgeLocal elections: Tories braced for losses as England votes in five-party raceHow did Spain's electricity grid collapse?The FT News Briefing is produced by Fiona Symon, Sonja Hutson, Kasia Broussalian, Ethan Plotkin, Lulu Smyth, and Marc Filippino. Additional help from Michela Tindera, Katie McMurran, Breen Turner, Sam Giovinco, Peter Barber, Michael Lello, David da Silva and Gavin Kallmann. Topher Forhecz is the FT's executive producer. The FT's global head of audio is Cheryl Brumley. The show's theme song is by Metaphor Music.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Conservative Party of Canada is once again the Official Opposition.Now, the Tories are grappling with the disappointing results of Monday's election. They lost to the Liberals after leading in the polls mere months ago and their party leader, Pierre Poilievre, failed to win in his own riding. But it wasn't a total loss. The Conservatives won 41 per cent of the popular vote, and picked up more seats than any other party, flipping both red and orange seats to blue. Top Conservative strategist, Kory Teneycke, joins the show to talk about the path forward – what the results mean for Poilievre and what kinds of challenges he will face, if he stays on as leader, in uniting Conservatives and expanding their base.

It was supposed to a fun afternoon arguing over the 2,000trees clashfinder but Sharon Osbourne, Scotland's First Minister and the pesky bloody Tories had other ideas…. so the spotlight is back on the Kneecap lads.But what about the promoters, like James, who have red hot Irish trio on their poster?Well, there's death threats for a start. We go again, every Thursday morning.

We all know the Conservatives got just about everything they could wrong when they were in government. But can we pinpoint where it all started to go wrong? And has the party learned its lessons? Tim Bale is a professor of politics at Queen Mary University London and his newly updated book: The Conservatives After Brexit: Turmoil and Transformation is best placed to answer those questions. Plus, is pronatalism having a moment under Donald Trump 2.0?  And in the Extra Bit for subscribers, following the death of Pope Francis, how much does religion play a part in politics?  We're on YouTube!: https://www.youtube.com/@ohgodwhatnow   Buy the updated version of Prof. Tim Bale's Book – The Conservatives After Brexit: Turmoil and Transformation, HERE.   www.patreon.com/ohgodwhatnow Presented by Dorian Lynskey with Rachel Cunliffe and Hannah Fearn. Producer: Chris Jones. Audio Production by: Robin Leeburn. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. OH GOD, WHAT NOW? is a Podmasters production. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ahead of England's local elections next week, the Political Fix team pick the races to watch and what's at stake for the main parties, as voters head to the polls to elect 1,600-odd councillors, six mayors and one new MP. Host Lucy Fisher is joined by podcast regulars Miranda Green and Anna Gross, plus the FT's Northern correspondent Jennifer Williams, to ask whether Reform UK will live up to high expectations, and just how far both Labour and the Tories could fall. They also examine Sir Keir Starmer's pivot to patriotism and projection of a nostalgic vision of England, as he attempts to see off the threat from Nigel Farage. Have a question for our panel? Drop us a line at politicalfix@ft.com. Record a voice note with your name and question, and email it to us. Follow Lucy on Bluesky or X: @lucyfisher.bsky.social, @LOS_Fisher; Anna annasophiegross.bsky.social @AnnaSophieGross, Miranda @greenmirandahere.bsky.social, and Jennifer @JenWilliams_FT @jenwilliamsft.bsky.socialWant more? Free links: What to watch in the 2025 local elections Starmer plays up patriotic credentials as local elections loom Reform UK heads offshore to raise funds from world's wealthy Unite divided: British trade union grapples with twin scandals Sign up here for 30 days free of Stephen Bush's Inside Politics newsletter, winner of the World Association of News Publishers 2023 ‘Best Newsletter' award. Presented by Lucy Fisher. Produced by Lulu Smyth, with help from Georgina Quach. The executive producer is Flo Phillips. Original music and mix by Breen Turner. The FT's head of audio is Cheryl Brumley. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The politics team answers listener questions on council tax, the voters ignored by Labour and the Tories, and the true value of billionaires.Hannah Barnes is joined by Andrew Marr and Rachel Cunliffe.Sign up to the New Statesman's daily politics newsletter: Morning Call Submit a question for a future episode: You Ask Us Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesperson Calum Miller, elected as the new MP for Bicester and Woodstock last year, joins James Heale to talk about the ambitions of the party that became the largest third party in Parliament in 100 years at the 2024 general election. They want to overtake the Conservatives to be the second party in local government – could they one day overtake the Tories to become the official opposition?  A former civil servant, Oxford University policy manager and councillor, Calum joins Coffee House Shots to talk about why he got into politics, how Brexit radicalised his desire for good governance and why, for all the fun, there is a serious point behind Ed Davey's stunts.  Produced by Patrick Gibbons.