July 31, 2000
What Divides Us?
Are the left and right really that different?
WHO
IS THE REAL ENEMY?
I
know that it will seem either ridiculous or obvious, but we are
no longer in charge of our governments. I know we have a vote every
four years or so, but this is making less and less difference. The
fact is that the role of the permanent government – the bureaucrats,
the media, the corporate lobbyists and elements of the national
security apparatus – will always get their agenda in the end.
Although it may not seem that way when the election is on, with
the fights on abortion, health-care reform or free trade –
few things change in the way that the electorate wants. This often
means that things change, which is what the electorate does not
want. Increasingly – and at a rate not seen since universal
suffrage was introduced – the wishes of the electorate are
fulfilled on the big issues only by coincidence.
WHAT'S
HAPPENED, BROTHERS?
Take
the Trade Unions. Now I believe in the free market and the free
movement of capital and am not in the least bit fazed by big companies,
but I am getting very uneasy at the state of the British Trade Union
movement. Now I am not just being cussed and nostalgic, the Trade
Union movement went very wrong in the Post War years. It's role
as a brake on progress and enemy of the small, non-industrial, and
innovative areas of the economy did much damage in an era not short
of damaging economic policies. However, with a few exceptions such
as the Marxist Arthur Scargill, they did care about their members.
Now the union leaders seem to be officials who started their working
lives in the union headquarters, and seem to have been shuffling
paper through their invisible rise "up the ranks" (sic). This has
a massive impact on the way in which they represent their members
– or don't.
EMU
– EVEN MORE UNEMPLOYMENT
This
lack of concern for their paymasters, the ordinary members, shows
itself in their attitude towards European Economic and Monetary
Union. There are two main types of union members – white-collar
public sector workers and blue-collar industrial workers –
neither of whom will be helped by monetary union. The blue-collar
workers in highly capitalised industries will either be decimated
by the unrealistically high interest rates, or pummeled by uncontrollable
inflation that frightens off long term investment. Government controlling
the money supply is, arguably, bad enough, but trying to control
it for five times as many people – it will kill off industrial
Britain, forever. Government employees think that they will be better
off as they look enviously at their continental neighbours. They
will be sorely disappointed – as their leaders surely know.
The fact is that it will help many government workers – the
bureaucrats, but the so called front line workers will see the continental
culture of centralisation come to an even greater extent than at
present. While spending on health or education is now higher, more
of it will stay with the bureaucrats that the European Union loves
so much.
THE
GREAT BETRAYAL
One
would expect that a measure that so harmed the trade union members
would meet with opposition from the trade unions to whom they pay
their dues. Not so. The Trade Union leaders are, with a number of
brave exceptions, staunchly in favour of EMU. In addition, this
is because they no longer come from the membership that they supposedly
represent. As I said before many leave university (which most of
their members do not attend) and start as researchers and administrators,
usually in the very unions that they end up leading. This means
that their career progression is all, and career progression is
not helped by upsetting governmental apple carts. Whereas even within
living memory the majority of union leaders had done the jobs that
their members were still doing – and some expected to return
to that job – these leaders are rare. The exceptions in Britain
tend to shock with their polite dissent, a teacher's union saying
that the opposition is tougher on pupil discipline or a leader of
London local government workers pointing out that EMU will ruin
his members. They illustrate the rule that union leadership is now
about managing their members' dissatisfaction rather than trying
to address it.
SPOT
THE DIFFERENCE
Many
readers may start saying what does this have to do with me. It is
not about International affairs, I am not a member of a union, I
am not British, I am not even particularly fond of them. However,
the message is clear, the managers are winning. The very reason
that the union leaders give for ignoring their member's interests,
that the Euro will attract foreign investment, gives a taste of
their managerial ambitions. The first thing to remember is that
Britain doesn't just attract more investment than any other country
in the European Union, as it has for years, but attracts more international
investment than anywhere but the United States. Not bad for less
than 1% of the world's population. If the Euro really were a killer
issue, the investment would have dried up a couple of years ago;
it did not so there is no real issue. But the whole point here is
that they actually want economic policy not run for their members
interests, or even for the economic health of the country, but because
it will help the multinationals. Is that really why the unions
were formed?
THE
REVENGE OF THE SALARIAT
The
managers have won. Middle managers in multinationals do roughly
the same job as the trade union officials, and they are paid roughly
the same wage, sorry salary. They also labour under the same conditions
as senior civil servants, accountants in large practices, corporate
lawyers and top level journalists. With a few exceptions, they create
roughly the same amount of wealth, a figure close to zero. Moreover,
they are the real beneficiaries of this move to coagulated governance.
There is no conspiracy, just a clear but often unstated community
of interest – and most of us are outside that community.
DEMOCRACY
BYPASS
The
representatives of the workers no longer represent the best interests
of the workers and the representatives of businessmen (who in Britain
are bizarrely management consultants) poorly represent business.
With this sort of example is it any surprise that the representatives
of the people are doing such a poor job? Looking at their records
it is not hard to see why, the Prime Minister was a lawyer who made
his living representing Trade Unions (or their leaderships –
but at least he has a less corrupt background than his wife). The
leader of the opposition was (and is) a highly intelligent man from
a commercial background who threw away his talent to become a management
consultant and then a Conservative MP, and he is one of the relatively
good guys. The simple fact is that we are now managed rather than
represented and we are addressed with gimmicks rather than improvements
in our lives.
HOW
DO WE TAKE THIS BACK?
This
situation can not last. This is not necessarily good news as the
present corrupt prosperity is far preferable to the widespread unrest
and even violence that could replace it. The real question is not
should we replace the current order, but how we steer our
political process back to sanity. And the key is the left. Yes,
the left – those people I have spent almost my entire adult
life railing about. I will apologise to the sizable minority of
my readers who are already fully paid up members or sympathisers
of the left as I switch into exclusively right wing mode.
|
