I'm not keen on ID cards either
songofnewday invited me to blog about politics.
I am interested in politics, even if my own political compass has swung in multiple directions over time. The processes, the theory, and the practice is all immensely interesting and reveals a lot about human nature, both in relation to aspirations and ideals, but also sadly in the baser aspects thereof. It is actually quite sad that such a dynamic and significant process is so frequently rendered petty, or dull, or obscure, or even irrelevant.
I owe the root foundation of my understanding of governmental politics to Alwyn Brace (my GCSE and A Level economics teacher). Fundamentally, it is impossible to separate politics and economics. Taxes are the other great certainty in life, and no government can function without an income stream to pay police, soldiers, pay benefits, health services etc. So it was from Mr. Brace that I understood the foundation principles of the left wing (inc. concepts like nationalization, which are coming back into fashion) and the right (inc. the principles of the Wealth of Nations).
Whilst issues of the government meddling in “moral issues” (such as abortion) do crop up, the current financial crisis of the credit crunch clearly illustrates the significant links between Politics and Economics.
When I was a callow youth, Socialism and the Left was my cause. It was the 80s and hating Thatcher was cool. The Tories were the Big Bad, and in the playground most of the kids I hung out with had Labour voting parents. So did I, but being a) slightly perverse, and b) a sucker for the underdog, it wasn’t long before I went for the Liberal Democrats.
However, it felt right. Big businesses exist to make rich people richer, and they have money to spare. Evil wicked men with hearts full of greed wore suits. So you take from The Rich and give to The Poor and that’s social justice. It's all very Robin Hood etc. What’s not to cheer?
Of course, then I went into the world of Social Work and I actually got to meet The Poor (or a subset thereof). If you are sufficiently wealthy, you may go your entire life and never meet a social worker (except possibly socially - hello!). Whilst some of them were hard-working but unfortunate or unambitious deserving individuals, there were also a lot of ungrateful, self-centred, scrotes too.
Furthermore, from inside the public sector, I saw how the treasures taken from the swollen coffers of the wealthy were used... and it was not always terribly inspiring. Around various good intentions was recurrences of lacking wisdom, and sometimes just plain common sense. Money and opportunities wasted, and tragically the picture was also writ large on the national scale of spending.
Of course the ideal behind such “left-wing” models of government is that the money is spent wisely and well by the government upon those in most need and thus the nation prospers. Of course, the government doesn’t spend the money in the way that I think is wisest. Instead, it stupidly listens to other voters and interest groups, and that can result in what I consider to be inefficiency and wasted money.
Now, in truth, I wouldn’t trust myself to spend £X billion pounds in the most efficient, wisest and most beneficial fashion - so how can I trust anyone else to do the same? Yet that is what I was signing up to do with my political views.
With this revelation, I have come to a greater appreciation of a more capitalist / right-wing viewpoint. It has the virtue of simplicity. You get to keep as much of your money as you can make, and if you want something enough then someone will want your money enough to provide it. The more people want that thing, the cheaper it will get. Some things, everyone wants and so they will be available cheaply, and with a push for innovation. Who needs the government to do more than just provide what no collective purchaser can (like standing armies)?
It has to be appealing to Governments as well. No longer being directly responsible for the trains means no more blame when they are late. Also laws can be pesky to enforce, and people complain about them, so try and shape society through indirect taxation. Tax the things that are “bad, mmkay” like cigarettes, and even some laws like speeding. You may succeed in changing some behaviours that are not ideal, but if you don’t you have the tax money to use instead.
Given the greater ease / less cost to try and social engineer in this fashion, is it any surprise that governments in the developed world have drifted to the right even without the pressures from corporate interest groups? It is all so very simple.
Except its not. Just as a left-wing model assumes that the government can spend money well, the right-wing one assumes that individuals can spend their money well. The same problem exists on both hands: People cannot be relied upon to do the smart thing.
The Credit Crunch is a really exciting example of the epic level failure of carefree capitalism. Drawing on debt rather than investing from surplus has been excellent for rapid expansion, but both people and businesses have feared being left behind by their peers. People have seen mortgages as a form of get-rich-quick investment, just as businesses have seen rivals expanding swiftly, and both have stretched themselves unto the very breaking point we are at.
So where does that leave me? Well, if I were in the US, I would unquestioningly vote for Barack Obama. Here in the UK my choices are less clear. Now, more than any time in my life before, I am a truly floating voter. I will vote because I am strongly against apathy in this regard where in other countries people are denied even that right. Yet who to vote for?
The last time I voted for the Liberal Democrats it was because I wanted to send a message to the two main parties to pull back to the ‘left’ a bit and court my vote. David Cameron responded by waving a Green banner - but has never convincingly persuaded me that this was something a government under him would deliver.
I think, ultimately, I am put off by how powerless our government actually is. Whilst Brown did nothing really to prevent the current economic climate, I’m not sure what he would have done. Equally, for all that this provides the Conservatives with ammunition to use against the government, I’m not seeing much to say that they are the party to lead us through this and into a post-ultracapitalist world.
Given a real choice, I think I would like to vote for Barack Obama. Can we become the 51st state and get 10 electoral college votes please?
In other news:
- Games Workshop Just Don't Get It
- I am exceptionally grateful to alan_wells and plucky_lass for a very relaxing weekend in Brussels. It was very relaxing and very necessary. Belgian beer tastes good (thank you microgirl) and belgian waffles are messy and tasty.
- MP5s are not for baby.
- "Shine Jesus Shine" is not an acceptable alternative to "Happy Birthday"
- I went to Wales and back today. It was green.
- I am booking for Insurrection and yet still not 100% sure why.
