Decades of privatisation and its rhetoric have left us with a community that struggles to conceptualise its real collectivity.
It is correct to point out that the role of geographical community has been significantly weakened in the three decades of market fundamentalism. The last of the great working-class struggles, the miners strike 1984-85, grew out of an identification with community. Those communities are now fractured.
I will list here without comment what I regard as the major reasons for the diminution of geographical community in the age of market fundamentalism:
1. Geographical mobility (people moving from one location to another with little commitment to where they live)
2. Economic inequality (financial segregation of the working class with minimal shared existence.)
3. Stress through insecurity (flexible insecure work, with little time left to devote to the clubs and societies that comprise community.)
4. Altered consumer consumption patterns (from the public market to the private shopping mall, where trespass laws prevent any non-authorised meeting)
5. Break-down in family structures (Isolated individuals spending more time with self-maintenance than reaching out to others in the community)
6. De-homogenisation of culture (Immigration can enrich a local community, but it can also divide it)
New Labour in government (1997-2010) in its spin recognised the loss of community by creating the post of community secretary in the government. The main thrust, though, was to try to re-invent artificial, illiberal and undemocratic religious “communities” by co-opting right-wing clerics. Segregated education became the main tool of bringing this about. Of course, all this served to further break up secular geographical communities (e.g. the loss of local comprehensive school)
Showing posts with label British society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label British society. Show all posts
1 March 2018
1 December 2012
Incarceration & Punophilia in Britain
Britain has a blooming love affair with punishment
I can remember in 1977-78 delivering newspapers (mostly the Telegraph, Mail and Express) around leafy lanes in Surrey. One outraged headline demanded what was happening to Britain with the prison population exceeding 40 000. The 1970s, after all, were a time when class discontent was supposedly making Britain ungovernable and law and order was breaking down. Mrs Thatcher, then on the verge of office, was preaching authoritarianism and shock capitalist therapy.
Today, more than three decades later in a richer but more unequal Britain, government boasts a prison population of over 80 000, representing the highest incarceration rate in Europe. Maybe the dreck of society is always present, but the size of a country's lumpenproletariat and the proportion of it dumped into jails are determined by social and political factors.
Two factors stand out in explaining this. One is the increasing inequality in British society in which any sense of a community-of-equals is ebbing away, with the result that the shared public morals binding social behaviour have weakened, particularly so in the junk estates and inner cities.
The other, and perhaps related, factor is Britain’s current addiction to punophilia, the love of punishment: a person sent down for six months for stealing a bottle of water, or another receiving three months for making a sick joke on Facebook. Increasingly, imprisonment is used not as an unavoidable last resort, but to “send a message” by government and the judiciary grabbing a headline.
On a more positive note: if Britain imprisoned the same proportion of its population as the US there would 400 000 people rotting in Britain’s jails. But America aside, if you judge a country by the proportion of its population in jail – not a bad measure – then Britain performs very badly indeed.
I can remember in 1977-78 delivering newspapers (mostly the Telegraph, Mail and Express) around leafy lanes in Surrey. One outraged headline demanded what was happening to Britain with the prison population exceeding 40 000. The 1970s, after all, were a time when class discontent was supposedly making Britain ungovernable and law and order was breaking down. Mrs Thatcher, then on the verge of office, was preaching authoritarianism and shock capitalist therapy.
Today, more than three decades later in a richer but more unequal Britain, government boasts a prison population of over 80 000, representing the highest incarceration rate in Europe. Maybe the dreck of society is always present, but the size of a country's lumpenproletariat and the proportion of it dumped into jails are determined by social and political factors.
Two factors stand out in explaining this. One is the increasing inequality in British society in which any sense of a community-of-equals is ebbing away, with the result that the shared public morals binding social behaviour have weakened, particularly so in the junk estates and inner cities.
The other, and perhaps related, factor is Britain’s current addiction to punophilia, the love of punishment: a person sent down for six months for stealing a bottle of water, or another receiving three months for making a sick joke on Facebook. Increasingly, imprisonment is used not as an unavoidable last resort, but to “send a message” by government and the judiciary grabbing a headline.
On a more positive note: if Britain imprisoned the same proportion of its population as the US there would 400 000 people rotting in Britain’s jails. But America aside, if you judge a country by the proportion of its population in jail – not a bad measure – then Britain performs very badly indeed.
7 December 2010
Is the British state a threat to socialists?
To what extent could the British state become a threat to socialists? The simple answer is that I don’t know.
My rough guess would be this: the security apparatus monitors anybody who either in opinion or deed questions the existing power structure in Britain. Monitoring of the internet is ubiquitous; and no doubt all our names along with other details are logged.
Yet the number of people who roughly agree with what we say could be counted in the millions, but only very occasionally do they articulate their thoughts on the net or elsewhere. But that still leaves a few thousands of people who do comment or act regularly and who also urge others to do so. It is these people who are identified on security lists.
Britain, though, is not about to throw liberal democracy overboard wholesale and cull its left-wing critics, as per Indonesia 1965 or Chile 1973. Therefore, I see little personal danger. The only adverse consequence might occur in the unlikely event of anybody getting near a ‘sensitive’ position in the British state; they would be blacklisted immediately. I for one can live with that.
My rough guess would be this: the security apparatus monitors anybody who either in opinion or deed questions the existing power structure in Britain. Monitoring of the internet is ubiquitous; and no doubt all our names along with other details are logged.
Yet the number of people who roughly agree with what we say could be counted in the millions, but only very occasionally do they articulate their thoughts on the net or elsewhere. But that still leaves a few thousands of people who do comment or act regularly and who also urge others to do so. It is these people who are identified on security lists.
Britain, though, is not about to throw liberal democracy overboard wholesale and cull its left-wing critics, as per Indonesia 1965 or Chile 1973. Therefore, I see little personal danger. The only adverse consequence might occur in the unlikely event of anybody getting near a ‘sensitive’ position in the British state; they would be blacklisted immediately. I for one can live with that.
21 July 2010
social class: a reality
Walter argues that class politics is now outdated, and if we are to build a coalition for socialism it has based on something else. As evidence he points to the decline, especially outside the state sector, of trade union affiliation.
I don’t think this argument is wholly correct. It is certainly true that levels of political class consciousness have declined, but does that mean class itself is less of a social reality so socialists should ignore it? I think not.
Social class is a concomitant of the relations of production under capitalism. Economic and political structures affect classes in such a way as to bring about a variety of class divisions based primarily on income and wealth, but also on ethnic group, status, education, etc.
In the last three decades Thatcherism and then New Labour have overseen an increase in social inequalities of income and wealth so that Britain is now more unequal than at any time since the Second World War. In parallel social mobility (inter and intra-generational) has declined. It is thus wide of the mark to talk about the disappearance of social class; and if social classes are a reality they cannot be ignored in politics.
As of old, it remains the job of socialists to convince working people, as working people, of the injustices of the capitalist order so that they can become instruments of progressive social change
I don’t think this argument is wholly correct. It is certainly true that levels of political class consciousness have declined, but does that mean class itself is less of a social reality so socialists should ignore it? I think not.
Social class is a concomitant of the relations of production under capitalism. Economic and political structures affect classes in such a way as to bring about a variety of class divisions based primarily on income and wealth, but also on ethnic group, status, education, etc.
In the last three decades Thatcherism and then New Labour have overseen an increase in social inequalities of income and wealth so that Britain is now more unequal than at any time since the Second World War. In parallel social mobility (inter and intra-generational) has declined. It is thus wide of the mark to talk about the disappearance of social class; and if social classes are a reality they cannot be ignored in politics.
As of old, it remains the job of socialists to convince working people, as working people, of the injustices of the capitalist order so that they can become instruments of progressive social change
5 March 2009
Reduced social bonding in Britain
Opposition to the continuing reduction of all social and inter-personal bonds to legal relations seems to unite both the left and right in British politics.
Scratch beneath the surface, however, and you soon find very different thinking. For the right the enemy is the imposition of the so-called politically correct agenda against traditional British practices. For the left the issue is the insertion of repressive and capitalist relations into the community to frustrate solidarity.
The right and left may seem to coalesce on this issue, but only on the surface.
Scratch beneath the surface, however, and you soon find very different thinking. For the right the enemy is the imposition of the so-called politically correct agenda against traditional British practices. For the left the issue is the insertion of repressive and capitalist relations into the community to frustrate solidarity.
The right and left may seem to coalesce on this issue, but only on the surface.
Britain in Superlatives
Reading the papers it seems that Britain is chalking up a number of superlatives.
The most obvious, and the one that directly affects everyone, is the IMF forecast that of the G7 countries, Britain’s recession will be the deepest. Britain’s level of private debt, a key element in the current economic predicament, is the worst in the EU. So much for Britain being well placed to weather recession!
Britain’s debt-ridden system of unbridled capitalism, championed first by Thatcher and then perfected by New Labour, seems to have led the country to the edge of a social abyss – at least that is the picture thrown up by a whole raft of studies comparing Britain to its continental neighbours.
Social democracy is truly dead in Britain, if only because Britain is now under a Labour Government the most unequal society in the EU. British children according to another survey are the worst off in Britain: enjoying the least parental time, having the fewest rights and suffering the highest stress levels. British state pensions are the lowest when compared to average national earnings.
The wider society does not fare much better. In another study published a few weeks ago, I read that, if you exclude older people, the British were among the least likely to trust one another in Europe. Yet another study showed that Britain had the highest transient population (people moving rather than staying in any one location). The result is fractured communities and anomic men and women. As Margaret Thatcher said, ‘There is no such thing as society.’ Blair and Brown have realised her dream.
Then Britain spends more on policing than any other EU country; it has the largest prison population per head and has the most CCTV cameras at one for every fourteen individuals.
OK, Britain does not come out on the bottom in everything. It is not the poorest, does not have the most violent police – nor is it the most corrupt country in Europe. However even in these indicators Britain is slipping down the table rather than moving up.
It stinks. New Labour has failed and has done so spectacularly.
The most obvious, and the one that directly affects everyone, is the IMF forecast that of the G7 countries, Britain’s recession will be the deepest. Britain’s level of private debt, a key element in the current economic predicament, is the worst in the EU. So much for Britain being well placed to weather recession!
Britain’s debt-ridden system of unbridled capitalism, championed first by Thatcher and then perfected by New Labour, seems to have led the country to the edge of a social abyss – at least that is the picture thrown up by a whole raft of studies comparing Britain to its continental neighbours.
Social democracy is truly dead in Britain, if only because Britain is now under a Labour Government the most unequal society in the EU. British children according to another survey are the worst off in Britain: enjoying the least parental time, having the fewest rights and suffering the highest stress levels. British state pensions are the lowest when compared to average national earnings.
The wider society does not fare much better. In another study published a few weeks ago, I read that, if you exclude older people, the British were among the least likely to trust one another in Europe. Yet another study showed that Britain had the highest transient population (people moving rather than staying in any one location). The result is fractured communities and anomic men and women. As Margaret Thatcher said, ‘There is no such thing as society.’ Blair and Brown have realised her dream.
Then Britain spends more on policing than any other EU country; it has the largest prison population per head and has the most CCTV cameras at one for every fourteen individuals.
OK, Britain does not come out on the bottom in everything. It is not the poorest, does not have the most violent police – nor is it the most corrupt country in Europe. However even in these indicators Britain is slipping down the table rather than moving up.
It stinks. New Labour has failed and has done so spectacularly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)