There are two articles in the Observer, one by Kenan Malik - It’s in Milan Kundera’s ambiguities and contradictions that we find his truths, which can be found at:
and the other by Will Hutton - Europe is surging rightwards. But, as Britain has shown, the populist tide will start to ebb which can be found at:
which are well worth a read. One deals with the recently deceased author Milan Kundera’s writings and his views on the question of European identity, and the other deals with European identity from a political perspective
How the European continent will emerge from the current financial and climate crises, as well as the Ukrainian war, is dependent on how individual European states chose their representatives in government. Is it really a matter of how the individuals in each state finds or defines their identity as citizens of the state?
There is a view that as the individual European states become more closely aligned economically and politically, they will merge into a single state and citizens will lose their individual identity as Frenchman, Germans, Italians Greeks, Hungarians etc. It is being suggested that as a result of the European Union, people are losing their cultural heritage to the extent that they no longer understand what it means to be French, German, Italian etc. and that consequently there is a backlash being fermented by individuals who are dead set against any further deterioration of what they perceive as their patriotic identity, which includes their historical myths and specific cultural history. Hence there is an instinctive reaction by some to conserve and preserve that narrative. This fear of loss is what appears to be driving the movement towards a conservative right, intent on stopping any other form of movement. It is a matter of battening down the hatches and stopping any further leaks, or influx into the existing mix. It is an attempt to return to what was before the rot set in, all the while maintaining an economic link and remaining in the European Union. Quite a feat. To do that one needs to employ whatever means it takes to stop and prevent dissent or wayward thinking of any kind. Once that is achieved and equilibrium restored one can move on.
As to the UK one sees that happening with legislation preventing protest and freedom of expression, as well as illegal draconian legislation in an attempt to stop all immigration. The list goes on. (The UK has unfortunately cut ties with the European Union , making isolation far more costly) Under the guise of acting in the public interest, Suella Braverman and Priti Patel have crafted legislation that would have prevented their parents from entering the United Kingdom. So much for filial responsibility. But I digress.
The problem for them all is that the hatches no longer have their covers. They’ve been blown off ages ago and the current attempts at closure is the equivalent of using a sieve to stop the flow. The internet and all forms of media, social or otherwise, has opened access to all forms of ideas, new myths and cultural output from across the globe. The output from streaming media companies conclusively demonstrates the similarity of global output. United States crime series, such as CSI, Law and Order, NCIS, Criminal Minds etc. are being eclipsed by similar output from the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, France, South Korea, Italy etc. Every country does cop shows, soap operas, sitcoms etc.. They depict human beings doing the same things all over the world, having lives and living in societies that have the same problems, seeking solutions in their own ways and in their own languages. Any number of Netflix, Prime, iPlayer, channel4 or My5 box sets are available to us all. Every country has its own version of reality television as well, mostly in the same format but with their own particular national quirks. Most successful shows are shown in just about every country in translation voice over. It is no longer surprising to see Upstairs Downstairs, Downton Abbey, Unforgotten, Friends, Neighbours or The Big Bang Theory dubbed in Spanish, French, German, Dutch etc. Fortunately, the UK have taken to broadcasting Scandi noir and French policier in the original language with subtitles, as does Netflix and Prime. This does preserve the cultural aspects of the shows does it not? I digress again.
My point is, we all see and hear it all, so why is it so difficult for nations to get together. We all go through the same crap. Why is it so difficult to find global solutions? Why do we elect representatives that are so totally partisan that whenever they are interviewed their sole reaction is to slag off the other party.
There are problems which are now so exacerbated that any incoming administration will find it exceedingly difficult to resolve. The Labour leadership is currently floundering as to how, should they achieve a majority at the next election, they will go about getting the NHS back on track, how they will cope with social care, supplementary benefits and housing, getting educational institutions back on track, in effect getting public services fully functional and properly rewarded. There is also the question of the environment. Will we have a planet that is habitable?
So far, they keep coming up with words like ‘reform’ and negotiating and resolving pay claims with the various public service unions. There has been no mention whatsoever of what is actually meant by reform. Reform what and in what way? Resolve pay claims, how? There are financial commitments that need to be made and the gathering up of sufficient funds to back up the reforms and resolutions has itself to be resolved. They also keep going on about economic growth and investment in growth. How do you get growth having closed off the market for the last seven years? From where will the funds be gathered?
One wonders whether the current government has maxed out the nation’s credit card or whether there is still some credit left? If so, is there another card available with a similar credit limit? Or is it a matter of extending the current limit? Make no mistake, there can be no lowering of taxation in any area, and, if anything, will need to be increased. Any notion that ‘growth’ will automatically increase the state's income sufficiently to cope with the required expenditure is pie in the sky thinking. Any prospective government that holds out that promise is being dishonest. Running a country as if it were a business is not a solution. Governments are about people and the needs and resources of individuals vary to a very great extent. Income, corporation, and windfall taxes won’t cut it. Nor will value added tax. Return on investment is equally unfounded as a backstop. There is no guarantee, unless, I suppose, you’re a shareholder in a water utility company.
There is an article in The New Yorker July 17, 2023 issue by Louis Menand entitled The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism. (Sub title: The free market used to be touted as the cure for all our problems; now it’s taken to be the cause of them). The opening paragraph reads:
"Neoliberalism” has been called a political swear word, and it gets blamed for pretty much every socioeconomic ill we have, from bank failures and income inequality to the gig economy and demagogic populism. Yet for forty years neoliberalism was the principal economic doctrine of the American government. Is that what has landed us in the mess we’re in?
In effect it can be translated as Thatcherism. Menand posits that Friedrich A. Hayek and Milton Friedman still exert their peculiar influence. The idea of an idealised market place, where everyone behaves in an exemplary ethical manner, where wealth is accumulated by the few and trickles down to some amenable workforce fully accepting their lot, is as fanciful as Adam Smith’s other concerned person, as depicted in his Theory of Moral Sentiments, let alone his inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations so influential to Milton and Hayek. The difficulty with their theory is that it takes no account of the reality of humanity, and any concept of the totality of human rights.
The market place is there to serve the interests of humanity not the other way round. Human beings have devised nations and their constitutions to be able to guarantee their rights and freedoms. That guarantee is extended to each and every individual citizen under the rule of law and duty of care. That is paramount. Democracy is about ensuring that the theory is applied equally to each and every human being. It is also about sharing the cost of maintaining the structures and institutions that provide for the health and safety of all. There is no guarantee the enterprise will be successful; however, that being the case, what you can guarantee is the increased need for the services of an NHS, social services generally, housing and a planet to protect. For the next UK government to get all that together over the coming five years before another general election, is going to take more than whatever ‘reforms’ are being contemplated. Funding is required. We will have to pay.
No comments:
Post a Comment