So we were discussing confusion about politics today, and for once I managed to get some sense out of my companion.
As he quite rightly pointed out, people are considerably more savvy than they used to be, particularly on the details of what is right and wrong in relation to themselves. So, we might say that self interest has awakened some political awareness.
This does not fit with what is actually happening however. What is actually happening is that people who have managed to get a little something, whether that is minor status, a basic living, a small house or whatever, frantically vote in a self interested way to keep what they have. They are so terrified of losing their tiny something that they fear other people having anything.
By far the most intelligent and politically aware period in my family’s conversational history was the period at which people were at their poorest, the 1930s. My rabid Tory grandmother worked night and day to feed her two small children, (her husband died when my mother was seven, which was very disturbing for them by all accounts) buy herself a house and feed the poor neighbours.
On my father’s side, we had a couple of generations of highly intelligent and rather gobby communists. My father was the black sheep of a large sprawling network of formerly religious political fanatics who did not like it at all when he obsessed over work and became successful. Some members of the family stuck around, and he spent what spare time he had helping them for several years, which appears to have caused an unfortunate reaction with my siblings. He made his choices and did not discuss them with anybody, including my mother as it turned out, who was very shocked when I passed on what little I knew about my father.
So, by and large, political discussion between my parents was between a more acceptable form of hard working socialism and military conservatism. My father’s ideology was very heartfelt, however by sixteen or so I knew I did not entirely agree with him. Had I the same experience of war as both of my parents, I might feel differently of course, but as with anarchism, pacifism does not take the fact that people are not very nice into account.
So, when I look at political ideology these days I see structure, I see monoliths with cracks, graffiti etc., and I see the wounds and rotting flesh over the bones. I see the engine and I see the car shape. I do not see things the way other people see them at all. Politics is circuitous, and when you examine far right and far left, you are quite surprised at how much these ideologies have in common.
The vast majority of people, including people in power of whatever persuasion see politics as something directly pertaining to them personally and are dutifully offended by disagreement. This prevents healthy discussion.
It is important to realise that as with religion, you are actually just using convenient labels to express self-interest. In the case of the less powerful, this self-interest is expressed by a group, and in the case of the more powerful, the self interest is expressed by a form of enlightened corruption – that is to say a ‘might is right’ mentality that takes little to no account of weakness or dignified poverty.
The latter is what we have currently presented to us as conservatism in this country. This is for several reasons:
Latterly, we seem to have a crop of young Etonian bucks who are determined not to seem Thatcherite, even when the alternative is basically wrong for most of the population.
A great example of this is Cameron and Osborne, who pranced through parliament like school prefects, openly lied (Osborne) made really poor strategic decisions (Cameron) and attempted to cover all this up by using substandard PR companies who made very bad decisions – Cameron’s bloky paternalism was quite sickening and not entirely his character. I have met Cameron, and whilst he is a bit like an over friendly accountant he isn’t the character he portrayed as a Prime Minister. (they appear to be trying to repeat this model with my beloved Boris, but we shall see if I can gently talk him out of this without actually interfering as it is crushing his tutu somewhat)
Another example of bad PR was Theresa May’s strong and stable ranting. This demonstrates that the thinking at the top has been that the vast majority of the population have the thinking skills of a hamster. (they are at least partially right) They appeared to be attempting to market her as a Girl Guide leader and sensible Matron figure. In the absence of charisma this may have seemed a sensible decision, but it did not present well at all in combination with the shitty speech writing.
What I can see from this period is that the internal philosophy is weak at present. The wounds in the flesh are exposing the damage to the structural thinking. The structural thinking, therefore, is what I seek to resolve.
We also have a bit of an issue with inspiration. Churchill is not a good example to follow. We are not likely to be repeating an era of colonialism in the same form and I do not forsee ground wars as regaining popularity. Countries are far more likely to reduce populations by biochemical and policy making means. Unless we find a reason for defensive ground troops, used with considerable economy, you aren’t going to find huge support for generating wars in the name of Merrie Engerland.
What do I mean by this? Well the reason we pay for big giant weapons is so that we do not have to actually use the small ones. Conflicts involving big giant weapons do not involve the same loss of life as conflicts with little tiny ones, hence actual warfare is, touch wood, never going to be quite as useful a tool for mastering the economy. No, what you have to do with any issues of population reduction is foster individualism and contempt for others, a cultural shift that is enjoying some success at present but it isn’t actually all that good for productivity, motivation or happiness.
So, assuming that a desirable outcome is a happy and unified country, what you ought to be shooting for is inclusivity, social mobility, (whether that is up or down) high levels of happiness, hence motivation, and a sense of collective purpose without the need for war.
My proposed solution to this, which I touched on several years ago, is a form of neo-colonial economic expansionism. In our current situation, this has to come from ground level up, not the other way around. There are several ways of expressing and implementing this, all of which require a different kind of management than I am seeing much evidence of.
We are in a relatively good position at present to create an economy which makes it far easier for people to acquire marketable skills, move into employment and push the entire economy up a notch. The focus ought to be on manufacturing, tourism and, for the sake of foreign currency, online activity at micro level (I am personally involved with this at the moment.)
I have no idea who is attempting to formulate strategy at the moment, nor do I particularly care, but sticking to a ‘fill your pockets boys’ mentality WILL NOT DO for very long under the current circumstances, and you will require altruism that no longer appears to exist to recover.
I would suggest that we discuss this further rather than messing about waiting for me to be bothered writing blog posts.
