WHY POLITICS MATTER PART II
WHY POLITICS MATTER PART
II
i)
George Osborne is a man largely lacking in compassion and wholly lacking in empathy.[1] He tries to make up for what he lacks in more human qualities by what he imagines to be his acutely Machiavellian political skills. Thus we saw him carefully contrive a trap for the Labour party, using the poorest and most disadvantaged as bait. He would restrict benefit rises and by insisting on a vote would place Labour in the position of either supporting the move, and alienating the party faithful, or better still opposing the move and be portrayed as the party of ‘shirkers.’ There in a nutshell you have the moral character of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
George Osborne is a man largely lacking in compassion and wholly lacking in empathy.[1] He tries to make up for what he lacks in more human qualities by what he imagines to be his acutely Machiavellian political skills. Thus we saw him carefully contrive a trap for the Labour party, using the poorest and most disadvantaged as bait. He would restrict benefit rises and by insisting on a vote would place Labour in the position of either supporting the move, and alienating the party faithful, or better still opposing the move and be portrayed as the party of ‘shirkers.’ There in a nutshell you have the moral character of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
He does appear to have
misjudged the public mood somewhat as the Labour party identified that the
majority of people hit by his real terms cut were the working poor. As it
happens my own MP Malcolm Rifkind was on last week’s radio panel show Any Questions.
I had written to Rifkind, -who has been knighted for…well has been knighted, - protesting
the Chancellor’s nasty little speech in which he described shirkers on benefits
idling their lives away, hiding behind the curtains as the strivers made their
way to work in the cold dark mornings.[2]
I had received a letter in response oozing patrician sympathy, stating that he
would take up my concerns with the Chancellor; however on a public radio panel
his tone was wholly in accord with the Chancellor’s sentiments, going so far as
to joke, when his remarks were booed, that those heckling must therefore be
shirkers. I suppose protesting that a Tory politician lacks honour is a bit
like rebuking a whore for not knowing the meaning of propriety.
ii)
The government would have
you believe that its economic policy is driven by necessity, by the need for deficit
reduction and a desire to restore growth to the economy. “Ideology, what ideology,”
government spokesman respond, laughing of the very idea that these policies are
ideologically driven.
The reality is very different.
If the government was serious about keeping on top of the national debt, then
it would seriously tackle tax evasion by large corporations and tap into the
vast pool of idle wealth held by the top 5% of the population. Job security
would be increased to encourage a sense of security and longer term financial
planning by wage earners. If employment protection was matched by putting money
in the pockets of the less well of by penalising employers who rely on low pay
and providing incentives for those employers who pay a living wage, then those
at the lower end of the income spectrum, who tend to use additional spending
power, would spend much of this surplus going on to create more jobs in an ongoing
virtuous circle; in turn of course increasing the tax intake. The reason the
government does not take this course is purely ideological, since it would not
create the kind of society the government desire, that is a society with a
strong and confident working class increasingly able to assert its economic
strength.
‘The opposition posed
by this coalition of bosses and financiers is motivated by three factors.
First, they want as little government interference in the economy as possible;
second, they don't want the state expanding into new areas and so doing them
out of business. But the thing that really keeps the capitalists awake at nights
is the boost to workers' confidence that will be provided by a healthy jobs
market. They will demand more pay, better working conditions, perhaps even a
say in how their companies are run. Fully employed, well-paid Britons will have
more cash to buy things, so a healthy economy supported by the government is
better for corporate profits than a sick one. "But 'discipline in the
factories' and 'political stability' are more appreciated by the business
leaders than profits". Rather an insecure and cowed workforce than a
confident and boisterous one.’[3]
There is a scene in the
film Contact, based on a novel by Carl Sagan, starring Jodie Foster; when the
character, played by Foster, who has been cheated out of a lifetimes
opportunity, is informed by the man who has manipulated the situation to disbar
her from this opportunity, the dialogue goes as follows:-
“I suppose this all seems very unfair to you
Ellie, but I’m afraid that is just how life is.”
“Funny,” says Foster, “I
thought life was what we made it.”
***********************************************************
[1] There is a wonderfully
comic picture of The Chancellor at a Christmas party held at number 11 for
disadvantaged children, he has all the easy going charm of a curate in a
brothel with a poker stuffed up his rectum.
[2] This week alone people
working for HMV and Blockbusters began the week on Monday as ‘Strivers’ only to
end it as ‘shirkers.’ Whilst the Chancellor’s cuts were not restricted to out
of work benefits but also affected in work benefits, i.e. the working poor or ‘strivers.’
This effectively demolished the spurious vision created by Osborne and provided
a handhold for the counter attack against this vicious and mean spirited
coalition.
[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/14/deepening-mess-words-polish-economist?INTCMP=SRCH
Though in reality those running large corporations have also managed to do very
well for themselves.
Having visited this page I would be grateful for your feedback, either tick one of the boxes below or make a comment via the comments button.
