Phil Swatton
@philswatton.bsky.social
Work as a senior data scientist at the Alan Turing Institute, background in political science. Views my own and not necessarily shared by my employer.
https://philswatton.github.io/
https://philswatton.github.io/
Think the difference possibly is that Johnson and Starmer were both weak by the time of these scandals -- Blair by contrast was not?
February 9, 2026 at 8:56 PM
Think the difference possibly is that Johnson and Starmer were both weak by the time of these scandals -- Blair by contrast was not?
I have in mind something like the below paper w/ this. The same paper notes as you do that he was all for technocratic social engineering by established civil servants. (2/2)
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Fear and Freedom - Jan-Werner Müller, 2008
This article identifies a distinct strand of 20th-century liberal thought that was exemplified by Isaiah Berlin, Raymond Aron and, to a lesser extent, Karl Popp...
journals.sagepub.com
February 8, 2026 at 5:20 PM
I have in mind something like the below paper w/ this. The same paper notes as you do that he was all for technocratic social engineering by established civil servants. (2/2)
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Very fair note (dangers of tweeting based on very loose notes). By 'reacts against Red Vienna' I mean that he was anti-Marxist based on an epistemology of political knowledge which had overlaps w/ the Austrian economists. (1/2)
February 8, 2026 at 5:20 PM
Very fair note (dangers of tweeting based on very loose notes). By 'reacts against Red Vienna' I mean that he was anti-Marxist based on an epistemology of political knowledge which had overlaps w/ the Austrian economists. (1/2)
I wish I'd known it when I visited Vienna! But yes, I think so, or at least that's the perspective of the book.
February 8, 2026 at 2:18 PM
I wish I'd known it when I visited Vienna! But yes, I think so, or at least that's the perspective of the book.
Of course: the decline of faith in planning happened for a reason. But I think @himself.bsky.social's musings in this post on Scott on how ML may be able to encode tacit knowledge (similar to points you made) are the beginnings of a response to that:
www.programmablemutter.com/p/high-moder...
www.programmablemutter.com/p/high-moder...
February 8, 2026 at 2:11 PM
Of course: the decline of faith in planning happened for a reason. But I think @himself.bsky.social's musings in this post on Scott on how ML may be able to encode tacit knowledge (similar to points you made) are the beginnings of a response to that:
www.programmablemutter.com/p/high-moder...
www.programmablemutter.com/p/high-moder...
Or see James C Scott, who was of the left but very sceptical of what he called 'high modernism' of the kind Red Vienna embodied, and also bucked the trend towards quantitative method:
dissentmagazine.org/online_artic...
dissentmagazine.org/online_artic...
February 8, 2026 at 2:11 PM
Or see James C Scott, who was of the left but very sceptical of what he called 'high modernism' of the kind Red Vienna embodied, and also bucked the trend towards quantitative method:
dissentmagazine.org/online_artic...
dissentmagazine.org/online_artic...
While I think of it, lots of examples of scepticism in planning being combined w/ scepticism in method. E.g. Isaiah Berlin was sceptical of scientific method in the humanities (some notes: philswatton.github.io/2025/06/18/i...), was also v. opposed to state planning.
Isaiah Berlin on the Scientific Method in History
philswatton.github.io
February 8, 2026 at 2:11 PM
While I think of it, lots of examples of scepticism in planning being combined w/ scepticism in method. E.g. Isaiah Berlin was sceptical of scientific method in the humanities (some notes: philswatton.github.io/2025/06/18/i...), was also v. opposed to state planning.
Hope all of that makes sense! The book is not just about these things, but it covers them and is highly recommended
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Hope all of that makes sense! The book is not just about these things, but it covers them and is highly recommended
The Austrian school by contrast always rejected planning: their economic perspective is partly based in the rejection of scientific method in economics and in social planning. And I suppose you could say that disenchantment with the state in the post-68 left comes from disillusionment w/ planning
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
The Austrian school by contrast always rejected planning: their economic perspective is partly based in the rejection of scientific method in economics and in social planning. And I suppose you could say that disenchantment with the state in the post-68 left comes from disillusionment w/ planning
So to explain what I was trying to say: the Austromarxists/Red Vienna/Vienna school are a clear example of the pre-68 left you refer to in their faith in scientific planning and organisation.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
So to explain what I was trying to say: the Austromarxists/Red Vienna/Vienna school are a clear example of the pre-68 left you refer to in their faith in scientific planning and organisation.
According to Cockett, the post-68 New Left also adopts these critiques of scientism and planning, but eventually dovetails with rise of libertarianism.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
According to Cockett, the post-68 New Left also adopts these critiques of scientism and planning, but eventually dovetails with rise of libertarianism.
Popper also reacts against Red Vienna, albeit does not share Hayek's economic or political outlook.
