Week-end Wrap – Political Economy – April 05, 2026
by Tony Wikrent
A German Journalist’s ‘Civil Death’
Patrick Lawrence, March 31, 2026 [via defenddemocracy.press]
… With the seizure of his spouse’s bank accounts last Friday, Dogru and his family now face what amounts to a starvation blockade of the kind the Trump regime (not to change the subject) currently imposes on Cuba and Israel imposes on Gaza.
This story reads like something out of Dostoyevsky or Kafka, I have to say. We are talking about a family of five going hungry in the capital of the Federal Republic of Germany as punishment for… what?… for seeing with his eyes open, for thinking about what he sees, then commenting on what he sees?
I would love to suggest various ways readers could support the Dogru family, but there are none. Were someone to donate so much as a loaf of bread to help sustain them the German authorities would count it a criminal offense punishable by a prison term of up to several years.
Strategic Political Economy
Why we need rationing, now
Richard Murphy, April 02, 2026 [Funding the Future]
The UK is in a war
economy, and most people don’t realise it yet. The Middle East conflict has already cut global oil supplies by around 20% and gas supplies by roughly 30%. With approximately half of all UK food imported, and global fertiliser supplies under severe pressure, the shortages hitting our shelves and energy bills are only the beginning.
Markets cannot solve this. When supply collapses, markets ration by income and those with money survive; those without do not. That is not a policy choice. That is a failure of government. The energy crisis and emerging food shortages demand an active UK state response.
Drawing on Lord Keynes’s approach at the start of World War II, and John Kenneth Galbraith’s wartime work in the United States, this video argues that the only credible response to this supply chain crisis is a combination of government-led rationing and a serious redesign of the tax system.
It means government intervention in the economy at a scale not seen since the 1940s.
The alternative is leaving resource allocation to the market, which will transfer wealth upward, destroy social cohesion, and risk public unrest. That is not how to manage a war economy. That is a policy choice to let the poor bear the cost of a crisis they did not create.
[TW: Interesting! Can the consequences of Trumpanyahu war be used to drive a regime change of political economy away from neoliberalism? We must try….. ]
Not Getting It Together
Aurelien, via Naked Capitalism 04-01-2025]
…It’s not so much that numbers can be confused with reality, as that reality in the end is nothing but numbers, and decisions are made and workers rewarded without any kind of real-world check. Everything is possible, therefore, because ultimately everything is numbers.
The modern political class, increasingly dominated by those who have worked in finance, or its close relative management consultancy, therefore largely consist of people with little experience of the real world. Over the last forty years, unsurprisingly, this way of thinking and working, combining symbolic manipulation of numbers and the ticking of symbolic boxes, has become the default in government, and even the military and diplomacy. So the emphasis now is not on the capability to do things and achieve actual objectives, but on the skills of making the numbers look right, and proving that you have carried out the correct steps in the correct order. That is all the system knows how to do….
…It is the nature of a crisis that most attention is focused on transitory daily issues, such that the big picture, if there ever was one, disappears from view. I know from personal experience that in a crisis every long and exhausting day is overwhelmed with meetings, telephone calls, video-conferences, unexpected news or initiatives, requests for interviews, media statements, questions in parliament … the list goes on and on. For those like me who had the temerity to ask what the point of all this was, and about longer-term objectives and plans, the response was typically “we’ll worry about that later.” And quite soon, of course, it’s later, and the system realises that it has no idea how it got to where it is, especially because it actually wanted to be somewhere else. But by then it’s too late.
So the real problem is not so much that the left brain dominates, as that the two modes of thinking are never brought together. This means that quite a lot of left-brain work can go on effectively on auto-pilot, because it develops a life of its own. Thus, ideas for using US ground troops in Iran can rapidly be developed at a technical level, with force composition and generation, potential targets, entry points, logistic resupply, ISR etc, all without the questions of “why are we doing this?” or “what do we hope to achieve?” ever being posed. But of course the output of such activities can be easily expressed in whizzo graphics and AI generated simulations, and it provides the planners with something to do….
