Divide & conquer

lemonjelly

There seems, from my perspective anyway, to be an significant increase in the polarization of society right now.

To me, it seems to be an age old way of getting your own way. Get the populace divided, blaming each other (or particular sectors) for the current woes and ills, meanwhile, push through your own policy regardless of opinion, expert analysis, or whether the populace are actually in favour of it. (A prime example of this, Michael "unable to tell the truth" Gove, & the academies bill, which in the space of 2 weeks went from 1500 interested schools, to 150 interested schools, to 50, to 16.)

Certain groups are easy targets. Asylum seekers. We can see - from the many threads on here that the welfare benefits system (& benefits claimants) can create a hell of a lot of vitriol, finger pointing and so on.

I've posted a few times that I feel that the private sector played a significant role in creating this deficit that we have. I struggle to see how it couldn't make a significant impact, given the billions ploughed into the banking system et al in a ridiculously short space of time. Funnily enough, other countries who also had to pour ridiculous totals into their national banking systems also have major deficits to deal with.

But apparently, it is the welfare state etc that is to blame...

Now, when the private sector started to contract last year, many in the private sector started there & then arguing that it was time for the public sector to be shrunk etc, feel the costs of the deficit & the like. Seems to me there are some that positively gloat about people losing their livelihoods. To me, this is a worrying trait.

We have been told repeatedly that we are in this together. I'm struggling to see how this is the case. We have a guy appointed to Barclays on £11.5 million a year+. And we have stories like this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11279763

The general feeling is that the downturn is past for the private sector. It is now the case that the public sector must bear the brunt of the majority of job losses, pain and pay freezes for years to come.

I don't see this as fair or reasonable. Typically, it seems to me that the private sector is skipping any social responsibilities. They will argue it wasn't their fault, they didn't do it, blah blah. However we have massive amounts of bad debt transferred into the public purse, whilst the good debt remains in private hands.

Seems to me they've got away with it.

Further, they'll be protected by the condems, which in the longer term will only be worse for all of us. Of course, uber-capitalists amongst us won't worry about that as they are generally only in it for short term gain, and also themselves (rather than the social aspects).

But to return to the main point, there appears to be some significant polarization within society, a grand play of divide & conquer, which will allow the tories to do their bidding, and the Lib dems to be a proper sacrificial lamb, complete with some growing divisions in society/class/cultures and amongst other such groups.

Thoughts?

marklv

I don't believe the private sector has escaped yet. A lot of the public sector bashers are gloating now, but the economy is not out of the woods yet. The risk of a double dip recession is as high as ever and the next few years will be painful for all.

The fact is that the Tories will always support the rich - the British Conservative Party is basically a rich man's party, they are not 'conservative' at all. They are basically libertarian, and therefore an alliance with the Lib-Dems makes a lot more sense than might appear at first sight. In many ways Labour is much more conservative than the Tories, which is ironic. If you ignore the loony left represented by Diane Abbott and others, Labour is pretty conservative in many ways, eg. on law and order, ID cards, etc.

There was a time when being conservative meant being pro-traditional values, respecting the state and national identity, strong law and order, etc. Who is upholding these values now? The BNP? UKIP? Maybe they are, because noone else is. Britain no longer has a mainstream conservative party; we have, in effect, three liberal parties, with only slightly different stances on most issues. I suspect this is because the parties have positioned themselves in order to attract the most public support, not because they want to offer the electorate genuine choice. Our democracy is rotten, rotten to the core, and far too dependent on vested interests and lobby groups. Now that the two Milibands are competing for the top spot in Labour who is to say that they won't pass state secrets to Mossad when they come to power? Can they be trusted? I'm not convinced that they can. We live in interesting times.

michaels

Happy with the polarisation of society bit.

Disagree about the cause of the deficit problem - latest projections suggest that bailing out the banks will be profitable.

Looking at historical data the deficit has been caused by a long term increase in govt expenditure as a share of GDP without a commensurate increase in taxation. The ideal answer of course would have been to increase taxes as expenditure increased. However the previous administration did not do this so when the financial bubble burst the true fiscal position was revealed.

The left wing section of politics still denies there is a bargain to be struck between increasing taxation and reducing govt expenditure and not surprisingly this position is popular with many who have benefited from the higher expenditure.

However they are not the only group being mendacious. The current administration is using the unsustainable state of the public finances to cover up a large contraction in the role of the state in the economy. Historically the share of the govt in the economy has risen as expenditure on health and education (supplied to a large extent by the govt in the UK) have increased their share of expenditure, it appears to e a natural human impluse to spend a greater proportion of income on health as income increases. The current govt is trying to role back the share of the state in the economy to below the long term trend increase which politically is a big deal and is not something even the Thatcher / Major govts achieved (they were much more interested in a supply side reform of how services were provided than actually redefining what the state should provide).