The Austrian school gets the last laugh, as it is eventually (via e.g. the Mont Perelin society) highly influential.
The Austrian school gets the last laugh, as it is eventually (via e.g. the Mont Perelin society) highly influential.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Popper also reacts against Red Vienna, albeit does not share Hayek's economic or political outlook.
The Austrian school gets the last laugh, as it is eventually (via e.g. the Mont Perelin society) highly influential.
The Austrian school gets the last laugh, as it is eventually (via e.g. the Mont Perelin society) highly influential.
Hayek regards Neurath as an intellectual rival, explicitly critiques his positivsm and what Hayek views as his 'scientism'. He critiques the application of the methods of the natural sciences (i.e. quantitative methods) where they don't belong (i.e. planning of society, economics).
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Hayek regards Neurath as an intellectual rival, explicitly critiques his positivsm and what Hayek views as his 'scientism'. He critiques the application of the methods of the natural sciences (i.e. quantitative methods) where they don't belong (i.e. planning of society, economics).
In particular, the economists of the Austrian school (esp. Hayek, Schumpeter, von Mises) are explicitly reacting against Red Vienna.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
In particular, the economists of the Austrian school (esp. Hayek, Schumpeter, von Mises) are explicitly reacting against Red Vienna.
According to Cockett, the emphasis on scientific method and empirics had a long afterlife in Viennese influence across many fields, including psychoanalysis, sociology, marketing, management science, and architecture. But it also has another afterlife in the political reaction against it.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
According to Cockett, the emphasis on scientific method and empirics had a long afterlife in Viennese influence across many fields, including psychoanalysis, sociology, marketing, management science, and architecture. But it also has another afterlife in the political reaction against it.
Many of the members of the circle understood their opposition to metaphysics in explicitly political terms, and as a reaction against the increasing turn to the far right in Austria and elsewhere (e.g. introductory remarks here: plato.stanford.edu/entries/vien...)
Vienna Circle (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
plato.stanford.edu
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Many of the members of the circle understood their opposition to metaphysics in explicitly political terms, and as a reaction against the increasing turn to the far right in Austria and elsewhere (e.g. introductory remarks here: plato.stanford.edu/entries/vien...)
They argued that statements are only meaningful if they are empirically verifiable or are a tautology. Given the overlap w/ Red Vienna, this isn't separable from their politics. The scientific method and the planned management of society are in, metaphysics is out.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
They argued that statements are only meaningful if they are empirically verifiable or are a tautology. Given the overlap w/ Red Vienna, this isn't separable from their politics. The scientific method and the planned management of society are in, metaphysics is out.
Part of this scene was the Vienna Circle, the group of philosophers who advocated for logical positivsm - which I can't meaningfully summarise even when I don't have a character limit. Suffice to say: this included many socialists like Neurath and Carnap, and some non-socialists like Gödel.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
Part of this scene was the Vienna Circle, the group of philosophers who advocated for logical positivsm - which I can't meaningfully summarise even when I don't have a character limit. Suffice to say: this included many socialists like Neurath and Carnap, and some non-socialists like Gödel.
In Red Vienna, the Austro-Marxists (as they are known) sought to transform society according to scientific principles. There was substantial overlap between their membership and the academic and intellectual scene in Vienna.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
In Red Vienna, the Austro-Marxists (as they are known) sought to transform society according to scientific principles. There was substantial overlap between their membership and the academic and intellectual scene in Vienna.
So a somewhat long response based largely on the notes I took from said Cockett's book (yalebooks.co.uk/book/9780300...), but:
In 1919, the Social Democratic Worker's Party wins control of Vienna. It doesn't lose this control until around 1934 when Austrian democracy's demise fully begun.
In 1919, the Social Democratic Worker's Party wins control of Vienna. It doesn't lose this control until around 1934 when Austrian democracy's demise fully begun.
February 8, 2026 at 1:48 PM
So a somewhat long response based largely on the notes I took from said Cockett's book (yalebooks.co.uk/book/9780300...), but:
In 1919, the Social Democratic Worker's Party wins control of Vienna. It doesn't lose this control until around 1934 when Austrian democracy's demise fully begun.
In 1919, the Social Democratic Worker's Party wins control of Vienna. It doesn't lose this control until around 1934 when Austrian democracy's demise fully begun.
It's an interesting distinction for sure. That part reminded me of some bits in 'Vienna' by Richard Cockett, on the embrace of planning by figures like Neurath and the subsequent hostility to quantitative methods among the Austrian economists (which I suppose is a good example of pre-68)
February 8, 2026 at 11:06 AM
It's an interesting distinction for sure. That part reminded me of some bits in 'Vienna' by Richard Cockett, on the embrace of planning by figures like Neurath and the subsequent hostility to quantitative methods among the Austrian economists (which I suppose is a good example of pre-68)