NEXT: The practical applications of owning a JCB, living in Venzuela (as requested by sheyna
I am interested in politics, even if my own political compass has swung in multiple directions over time. The processes, the theory, and the practice is all immensely interesting and reveals a lot about human nature, both in relation to aspirations and ideals, but also sadly in the baser aspects thereof. It is actually quite sad that such a dynamic and significant process is so frequently rendered petty, or dull, or obscure, or even irrelevant.
I owe the root foundation of my understanding of governmental politics to Alwyn Brace (my GCSE and A Level economics teacher). Fundamentally, it is impossible to separate politics and economics. Taxes are the other great certainty in life, and no government can function without an income stream to pay police, soldiers, pay benefits, health services etc. So it was from Mr. Brace that I understood the foundation principles of the left wing (inc. concepts like nationalization, which are coming back into fashion) and the right (inc. the principles of the Wealth of Nations).
Whilst issues of the government meddling in “moral issues” (such as abortion) do crop up, the current financial crisis of the credit crunch clearly illustrates the significant links between Politics and Economics.
When I was a callow youth, Socialism and the Left was my cause. It was the 80s and hating Thatcher was cool. The Tories were the Big Bad, and in the playground most of the kids I hung out with had Labour voting parents. So did I, but being a) slightly perverse, and b) a sucker for the underdog, it wasn’t long before I went for the Liberal Democrats.
However, it felt right. Big businesses exist to make rich people richer, and they have money to spare. Evil wicked men with hearts full of greed wore suits. So you take from The Rich and give to The Poor and that’s social justice. It's all very Robin Hood etc. What’s not to cheer?
Of course, then I went into the world of Social Work and I actually got to meet The Poor (or a subset thereof). If you are sufficiently wealthy, you may go your entire life and never meet a social worker (except possibly socially - hello!). Whilst some of them were hard-working but unfortunate or unambitious deserving individuals, there were also a lot of ungrateful, self-centred, scrotes too.
Furthermore, from inside the public sector, I saw how the treasures taken from the swollen coffers of the wealthy were used... and it was not always terribly inspiring. Around various good intentions was recurrences of lacking wisdom, and sometimes just plain common sense. Money and opportunities wasted, and tragically the picture was also writ large on the national scale of spending.
Of course the ideal behind such “left-wing” models of government is that the money is spent wisely and well by the government upon those in most need and thus the nation prospers. Of course, the government doesn’t spend the money in the way that I think is wisest. Instead, it stupidly listens to other voters and interest groups, and that can result in what I consider to be inefficiency and wasted money.
Now, in truth, I wouldn’t trust myself to spend £X billion pounds in the most efficient, wisest and most beneficial fashion - so how can I trust anyone else to do the same? Yet that is what I was signing up to do with my political views.
With this revelation, I have come to a greater appreciation of a more capitalist / right-wing viewpoint. It has the virtue of simplicity. You get to keep as much of your money as you can make, and if you want something enough then someone will want your money enough to provide it. The more people want that thing, the cheaper it will get. Some things, everyone wants and so they will be available cheaply, and with a push for innovation. Who needs the government to do more than just provide what no collective purchaser can (like standing armies)?
It has to be appealing to Governments as well. No longer being directly responsible for the trains means no more blame when they are late. Also laws can be pesky to enforce, and people complain about them, so try and shape society through indirect taxation. Tax the things that are “bad, mmkay” like cigarettes, and even some laws like speeding. You may succeed in changing some behaviours that are not ideal, but if you don’t you have the tax money to use instead.
Given the greater ease / less cost to try and social engineer in this fashion, is it any surprise that governments in the developed world have drifted to the right even without the pressures from corporate interest groups? It is all so very simple.
Except its not. Just as a left-wing model assumes that the government can spend money well, the right-wing one assumes that individuals can spend their money well. The same problem exists on both hands: People cannot be relied upon to do the smart thing.
The Credit Crunch is a really exciting example of the epic level failure of carefree capitalism. Drawing on debt rather than investing from surplus has been excellent for rapid expansion, but both people and businesses have feared being left behind by their peers. People have seen mortgages as a form of get-rich-quick investment, just as businesses have seen rivals expanding swiftly, and both have stretched themselves unto the very breaking point we are at.
So where does that leave me? Well, if I were in the US, I would unquestioningly vote for Barack Obama. Here in the UK my choices are less clear. Now, more than any time in my life before, I am a truly floating voter. I will vote because I am strongly against apathy in this regard where in other countries people are denied even that right. Yet who to vote for?
The last time I voted for the Liberal Democrats it was because I wanted to send a message to the two main parties to pull back to the ‘left’ a bit and court my vote. David Cameron responded by waving a Green banner - but has never convincingly persuaded me that this was something a government under him would deliver.
I think, ultimately, I am put off by how powerless our government actually is. Whilst Brown did nothing really to prevent the current economic climate, I’m not sure what he would have done. Equally, for all that this provides the Conservatives with ammunition to use against the government, I’m not seeing much to say that they are the party to lead us through this and into a post-ultracapitalist world.
Given a real choice, I think I would like to vote for Barack Obama. Can we become the 51st state and get 10 electoral college votes please?
In other news:
- Games Workshop Just Don't Get It
- I am exceptionally grateful to alan_wells and plucky_lass for a very relaxing weekend in Brussels. It was very relaxing and very necessary. Belgian beer tastes good (thank you microgirl) and belgian waffles are messy and tasty.
- MP5s are not for baby.
- "Shine Jesus Shine" is not an acceptable alternative to "Happy Birthday"
- I went to Wales and back today. It was green.
- I am booking for Insurrection and yet still not 100% sure why.
NEXT: The practical applications of owning a JCB, living in Venzuela (as requested by sheyna