Who Knows What's Going On?

First of all: if the headline reads like an open invitation to anyonewho thinks they do, the BTL Comments section is truly at your disposal!  (And if, after you've survived a few challenges from the C@W readership, you still think you know - you should apply for a job as MSM leader-writer, because they haven't the faintest idea.  Even Guido is just dealing in trivia.) 

Here's how I'd stake out the landscape:

• everyone keeps having the excellent excuse of waiting for the Next Scheduled Event - after which, presumably, they'll understand everything and will doubtless let us know.  Right now that's the Euro Elections and maybe also the Locals.  Who bothers trying to call them?  The only game being played is to tell your own party: "if we don't do X [get rid of May, promise R2, commit to revoking A50, fill in your own heartfelt disideratum here] we'll be wiped out ..."
• there is no sign of leadership.  Anywhere, really.  OK, Starmer and Farage are being a bit more purposeful than most.  But that's about it
• there is no sign of coalition-building.  Around anything.  Every faction seems to think the best tactic is to retain its own purity of position.  (For Corbyn, of course, this means high-principled fence-sitting, which must eventually start to affect the flow of blood to those bollocks of his that the Momentumites so admire)
• rather against my own views on How Things Happen, there isn't much sign of the grown-ups seizing control.  Quite the reverse: the children are happily blocking the streets, metaphorically-speaking on quite a wide scale, as well as at Marble Arch  

Incidentally, for those of the Marxist disposition - or more specifically, Marxist-Leninist - none of this comes as a surprise.  As we've mentioned before, to many of them the current state of affairs closely resembles the backdrop they'd expect to presage the Revolution.  And, famously, Marx offered precious little guidance as to what to do in these circumstances, not least because (a) ultimately he was a library-bound tosser, and (b) he reckoned that the Hand of History would be doing its blind and baleful dialectical thing: no need to be too specific.  It was Lenin who started theorising - and, more importantly, doing something - about What Happens Next.  And, because what he faced in 1917 et seq bore scant relationship in detail to anything Marx had predicted, he was making it up as he ruthlessly went along.

Do we see any candidiates for the role of Lenin?  I am quite sure McDonnell dreams about this - but he doesn't look he part to me.

Have at it in the comments, chaps.

ND

from Capitalists@Work http://www.cityunslicker.co.uk/2019/04/who-knows-whats-going-on.html