Thus, statements of faith in an ultimate Ukrainian victory, or of a future “Free Palestine,” or of the inevitable defeat of Iran, have to be seen, even more than most political statements, as symbolic and metaphorical. They are not deduced from the facts of the situation, nor do there have to be actual processes capable of making them happen. They are battle-cries, slogans for chanting, descriptions of fantasies and in certain cases nightmares. The problem arises when the extreme right-brain thinking that has always characterised politics, exacerbated by the ignorance of modern politicians about real life, collides with the extreme left-brain culture of our modern world as exemplified in government systems, without any transmission mechanism to enable them to work together….
The greatest challenge, as often, is intellectual. Our masters will have to recognise that chains of consequence and causality do actually exist, that Father Christmas is a right-brain myth, and that there are hard limits on what can actually be done, and hard requirements about what needs to be done, and neither can be circumvented with words. In particular, they need to abandon the delusion that only finance matters, and that numbers on paper represent the underlying reality of the world. (Not even Pythagoras would have suggested that you can eat numbers.) This is most obvious in the endless, earnest discussion of what the Iran War will do to “the price of oil.” In a few cases, pundits even realise that “the price of oil” might affect the prices of other things as well. But from their point of view, “price” and “oil” are two different concepts. The idea that there might just not be enough oil, and that that lack may have practical consequences other than price doesn’t get much of an airing. After all, surely if the price goes up, new suppliers will come forward? That’s how the market works, isn’t it? Isn’t it? The idea that the world will soon lose some of its supply of oil-based products, and that this is a hard limit that cannot be got round, has only just begun to register, and, to the extent that it has, pundits appear to believe that we can substitute, say, solar power for oil, and all will be well. Can you use solar power to make fertiliser? Indeed, can you make solar panels at all without oil-based products?
…I doubt if any western country is now equipped, organisationally or even intellectually, to handle problems caused by scarcity of food. Western states now enjoy little absolute food security—a problem I discussed in some detail last year—but our governments are far from even beginning to grasp the nature of the problem, let alone its implications. Ah well, it will be said, people eat too much and anyway too much food is thrown away. Indeed, but that’s not the answer….
As it happens, there is a lot of experience of what happens in situations of severe shortage, and the answer is that the rich buy what they want, the poor buy what they can, and organised crime steps in to put those with money in touch with those with things to sell. The capacity of western states has been radically reduced over the last couple of generations, even as the power of organised crime has grown. We can imagine what shortages of basic medicines would do, and who might wind up controlling their retail sale. In reality, attempts by government to control the availability of everyday necessities will lead nowhere and arouse public opposition. The Internet will have a field day: it will be worse than Covid. This shortage of food doesn’t really exist you see, it’s just the Davos brigade trying to kill off as many people as it can, this time by hunger….
Trump’s planning war crimes
Richard Murphy, April 02, 2026 [Funding the Future]
Donald Trump has signalled his intention to attack Iran’s civilian infrastructure, power stations and desalination plants, and that is a war crime under international law. The law is unambiguous: military gain does not justify targeting civilian populations and the infrastructure they depend upon, and pre-announcing an attack does not reduce culpability. This is the reality of the Iran war that the world urgently needs to confront….
…There is a deeper ideological logic at work here, which is neoliberalism. Neoliberal economics reduces human beings to units in a system, economic cogs with conditional worth. When civilians are treated as expendable targets in a war in Iran, that is not aberration. That is the neoliberal system working as designed.
Margaret Thatcher applied the same logic to UK communities in the 1980s, treating unemployment and social harm as acceptable costs of economic policy. Trump’s Iran policy is the modern expression of that same ideology, now directed at Iranian civilians on a far grander and more lethal scale. The mindset is identical; the human cost is simply larger.
The collapse of moral constraint we are witnessing in the US-Iran conflict is a systemic danger. Neoliberalism, combined with distorted justification, is overriding both international law and basic humanity…
Never doubt that dangerous ideas are a threat to humankind
Richard Murphy, March 31, 2026 [Funding the Future]
…This is the consequence of neoliberal thinking. When, as that philosophy does, you reduce people to being cogs in a machine, those cogs become expendable. Margaret Thatcher treated people in this way when managing the UK economy with supreme indifference to its population in the 1980s. Donald Trump is treating the people of Iran in this way when managing his maniacal war agenda in the 2020s. There is a difference in the scale of the contempt shown, but the indifference to human suffering that underpinned both courses of action is similar.
The fact is that the courses of action required to fulfil the neoliberal agenda of ever-increasing the wealth of a few in society at cost to many have been presumed by all those who subscribe to this ideology as justification for their contempt for their fellow human beings, and as an excuse for the suffering that their ideology has caused to billions around the world….
Trump’s assault on 2026 Election
Trump Will Not Accept the 2026 Results. These Are the Legal Weapons to Force Certification
W. A. Lawrence, Mar 29, 2026 [Glass Empires]
Trump is not attempting to win the election. Trump is attempting to establish the outcome as settled before certification, because a public that accepts inevitability becomes far easier to override.
Since January 2025, actions to expand federal control of election administration have moved from proposal into execution. Courts have blocked portions on constitutional grounds. Legal countermeasures stand ready. Effective use requires speed, coordination, and sustained pressure applied before administrative strain.
American elections transfer governing authority through a statutory and constitutional process requiring convergence of canvassing, certification, judicial review, and final recognition within fixed time limits….
Stage one is voter roll disruption before the election. The SAVE America Act forces all 211 million registered voters to re register in person with documentary proof of citizenship before November, generating mass eligibility disputes designed to overwhelm certification administrators at the moment deadlines permit no unresolved claims.
A parallel draft executive order carries identical provisions for unilateral imposition under a declared national emergency if the Senate fails to act. Trump confirmed the fallback, stating the requirements will govern the midterms whether approved by Congress or imposed by executive authority….
Trump signs executive order creating national voter list, restricting mail-in voting
[Associated Press, via Drop Site Daily: April 1, 2026
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday directing the Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration to create a national list of verified eligible voters and seeking to bar the U.S. Postal Service from sending absentee ballots to those not on state-approved lists. Voting law experts say the move unconstitutionally usurps states’ authority to run elections. Federal funding could be withheld from states that do not comply.
Nearly Two Dozen Democratic States Hit Trump With Elections Lawsuit
Finn Hartnett, April 3, 2026 [The New Republic]
Officials from 23 different states (and the District of Columbia) are taking Donald Trump to court over a brazenly unconstitutional executive order that looks to limit Americans’ voting rights.
The executive order, signed on Tuesday, banned the U.S. Postal Service from delivering mail-in ballots to anyone not on a preapproved list compiled by the USPS itself. Trump and his cronies like to claim mail-in voting is rife with fraud—despite a lack of evidence and the fact that the president likes to vote by mail himself. But the executive order’s solution to this is sketchy at best. Why, and how, does the USPS get to choose who can vote by mail?
Perhaps even more insidious is another section of the executive order, which calls on the federal government to compile its own list of voters in each state, which will then be sent to states 60 days before each federal election—presumably along with a bunch of threats that they better not find anyone who doesn’t match their list voting….
Letters from an American, March 31, 2026
Heather Cox Richardson, Apr 01, 2026
…Trump is ordering the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to work with the Social Security Administration to create a list of verified U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state. The order directs the U.S. Postal Service to send mail-in ballots only to voters on the list, and to mark each ballot with its own unique barcode. It threatens any states refusing to cooperate with the order with a loss of federal funding and directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate anyone wrongfully distributing mail-in ballots. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council notes that “there is no such thing as a federal list of citizens. It does not exist.”
“This is unconstitutional on its face,” election law expert David Becker told Yunior Rivas of Democracy Docket. “The Constitution clearly gives the president no power over elections….
State Dems must stop ICE from stealing the midterms
Cory Doctorow, March 31, 2026 [Pluralistic]
Writing for Jacobin, Eric Blanc points out that Democrats don’t have to sit by passively while Trump – who repeatedly promised that if you voted for him in 2024, “you won’t have to vote anymore” – steals an election:
https://jacobin.com/2026/03/ice-trump-election-theft-laws/
…On March 13, the New Mexico state legislature passed a law banning armed federal officials from showing their fascist asses anywhere within 50 feet of a polling place or ballot drop-box:
https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-prohibits-armed-agents-voting-sites/70729595
Other blue states like “California, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington” are contemplating similar laws.
It’s a start, but as Blanc says, what the fuck are the other blue statehouses waiting for? This is a white-hot, hair-on-fire emergency. There isn’t a moment to spare. This should be on the agenda for every union, at every demonstration, at every DSA and Democratic Club meeting. As Blanc says, if we wait until November to find out what Trump is going to do, it’ll be too late. The time to act is now.
Read More
