THE political landscape in the United Kingdom presents interesting and unprecedented times. Rishi Sunak, a conservative politician of South Asian pedigree, is the third prime minister in two months — a level of turbulence hitherto unseen in one of the oldest democracies in the world. More significant than the political revolving door, however, are the elements that forced Mr Sunak’s predecessor Liz Truss out of office, and which point to a deep malaise plaguing the entire modern world.

Mere weeks before resigning, Ms Truss announced a series of tax cuts to stimulate a British economy that had remained moribund for years. Contrary to the former prime minister’s intentions, this expansionary fiscal policy saw the pound sharply devalue against the dollar and sent financial markets into a frenzy. The Bank of England was forced to step in to rectify this ‘wayward course’, but the damage had been done. Ms Truss lost all credibility and, within 45 days — a record for a British prime minister — she had resigned.

The response to this stimulus package reveals the dichotomy modern societies must contend with. Politics and the ability to politically organise were always seen as the defining feature of humans. This is how thinkers like Rousseau and Hobbes envisaged society to evolve from its ‘natural, primordial state’, while for Plato and Aristotle, politics was the routine — a defining feature characterising the public space.

And yet, it was not individuals who were responsible for Ms Truss’s ignominious exit. This was triggered by unease in the market; a machination of invisible economic forces governed by their own laws and impervious to fallible human intervention that caused the downfall.

Capital and neoliberalism have distorted the very essence of politics.

This preponderance of the market and the utter absence of human agency is the single greatest takeaway from the UK’s political crisis, and the most significant political challenge confronting modern nation states. The transition of three prime ministers in such short a span raises fundamental questions about whom do modern political parties and governments represent?Whose voices does the ‘market’ carry, and are ‘jittery markets’ representative of the larger political mood and economic sentiment?

Answers to these questions will take us to the very foundations of modern economic thought. The present paradigm of the ‘market’ — an entity reified and brought to life — is peculiar to capitalism and its modern iteration: neoliberalism. According to thinkers such as Ellen Wood and David Harvey, this market has taken on a life form of its own and is powerful enough to shape individual psyches, behaviour and political outcomes.

As Michael Hudson argues, moreover, the market and the national economy are now dominated by the FIRE sector — finance, insurance and real estate — segments that do not form part of the productive economy and which are often dominated by a small minority.

Capital and neoliberalism have therefore distorted the very essence of politics. Instead of harking to the electorate and letting voters decide, governments rely on ‘market sentiments’ to determine who will be the chief executive of millions. As stated above, however, these market sentiments are usually dominated by a few major players and do not reflect larger popular opinion.

Modern politics is thus devoid of the agency or mobilisation that form the bedrock of historical definitions of the political. This points to another dangerous trend. Political discourse today shuns genuine issues the populace faces and focuses instead on topics the electorate cares little about. Look closely and you will observe similar trends in Pakistan, where mainstream political discourse continues to eschew climate change, the damage from floods and debilitating inflation and economic stagnation. Low voter turnouts the world over are yet another byproduct of this phenomenon.

The inability to exercise political rights or effectively shape political outcomes is also to a large degree responsible for the frustration that fuels movements such as Donald Trump’s. The unprecedented and horrendous attack on the Capitol by Donald Trump’s supporters is a physical manifestation of this and reflects the mistrust multitudes hold towards the political status quo. The popularity of certain parties in Pakistan too is contingent on this mistrust and frustration many Pakistanis feel.

Any analysis of political uncertainty in the UK or Pakistan, or anywhere else, will thus be incomplete without dissecting how economic forces such as the market and neoliberalism impact politics and societies. At the same time, we must become cognisant of and mitigate the myopic shape modern political discourse is taking — one that is altogether unrepresentative of popular sentiments. Only then can we avoid turmoil and chaos.

The writer is a civil servant and studied at Cornell University and at the University of Oxford.

Published in Dawn, November 19th, 2022