Left, right, or in the muddle

Many readers – and even more non-readers! – of this book will regard it as ‘Left-wing’. ‘Pro-99%’ or ‘pro-planet’ might be better, but I don’t care how you classify it: I do care whether the arguments are sound, and what the counter-arguments are, if not. The Right normally applies the Left label as a stigmatising term, in order to avoid engaging with the issues raised, yet even leading organisations of the rich and powerful now have to admit that rising inequality and global warming are major problems.

In January 2015, the World Economic Forum, which holds its annual meeting of the super-rich in Davos (see pp 244-5), proclaimed that inequality and climate change were 2015’s challenges, and chided those who dismiss concern about inequality as the politics of envy:

Then there’s the International Monetary Fund (IMF), a major player in the global debt crisis. Its managing director, Christine Lagarde, said “All will benefit from steps to cut excessive inequality … Our findings suggest that – contrary to conventional wisdom – the benefits of higher income are trickling up, not down.” The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), representing rich countries, makes similar points in a report called In it together: Why less inequality benefits us all.

Moving from Mammon to God, or his representative, in an eloquent encyclical letter, Pope Francis shocked the political elite with his call to value the earth and its ecology, live within ecological limits and drastically reduce inequality. The letter is informed not only by Catholic theology but also by an extensive review of research on climate, inequality and development. It is also refreshingly direct: