Sunday, 6 July 2014
The Great Money Trick
Robert Tressel (Robert Noonan) wrote the Ragged Trousered Philanthoprist in 1910. The main themes remain relevant today. In one chapter Tressel explains how the landlord and capitalist class create and maintain their wealth (or you could read Thomas Piketty's extremely long book).
“'Money is the cause of poverty because it is the device by which those who are too lazy to work are enabled to rob the workers of the fruits of their labours.'
'Prove it,' said Crass.
Owen slowly folded up the piece of newspaper he had been reading and put it into his pocket.
'All right,' he replied. 'I'll show you how the Great Money Trick is worked.'
Owen opened his dinner basket and took from it two slices of bread but as these were not sufficient, he requested that anyone who had some bread left would give it to him. They gave him several pieces, which he placed in a heap on a clean piece of paper, and, having borrowed the pocket knives they used to cut and eat their dinners with from Easton, Harlow and Philpot, he addressed them as follows:
'These pieces of bread represent the raw materials which exist naturally in and on the earth for the use of mankind; they were not made by any human being, but were created by the Great Spirit for the benefit and sustenance of all, the same as were the air and the light of the sun.'
'You're about as fair-speakin' a man as I've met for some time,' said Harlow, winking at the others.
'Yes, mate,' said Philpot. 'Anyone would agree to that much! It's as clear as mud.'
'Now,' continued Owen, 'I am a capitalist; or, rather, I represent the landlord and capitalist class. That is to say, all these raw materials belong to me. It does not matter for our present argument how I obtained possession of them, or whether I have any real right to them; the only thing that matters now is the admitted fact that all the raw materials which are necessary for the production of the necessaries of life are now the property of the Landlord and Capitalist class. I am that class: all these raw materials belong to me.'
'Good enough!' agreed Philpot.
'Now you three represent the Working class: you have nothing--and for my part, although I have all these raw materials, they are of no use to me--what I need is--the things that can be made out of these raw materials by Work: but as I am too lazy to work myself, I have invented the Money Trick to make you work FOR me. But first I must explain that I possess something else beside the raw materials. These three knives represent--all the machinery of production; the factories, tools, railways, and so forth, without which the necessaries of life cannot be produced in abundance. And these three coins'--taking three halfpennies from his pocket--'represent my Money Capital.'
'But before we go any further,' said Owen, interrupting himself, 'it is most important that you remember that I am not supposed to be merely "a" capitalist. I represent the whole Capitalist Class. You are not supposed to be just three workers--you represent the whole Working Class.'
'All right, all right,' said Crass, impatiently, 'we all understand that. Git on with it.'
Owen proceeded to cut up one of the slices of bread into a number of little square blocks.
'These represent the things which are produced by labour, aided by machinery, from the raw materials. We will suppose that three of these blocks represent--a week's work. We will suppose that a week's work is worth--one pound: and we will suppose that each of these ha'pennies is a sovereign. We'd be able to do the trick better if we had real sovereigns, but I forgot to bring any with me.'
'I'd lend you some,' said Philpot, regretfully, 'but I left me purse on our grand pianner.'
As by a strange coincidence nobody happened to have any gold with them, it was decided to make shift with the halfpence.
'Now this is the way the trick works--'
'Before you goes on with it,' interrupted Philpot, apprehensively, 'don't you think we'd better 'ave someone to keep watch at the gate in case a Slop comes along? We don't want to get runned in, you know.'
'I don't think there's any need for that,' replied Owen, 'there's only one slop who'd interfere with us for playing this game, and that's Police Constable Socialism.'
'Never mind about Socialism,' said Crass, irritably. 'Get along with the bloody trick.'
Owen now addressed himself to the working classes as represented by Philpot, Harlow and Easton.
'You say that you are all in need of employment, and as I am the kind-hearted capitalist class I am going to invest all my money in various industries, so as to give you Plenty of Work. I shall pay each of you one pound per week, and a week's work is--you must each produce three of these square blocks. For doing this work you will each receive your wages; the money will be your own, to do as you like with, and the things you produce will of course be mine, to do as I like with. You will each take one of these machines and as soon as you have done a week's work, you shall have your money.'
The Working Classes accordingly set to work, and the Capitalist class sat down and watched them. As soon as they had finished, they passed the nine little blocks to Owen, who placed them on a piece of paper by his side and paid the workers their wages.
'These blocks represent the necessaries of life. You can't live without some of these things, but as they belong to me, you will have to buy them from me: my price for these blocks is--one pound each.'
As the working classes were in need of the necessaries of life and as they could not eat, drink or wear the useless money, they were compelled to agree to the kind Capitalist's terms. They each bought back and at once consumed one-third of the produce of their labour. The capitalist class also devoured two of the square blocks, and so the net result of the week's work was that the kind capitalist had consumed two pounds worth of the things produced by the labour of the others, and reckoning the squares at their market value of one pound each, he had more than doubled his capital, for he still possessed the three pounds in money and in addition four pounds worth of goods. As for the working classes, Philpot, Harlow and Easton, having each consumed the pound's worth of necessaries they had bought with their wages, they were again in precisely the same condition as when they started work--they had nothing.
This process was repeated several times: for each week's work the producers were paid their wages. They kept on working and spending all their earnings. The kind-hearted capitalist consumed twice as much as any one of them and his pile of wealth continually increased. In a little while--reckoning the little squares at their market value of one pound each--he was worth about one hundred pounds, and the working classes were still in the same condition as when they began, and were still tearing into their work as if their lives depended upon it.
After a while the rest of the crowd began to laugh, and their merriment increased when the kind-hearted capitalist, just after having sold a pound's worth of necessaries to each of his workers, suddenly took their tools--the Machinery of Production--the knives away from them, and informed them that as owing to Over Production all his store-houses were glutted with the necessaries of life, he had decided to close down the works.
'Well, and wot the bloody 'ell are we to do now?' demanded Philpot.
'That's not my business,' replied the kind-hearted capitalist. 'I've paid you your wages, and provided you with Plenty of Work for a long time past. I have no more work for you to do at present. Come round again in a few months' time and I'll see what I can do for you.'
'But what about the necessaries of life?' demanded Harlow. 'We must have something to eat.'
'Of course you must,' replied the capitalist, affably; 'and I shall be very pleased to sell you some.'
'But we ain't got no bloody money!'
'Well, you can't expect me to give you my goods for nothing! You didn't work for me for nothing, you know. I paid you for your work and you should have saved something: you should have been thrifty like me. Look how I have got on by being thrifty!'
The unemployed looked blankly at each other, but the rest of the crowd only laughed; and then the three unemployed began to abuse the kind-hearted Capitalist, demanding that he should give them some of the necessaries of life that he had piled up in his warehouses, or to be allowed to work and produce some more for their own needs; and even threatened to take some of the things by force if he did not comply with their demands. But the kind-hearted Capitalist told them not to be insolent, and spoke to them about honesty, and said if they were not careful he would have their faces battered in for them by the police, or if necessary he would call out the military and have them shot down like dogs, the same as he had done before at Featherstone and Belfast.
'Of course,' continued the kind-hearted capitalist, 'if it were not for foreign competition I should be able to sell these things that you have made, and then I should be able to give you Plenty of Work again: but until I have sold them to somebody or other, or until I have used them myself, you will have to remain idle.'
'Well, this takes the bloody biskit, don't it?' said Harlow.
'The only thing as I can see for it,' said Philpot mournfully, 'is to 'ave a unemployed procession.'
'That's the idear,' said Harlow, and the three began to march about the room in Indian file, singing:
'We've got no work to do-oo-oo'
We've got no work to do-oo-oo!
Just because we've been workin' a dam sight too hard,
Now we've got no work to do.'
As they marched round, the crowd jeered at them and made offensive remarks.
Crass said that anyone could see that they were a lot of lazy, drunken loafers
who had never done a fair day's work in their lives and never intended to. We've got no work to do-oo-oo!
Just because we've been workin' a dam sight too hard,
Now we've got no work to do.'
'We shan't never get nothing like this, you know,' said Philpot. 'Let's try the religious dodge.'
'All right,' agreed Harlow. 'What shall we give 'em?'
'I know!' cried Philpot after a moment's deliberation. '"Let my lower lights be burning." That always makes 'em part up.'
The three unemployed accordingly resumed their march round the room, singing mournfully and imitating the usual whine of street-singers:
'Trim your fee-bil lamp me brither-in,
Some poor sail-er tempest torst,
Strugglin' 'ard to save the 'arb-er,
Hin the dark-niss may be lorst,
So let try lower lights be burning,
Send 'er gleam acrost the wave,
Some poor shipwrecked, struggling seaman,
You may rescue, you may save.'
'Kind frens,' said Philpot, removing his cap and addressing the crowd,
'we're hall honest British workin' men, but we've been hout of work for the
last twenty years on account of foreign competition and over-production. We
don't come hout 'ere because we're too lazy to work; it's because we can't get
a job. If it wasn't for foreign competition, the kind'earted Hinglish
capitalists would be able to sell their goods and give us Plenty of Work, and
if they could, I assure you that we should hall be perfectly willing and
contented to go on workin' our bloody guts out for the benefit of our masters
for the rest of our lives. We're quite willin' to work: that's hall we arst
for--Plenty of Work--but as we can't get it we're forced to come out 'ere and
arst you to spare a few coppers towards a crust of bread and a night's
lodgin'.' Some poor sail-er tempest torst,
Strugglin' 'ard to save the 'arb-er,
Hin the dark-niss may be lorst,
So let try lower lights be burning,
Send 'er gleam acrost the wave,
Some poor shipwrecked, struggling seaman,
You may rescue, you may save.'
As Philpot held out his cap for subscriptions, some of them attempted to expectorate into it, but the more charitable put in pieces of cinder or dirt from the floor, and the kind-hearted capitalist was so affected by the sight of their misery that he gave them one of the sovereigns he had in us pocket: but as this was of no use to them they immediately returned it to him in exchange for one of the small squares of the necessaries of life, which they divided and greedily devoured. And when they had finished eating they gathered round the philanthropist and sang, 'For he's a jolly good fellow,' and afterwards Harlow suggested that they should ask him if he would allow them to elect him to Parliament"
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists by Robert Tressell
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3608
the Battle for Life - also known as "The Global Race"
“Happiness might be possible if everyone were unselfish; if everyone thought of the welfare of his neighbour before thinking of his own. But as there is only a very small percentage of such unselfish people in the world, the present system has made the earth into a sort of hell. Under the present system there is not sufficient of anything for everyone to have enough. Consequently there is a fight--called by Christians the 'Battle of Life'. In this fight some get more than they need, some barely enough, some very little, and some none at all. The more aggressive, cunning, unfeeling and selfish you are the better it will be for you. As long as this 'Battle of Life' System endures, we have no right to blame other people for doing the same things that we are ourselves compelled to do. Blame the system.
But that IS just what the hands did not do. They blamed each other; they blamed Crass, and Hunter, and Rushton, but with the Great System of which they were all more or less the victims they were quite content, being persuaded that it was the only one possible and the best that human wisdom could devise. The reason why they all believed this was because not one of them had ever troubled to inquire whether it would not be possible to order things differently. They were content with the present system. If they had not been content they would have been anxious to find some way to alter it. But they had never taken the trouble to seriously inquire whether it was possible to find some better way, and although they all knew in a hazy fashion that other methods of managing the affairs of the world had already been proposed, they neglected to inquire whether these other methods were possible or practicable, and they were ready and willing to oppose with ignorant ridicule or brutal force any man who was foolish or quixotic enough to try to explain to them the details of what he thought was a better way. They accepted the present system in the same way as they accepted the alternating seasons. They knew that there was spring and summer and autumn and winter. As to how these different seasons came to be, or what caused them, they hadn't the remotest notion, and it is extremely doubtful whether the question had ever occurred to any of them: but there is no doubt whatever about the fact that none of them knew. From their infancy they had been trained to distrust their own intelligence, and to leave the management of the affairs of the world--and for that matter of the next world too--to their betters; and now most of them were absolutely incapable of thinking of any abstract subject whatever. Nearly all their betters--that is, the people who do nothing--were unanimous in agreeing that the present system is a very good one and that it is impossible to alter or improve it. Therefore Crass and his mates, although they knew nothing whatever about it themselves, accepted it as an established, incontrovertible fact that the existing state of things is immutable. They believed it because someone else told them so. They would have believed anything: on one condition--namely, that they were told to believe it by their betters. They said it was surely not for the Like of Them to think that they knew better than those who were more educated and had plenty of time to study"
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, by Robert Tressell
Available free on Project Gutenberg http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/3608
Still think that the Tories know best?
Monday, 27 January 2014
Deep Freedom: John Mellencamp - Freedom Road
My recent post includes several references to speeches by Roberto Unger on the concept of Deep Freedom. In an essay for IPPR Unger defines this concept as:
" In opposition to the political ideas that have most recently guided ideological controversy around the world, but similarly to those that used to influence such debate in the 19th century, deep freedom combines a devotion to the empowerment of the ordinary person – a raising up of ordinary life to a higher plane of intensity, scope and capability – with a disposition to reshape the institutional arrangements of society in the service of such empowerment. In the design of social, economic and democratic institutions, deep freedom has priority over any form of equality of circumstance. Equality of opportunity is a fragmentary aspect of deep freedom."
The converse of deep freedom is of course shallow freedom. I think that these are easier to define, becaouse to most of us they are more tangible. Shallow freedoms are those granted to wage-slaves to give them the impression of choice; the illusion of autonomy. John Mellencamp gives a very incisive depiction of this in his song Freedom's Road.
The obstructions that we find along our journey along Freedom's Road are the same institutional obstructions that prevent people from really being free. Many people are obliged to take poorly paying jobs just to pay the rent or pay for expensive food. They are wage slaves earning a fraction of the value that their work produces and paying a fortune in housing that ultimately will only further enrich the corporate banks.
John Mellencamp - Freedom's Road, 2007.
I'm navigating my way down Freedom's Road
Trying to make my way back home
I got my foot to the floor
But she must need bleeding
This car just don't want to roll
Freedom's Road must be under construction
Sometimes you wonder what kind of freedom they're talking
If you're here looking for the devil
You'll find him on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
Sometimes there's rape sometimes there'll be murder
Sometimes just darkness everywhere
No passing signs and barbed wire fences
Misinformation but no one cares
Freedom's Road can get narrow
No one wants to know you
If there's no pork in your barrel
If you're here looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
You can drop your bombs
You can beat the people senseless
But that won't get you anywhere
Hide your agendas behind public consensus
And say that this world just ain't fair
Freedom's Road is a promise to the people
You'll never fool us now
With all your lying and cheating
If you're here wanting a crown in heaven
It's out there on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
" In opposition to the political ideas that have most recently guided ideological controversy around the world, but similarly to those that used to influence such debate in the 19th century, deep freedom combines a devotion to the empowerment of the ordinary person – a raising up of ordinary life to a higher plane of intensity, scope and capability – with a disposition to reshape the institutional arrangements of society in the service of such empowerment. In the design of social, economic and democratic institutions, deep freedom has priority over any form of equality of circumstance. Equality of opportunity is a fragmentary aspect of deep freedom."
The converse of deep freedom is of course shallow freedom. I think that these are easier to define, becaouse to most of us they are more tangible. Shallow freedoms are those granted to wage-slaves to give them the impression of choice; the illusion of autonomy. John Mellencamp gives a very incisive depiction of this in his song Freedom's Road.
The obstructions that we find along our journey along Freedom's Road are the same institutional obstructions that prevent people from really being free. Many people are obliged to take poorly paying jobs just to pay the rent or pay for expensive food. They are wage slaves earning a fraction of the value that their work produces and paying a fortune in housing that ultimately will only further enrich the corporate banks.
John Mellencamp - Freedom's Road, 2007.
I'm navigating my way down Freedom's Road
Trying to make my way back home
I got my foot to the floor
But she must need bleeding
This car just don't want to roll
Freedom's Road must be under construction
Sometimes you wonder what kind of freedom they're talking
If you're here looking for the devil
You'll find him on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
Sometimes there's rape sometimes there'll be murder
Sometimes just darkness everywhere
No passing signs and barbed wire fences
Misinformation but no one cares
Freedom's Road can get narrow
No one wants to know you
If there's no pork in your barrel
If you're here looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
You can drop your bombs
You can beat the people senseless
But that won't get you anywhere
Hide your agendas behind public consensus
And say that this world just ain't fair
Freedom's Road is a promise to the people
You'll never fool us now
With all your lying and cheating
If you're here wanting a crown in heaven
It's out there on Freedom's Road
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you want to take a ride
Well you've got to pay the toll
Freedom's Road, Freedom's Road
If you're looking for the devil
He's out there on Freedom's Road
Inequality, Ed Miliband and Deep Freedom
This piece was first posted on Labour Uncut on 24th January 2014 (Heading by website editor)
With Ed Miliband’s recent talk of rebuilding the middle class and his previous rhetoric of the squeezed middle are we now seeing a resurgence of class consciousness? Or is Ed just focusing on familiar words to cloak his lack of credible policies? I sincerely hope it is the former. The problem with the concept of class is that because the labour market is now so diverse it can be difficult for people to identify what class they are. Perhaps, therefore, we should just recognise that there are broadly only two classes of people; the ‘power elite’ and the rest of us.
I can understand why people may want to cling to the notion that there is a hierarchy of socio-economic divisions that we can climb up if we only work hard enough. People have evolved to compete for resources and societies have long been predicated on prestige and social position. But surely we must now recognise that the division between the elite and the rest is so entrenched that it will take more than a bit of pluck and a protestant work ethic to break the stranglehold of inequality. Will Hutton has written that he thinks that Ed Miliband’s “cost of living” crisis is a sideways route into opening up an argument over inequality and I hope that he is right.
Enabling effective change will not be easy; there are many vested interested who will oppose a recalibration of the way that our economy works. The obvious attack on Miliband’s ambition is to decry it as statist and anti-business. Fraser Nelson writes in the Telegraph that a Labour government implementing this agenda would result in “companies refusing to invest, and wealth-creators leaving”. This argument ignores the fact that the notion of state vs. business is a false choice; neither can this choice be defined as socialism vs. capitalism. Instead it should be defined as shallow versus deep freedom.
Steve Davies from the Institute for Economic Affairs (on Radio 4’s The Longview) agrees that the cost of living is a real problem for those on low wages; in particular the cost of housing. But he also states that workers must increase their productivity to improve their wage-earning capacity, as if low wages are their fault for not working hard enough. Solving the problem of the cost of living will still leave people dependant on increasingly precarious employment.
A leader in The Economist recently made a very good case for the importance of skills and education in combating this phenomenon and why we should invest more in pre-school and adult learning. But also admits that this will still result in some people relying on a benevolent state to provide subsistence. These actions may mitigate the worst aspects of poverty but they will not ameliorate the effects of inequality. Some inequality is an inevitable by-product of an organised society, but extreme levels of inequality are bad for everybody.
Those who would seek to maintain the status quo will offer a risible rise in wages and will continue to provide state-sponsored subsistence to bribe the voters. They will provide schemes to maintain the majority in machine-like jobs and will present mortgage debt as an aspiration for all. They will not attempt to increase opportunity and autonomy because to do so would threaten the interests of those who wield political influence. For them freedom means less regulation and redistribution. It means the absence of state interference in the business of multiplying wealth.
These political schemes of varying complexity and success may lead to some future prosperity and may guarantee future jobs, but the majority of individuals will still have very little influence on their personal future. People will still be bound to the will and caprice of employers. The majority of people will still subsist on wages that represent a small proportion of the value that their employment creates and the cost of living will continue to rise as the banks and other vested interests maintain the high cost of housing.
To challenge the system of inequality it is necessary to implement radical change to bring about greater personal and collective freedoms. To settle for anything less is to accept the existing institutional framework. The framework that offers varying combinations of state and market designed to ensure that the inequalities generated by the market are corrected by the redistributive and regulatory activity of the state. The very fact that people in their droves are fleeing the country and travelling to cities such as London in search of a job, any job, is proof enough that people don’t just want more equality. People want more consumption, more excitement, more of everything except equality. Deep freedom, the capability to make more of their own life, must be the objective of radical change.
Perhaps I am reading too much in to what Milband is trying to do; but it definitely seems to me that in his speeches on ‘predators’ and ‘pre-distribution’ he is pitching to represent the 99%. And that he is willing to take on the ‘Power Elite’. Blair and Mandelson famously shied away from challenging the ‘shadow cast on society by big business’, seeking merely to attenuate the effects. I hope that Miliband is brave enough to try and that we give him the opportunity to effect real and lasting structural change.
In order to be successful Miliband must first raise awareness that he alone represents the interests of the people. He must not just convince traditional Labour supporters but all the electorate that a vote for Labour is a vote in favour of the collective interests of the 99%. He must convince the electorate that the status quo only serves the interests of the elite and that Labour will enact meaningful change.
Ed Miliband is certainly influenced by his father and by other notable socialists Tariq Ali and C. Wright Mills. The papers have recently been suggesting that he aims to be a 21st Century Teddy Roosevelt. I suspect that he has also been reading George Lakoff:
Ed Miliband is the only politician talking about what really matters: inequality
by Robin ThorpeWith Ed Miliband’s recent talk of rebuilding the middle class and his previous rhetoric of the squeezed middle are we now seeing a resurgence of class consciousness? Or is Ed just focusing on familiar words to cloak his lack of credible policies? I sincerely hope it is the former. The problem with the concept of class is that because the labour market is now so diverse it can be difficult for people to identify what class they are. Perhaps, therefore, we should just recognise that there are broadly only two classes of people; the ‘power elite’ and the rest of us.
I can understand why people may want to cling to the notion that there is a hierarchy of socio-economic divisions that we can climb up if we only work hard enough. People have evolved to compete for resources and societies have long been predicated on prestige and social position. But surely we must now recognise that the division between the elite and the rest is so entrenched that it will take more than a bit of pluck and a protestant work ethic to break the stranglehold of inequality. Will Hutton has written that he thinks that Ed Miliband’s “cost of living” crisis is a sideways route into opening up an argument over inequality and I hope that he is right.
Enabling effective change will not be easy; there are many vested interested who will oppose a recalibration of the way that our economy works. The obvious attack on Miliband’s ambition is to decry it as statist and anti-business. Fraser Nelson writes in the Telegraph that a Labour government implementing this agenda would result in “companies refusing to invest, and wealth-creators leaving”. This argument ignores the fact that the notion of state vs. business is a false choice; neither can this choice be defined as socialism vs. capitalism. Instead it should be defined as shallow versus deep freedom.
Steve Davies from the Institute for Economic Affairs (on Radio 4’s The Longview) agrees that the cost of living is a real problem for those on low wages; in particular the cost of housing. But he also states that workers must increase their productivity to improve their wage-earning capacity, as if low wages are their fault for not working hard enough. Solving the problem of the cost of living will still leave people dependant on increasingly precarious employment.
A leader in The Economist recently made a very good case for the importance of skills and education in combating this phenomenon and why we should invest more in pre-school and adult learning. But also admits that this will still result in some people relying on a benevolent state to provide subsistence. These actions may mitigate the worst aspects of poverty but they will not ameliorate the effects of inequality. Some inequality is an inevitable by-product of an organised society, but extreme levels of inequality are bad for everybody.
Those who would seek to maintain the status quo will offer a risible rise in wages and will continue to provide state-sponsored subsistence to bribe the voters. They will provide schemes to maintain the majority in machine-like jobs and will present mortgage debt as an aspiration for all. They will not attempt to increase opportunity and autonomy because to do so would threaten the interests of those who wield political influence. For them freedom means less regulation and redistribution. It means the absence of state interference in the business of multiplying wealth.
These political schemes of varying complexity and success may lead to some future prosperity and may guarantee future jobs, but the majority of individuals will still have very little influence on their personal future. People will still be bound to the will and caprice of employers. The majority of people will still subsist on wages that represent a small proportion of the value that their employment creates and the cost of living will continue to rise as the banks and other vested interests maintain the high cost of housing.
To challenge the system of inequality it is necessary to implement radical change to bring about greater personal and collective freedoms. To settle for anything less is to accept the existing institutional framework. The framework that offers varying combinations of state and market designed to ensure that the inequalities generated by the market are corrected by the redistributive and regulatory activity of the state. The very fact that people in their droves are fleeing the country and travelling to cities such as London in search of a job, any job, is proof enough that people don’t just want more equality. People want more consumption, more excitement, more of everything except equality. Deep freedom, the capability to make more of their own life, must be the objective of radical change.
Perhaps I am reading too much in to what Milband is trying to do; but it definitely seems to me that in his speeches on ‘predators’ and ‘pre-distribution’ he is pitching to represent the 99%. And that he is willing to take on the ‘Power Elite’. Blair and Mandelson famously shied away from challenging the ‘shadow cast on society by big business’, seeking merely to attenuate the effects. I hope that Miliband is brave enough to try and that we give him the opportunity to effect real and lasting structural change.
In order to be successful Miliband must first raise awareness that he alone represents the interests of the people. He must not just convince traditional Labour supporters but all the electorate that a vote for Labour is a vote in favour of the collective interests of the 99%. He must convince the electorate that the status quo only serves the interests of the elite and that Labour will enact meaningful change.
Ed Miliband is certainly influenced by his father and by other notable socialists Tariq Ali and C. Wright Mills. The papers have recently been suggesting that he aims to be a 21st Century Teddy Roosevelt. I suspect that he has also been reading George Lakoff:
“The liberal market economy maximizes overall freedom by serving public needs: providing needed products at reasonable prices for reasonable profits, paying workers fairly and treating them well, and serving the communities to which they belong. In short, “the people the economy is supposed to serve” are ordinary citizens.”I think that all political parties have done the people a disservice by pretending that ‘we are all middle-class now’. Yes disposable incomes are higher; yes more people now work in offices rather than in manual occupations. But the availability of credit and the cultural incitement to home and car ownership means that just as many people are now wage-slaves, dependant on employment to pay for their ‘standard of living’, as they ever have been. As Ernest Bevin said “We must not confuse democracy with the maintenance of a particular form of economic or financial system…rather it is a condition which allows for change in the system itself”’
Monday, 11 November 2013
Bombers Moon - Mike Harding
young men waiting for the night, <BR>
In the hedgerows birds are singing, <BR>
Calling in the falling light. <BR>
And the captain says, <BR>
'Tonight there'll be a bomber's moon, <BR>
We'll be there and back underneath a bombers' moon. <BR>
A thousand bombers over the northern sea<BR>
Heading out, out for Germany.'<BR>
Chalkey White stands at the dartboard, <BR>
Curly Thompson writes to his wife, <BR>
Nobby Clarke and Jumbo Johnson<BR>
Are playing cards and smoking pipes; <BR>
And over the hangars rises a bombers' moon, <BR>
Full and clear rising, as the engines croon<BR>
And the planes they taxi out on to runway five<BR>
And sail off out into the silvery night. <BR>
Sandy Campbell checks his oil gauge, <BR>
The Belgian coast is coming soon; <BR>
Curly Thompson lifts his sextant, <BR>
Lines up on a bombers' moon<BR>
And waves are shining there below the bombers' moon. <BR>
The Lancasters flying high below the bombers' moon<BR>
Coming in along the Belgian coast<BR>
A thousand silver-shrouded ghosts. <BR>
Flak flies up around the city, <BR>
Jumbo Johnson banks his plane, <BR>
Goes in low and drops his payload, <BR>
Turns to join the pack again. <BR>
And people are dying there below the bomber's moon, <BR>
The city's a raging hell below the bomber's moon, <BR>
And the planes head out towards the northern sea: <BR>
Young men coming home from victory. <BR>
Over Belgium came the fighters, <BR>
Flying high against the night; <BR>
Curly Thompson saw them coming, <BR>
Closing in before he died. <BR>
And the young men shot them down below the bomber's moon, <BR>
Shot them down in flames below the bomber's moon; <BR>
Young men sending young men to their graves<BR>
Saw them down into the North Sea waves. <BR>
<BR>
'83 in Bomber County<BR>
Mrs White dusts the picture and she cries: <BR>
Chalkey White in uniform<BR>
Looking as he did the day he died. <BR>
And for God's sake no more bombers' moons, <BR>
No more young men going out to die too soon, <BR>
Old men sending young men out to die, <BR>
Young men dying for a politician's lies. <BR>
For God's sake no more bombers' moons, <BR>
No more young men going out to die too soon, <BR>
Old men sending young men out to kill. <BR>
If we don't stop them then they never will. <BR>
<BR>
No more no more bombers' moons. <BR>
<BR>
No more no more bombers' moons. <BR>
<BR>
No more no more bombers' moons. <BR>
<BR>
No more no more bombers' moons. <BR>
<BR>
If I can Dream - Elvis Presley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)