Welcome to ClemAntics the Blog which seeks to tickle, inform and challenge

Clem what?  (we hear you ask) when the political historian's among you know the right question to ask is:  Clem who?

 The answer is of course Clement Atlee, British Prime Minister 1945-1951.

Oh no,(we hear you say) another lot of old farts taking us back to the halcyon days of the 1950’s!

Au contraire, we may be old farts who hanker after the melodic tones of The Who and other such musical ensembles, by the way I never did want to die before I got old, and the older I get the more determined I am. We simply hold Clement Attlee up as an example of a politician who acted in the best interests of the country, not himself, or his Party and for whom the phrase

“….all in it together…” meant exactly what it says.

So how would Attlee have tackled the crash of 2008?

First let me give some context to this question…

He would have wholly approved of Gordon Brown’s success in ploughing money into the banks and, thus, avoiding an economic meltdown; money, by the way, the government would doubtless recoup in time by the sale of shares as and when such shares recovered their pre-crash value. In addition, at the time of the2010 election, the economy was growing at about 1.5% per annum.

Attlee was a supporter of J. M. Keynes who, in 1945, said that when the Labour party entered government in that year it was confronted with… “an economic Dunkirk…”, (yes, I know it’s before your time-Google it!), and the country was, effectively, bankrupt!  The economic situation of 2008 was by no means so severe. Yes, the deficit, largely as a result of the necessary steps taken to secure the banks, had increased substantially to about £150bilion, but our credit rating remained strong and loans could be made on interest as little as 1.5%

J. M. Keynes argued that in times of an economic downturn, government spending was a crucial factor in creating the necessary conditions for an economic upturn. Attlee, believed that the responsibility of government was to assume a prominent role in improving the lives of its citizens and as such would have adopted a Keynesian approach to the crash.

Just as in 1945, he would have borrowed money, albeit in much better circumstances, and invested heavily in infrastructure projects. By this means, the economy would have been stimulated, employment would have risen and the spending power of citizens maintained. Yes, in the short term the deficit would have increased, but over time, and with patience, it would reduce and achieve a tolerable and acceptable level.

Sound too good to be true? Nah,” you just gotta have faith baby” (Donald Sutherland, Kelly’s Heroes)

And sometimes, just sometimes, it pays to look back to find a way forward. An Old Fart

So we find our inspiration from Clem. But what about the Antics?

Well - antics as in capers, pranks, larks, tricks and frolics. We want to encourage and inform debate whilst often choosing to look at the world through a Dennis-the-Menace prism. We seek to offer a smorgasbord (thanks Sweden; here's hoping for free movement of language post Brexit) of serious critique, satire, comment and  tongue-in-cheek silliness. Would Clem have approved? He would probably have managed a wry smile away from cameras. We hope you will smile too.