Given that this shift was not overtly flagged in the election manifesto and the less than resounding mandate the current govt received I would say they were jumping far ahead of the mandate that they have to make these fundamental changes.

michaels

marklv wrote: »

Now that the two Milibands are competing for the top spot in Labour who is to say that they won't pass state secrets to Mossad when they come to power? Can they be trusted? I'm not convinced that they can. We live in interesting times.

Reported this.

vivatifosi

michaels wrote: »

Happy with the polarisation of sociaety bit.

Disagree about the cause of the deficit problem - latest projections suggest that bailing out the banks will be profitable....

.....However they are not the only group being mendacious. The current administration is using the unsustainable state of the public finances to cover up a large contraction in the role of the state in the economy.

Great post michaels. I think the bit I've cribbed above is key. Both sides are guilty: Labour of overstretching the state on the mistaken belief of the Chancellor that he was so brilliant that he could do what he liked financially as boom and bust would never exist again :eek:. The current government may prove to be guilty of slash and burn in large-scale state contraction.

In reality I want something between the two. A slimmed down state that doesn't waste money but at the same time where vital services are not heavily pruned.

I agree with some of the cutbacks made so far: for example, Building Schools for the Future was overly political. Instead of focusing on rebuilding schools in predominantly Labour seats - which is what was achieved in the early waves - it should have focused on identifying the worst school buildings across the UK, irrespective of where they are, and rebuilding those. So rather than Bradford having 6 new schools built it may have got one or two to replace its really bad ones, but authorities in later phases with schools in greater need would have gone ahead. Furthermore, why not have used modular designs that could be used across several sites rather than going to the expense of designing lots of high-end projects?

It is easy to despair at Labour's waste, but I do worry about the cuts that now face us in case they become ideology as opposed to deficit driven. Roll on October when we start to find out the truth rather than speculating.

bendix

lemonjelly wrote: »

I've posted a few times that I feel that the private sector played a significant role in creating this deficit that we have.

?

Here's a tip for you. Simply repeating an ill-thought through (and ultimately wrong) theory several times doesn't make it any more true.

bendix

marklv wrote: »

Now that the two Milibands are competing for the top spot in Labour who is to say that they won't pass state secrets to Mossad when they come to power? Can they be trusted? I'm not convinced that they can. We live in interesting times.

With every new post, you continue to reveal insidious little insights into your nature.

Not content with portraying yourself as a self-obsessed 'cuts but so long as they don't affect me' quasi bigot with alarming and idiotic views (supported by posted links) professing to 'prove' the superior intelligence of white people over blacks; and not content with constant 'oh so discrete' messages hinting at your support for BNP which you're scared of shouting out loud; you now reveal yourself to be a quasi-anti-semite too.

FTBFun

marklv wrote: »

There was a time when being conservative meant being pro-traditional values, respecting the state and national identity, strong law and order, etc. Who is upholding these values now? The BNP? UKIP? Maybe they are, because noone else is.

Yeah, lets all vote for the fascists because its the only real choice, right?

edit: Oh I saw the Milliband bit now. I think its fairly obvious what your solution to Britain's problem is. Although building concentration camps is one way of utilising unemployed labour, mind.

blueboy43

marklv wrote: »

Now that the two Milibands are competing for the top spot in Labour who is to say that they won't pass state secrets to Mossad when they come to power? Can they be trusted? I'm not convinced that they can. We live in interesting times.

dear me, shown your true colours there Mark.

Its all the fault of the Jews.

Please don't share any of your other pearls of wisdom about racial, ethnic and religeous sterotypes.

blueboy43

michaels wrote: »

Happy with the polarisation of society bit.

Disagree about the cause of the deficit problem - latest projections suggest that bailing out the banks will be profitable.

Your whole post hits the nail on the head.

The majority of people (at least according to the Times poll today) do however feel that the deficit is due to the banks / the global recession / BoE rather than Labour running a deficit during a relative boom.

The cuts are going to destroy the Lib_Dems.

neverdespairgirl

marklv wrote: »

Now that the two Milibands are competing for the top spot in Labour who is to say that they won't pass state secrets to Mossad when they come to power? Can they be trusted? I'm not convinced that they can. We live in interesting times.

It's the International Zionist Conspiracy!

Foil hats all round, lads!

<what a w@nker Mark-thingy is>