Dec 042011
 

This is the clearest evidence one can have – if evidence was needed – that capitalism has failed:

Almost two-thirds of people believe the current generation of children will have a lower standard of living than their parents, as concern about the economic crisis hardens into long-term pessimism, a new poll shows.

And I say this because an essential part of capitalism’s dynamics is the belief and confidence its subjects have in the future.  Without these two elements, people do not invest; do not battle with the challenges; do not take risks.  So it is that capitalism is mortally wounded.

The temptation must be very great – as we are always going to be sons and daughters of previous generations – to do an Iraq on capitalism even as it is on its last legs: bomb it to bits (figuratively speaking, that is) and then wait and see what flowers all on its lonesome.

I would, however, prefer to believe we are capable of avoiding getting involved in such a destructive cycle for the second, third or fourth time in a generation and – instead – learn from such experiences to a wider societal benefit.  Two initiatives do make me wonder if other people think the same.  First, this rather idiosyncratic presentation (no web-based context – just an almost automatic download of a .pdf file) of how important the concept of business should be to Labour (more context from Next Left to this project can be found here).  Its Foreword provides sufficient background thus:

Foreword
Chuka Umunna
I welcome this collection, which brings together
many important contributions to the discussion on the new
economy we seek to create, and crucially the role of enterprise
within it.
Our economy faces huge challenges, both in terms of increased
competition from the emerging economies of Asia and
Latin America, but also the fact that it is not working for enough
people in the way it can and should. Because of the government’s
decision to cut spending and raise taxes too far and too fast, our
recovery was choked off well before the crisis in the Eurozone.
Living standards are being squeezed harder than in living
memory, unemployment is at its highest in seventeen years and
the ‘British promise’ – the understanding that each generation
will benefit from better opportunities than the last – is at risk
of being broken.
But underlying this are deeper, structural problems which
urgently need to be addressed. Since 2003 wages for middle
and lower income earners have stagnated while rewards at the
top have grown exponentially and so for many in our society,
pay has not kept up with the rising cost of living. Growth has
become too dependent on a small number of sectors and too
few regions, making us more vulnerable to external shocks.
We need an economy structured to deliver the jobs and growth
of the future; which is focused on sustainable, long-term success
rather than the fast buck; which enables us to complete globally;
and which creates high-skilled, better paid jobs for our workforce.
In addressing and overcoming these challenges, the role of
enterprise is paramount: we are clear that growth must be private
sector led – so we need more people setting up, leading
and working in businesses. Our record here is strong – in our
thirteen years in government, over a million new businesses
were created and the turnover of small and medium sized enterprises
grew by over a third.
But, as this collection reflects, we need to do more to champion
entrepreneurship: those who go into business, turning their
ideas into reality, generating profit and creating employment
in the process, taking pride in their work providing consumers
with greater choice or even a new product or service. These
are the values Labour represents. We do not underestimate
the capacity for enterprise to act as a motor of aspiration and
social mobility, providing a ladder of opportunity and enabling
people to make the most of their ingenuity and talents. As ever,
we are ambitious for British business.
Where we fundamentally disagree with the government’s
approach is that we see the state playing a crucial role in
creating the conditions in which businesses thrive. Where
they see the best government as that which does the least, we
see the capacity for active, intelligent government acting as a
partner, enabler and friend, setting the rules of the game, with
the capacity to shape and even create markets. For example, the
last Labour government set the target for all new homes to be
carbon neutral by 2016 – this helped create whole new markets
in architecture, retrofitting and green design.
Government has a wide range of tools at its disposal
including regulation, procurement, competition policy and
taxation – and must use these to support business, developing
and driving an ambition for the new economy. This means
ensuring that markets are competitive, encouraging innovation,
working with business to drive success and backing business
approaches which invest in the long term and do right by
employees, customers, country, and communities.
Clearly, this requires change on the part of government. We
cannot ignore the debate going on in the business world about
how productive businesses can add value to the bottom line
in the form of profit and do the same for the communities in
which they are located – businesses and their communities are
after all interdependent.
That is why the contributions in this book are so important,
exploring how enterprise can deliver the better outcomes we
need: spurring a return to growth and creating jobs, as well as
addressing the longstanding challenges which face our economy.
I have no doubt that Labour’s Business will help inform
and shape this debate as we move forward.
Chuka Umunna MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills

As I pointed out yesterday:

It’s not time to reinvent politics – for politics simply piggybacks on the prejudices and mindsets of business.  Politics is the mouthpiece – no longer (was it ever?) the agent.

No.  We need to go much further that.

It’s now time to reinvent business itself – for only then will we half a chance of rescuing our scalps.  The root problem is business – and so the solution must also lie there.

Meanwhile, today in the Observer we find David Miliband spot-on, at least in this phrase I pick out of his thoughtful piece:

[...] The point of politics is not to compromise values. It is to understand dynamic forces in economy and society, and inch forward changes in the reality of life according to your values.

I think I can agree with many of the things I have quoted from in this post – or, at least, I can agree with them if I take an entirely textual approach to their content.  If I forget about who has written them and the political baggage they carry along with them – their biography and and their attributed psychology – then, in a sense, the option of valuing with greater equanimity does become possible.

Time to destroy, then, or time to engage?  Do we follow Bush Sr or Bush Jr?

I would hope we could be wise.  If politics were as it should be, I would be able to say it’d be up to you and me to decide. 

But it’s not.

So the question hangs heavily in the air: who will really decide – and, indeed, when?  And how will they choose?  Will they engage or, alternatively, destroy everything that is before them? 

And will they do it for us all – or simply for themselves?

Apr 282011
 

Sunder reminds us not to underestimate David Cameron.  This is one example:

People are, quite rightly, furious about the offhand disregard for the integrity of other people’s opinions which Cameron’s comments represent.  But today they are chattering far more about this foolishness than the underlying issues to hand: that is to say, the Tory desire to dismantle entirely the wise checks and balances of the NHS – an institution we could easily describe as having come to exemplify the cornerstone of the British sense of fair play.  In little more than three words, then, Cameron has managed to open up yet another disconnecting sore between the tabloid readers who countenance the sad prejudices that his comments represent and the left which presumably wishes to regain this constituency’s support.

A wounded animal is often far more dangerous than a healthy one.  Cameron, on more than one occasion, has demonstrated this ability to take the game to the sensibilities of this chattering left I mention above – and change it quite dramatically, even as he does so almost imperceptibly.  These patronising words – that is to say, “Calm down, dear” – will not serve to change people’s minds about Cameron, though.  They may, however, serve to make people forget – just a little – the broader battlefield in question. 

And that is precisely why we shouldn’t underestimate Cameron’s intuitive ability to rile the left where it most hurts – as simultaneously he manages, time and time again, in this unplanned and impulsive manner, to deflect its focus from where it could be of most use.

Jan 292011
 

There’s been a considerable rise in the popularity and acceptance of “evidence-based political blogging” – perhaps its most recent and best exponent being Left Foot Forward.  But the trends existed before they were thus conceptualised.  Next Left is another example of a blog which sources quite carefully its opinions – and uses the discursive structures of “compare and contrast” to provide a considered and fairly objective overview of the political landscape and its issues.  Whilst Chris’s Stumbling and Mumbling is a marvellous example of how to make surveys, reports, studies, data and economic philosophy in general the kind of fascinating reading which everyone can enjoy and learn most productively from. 

But there are other things on the virtual landscape which support – and possibly encourage – the move away from the rhetorical blogging we grew up with.  Projects such as Andrew Regan’s Poblish.org – and the multitude of tools it potentially offers up for us (more here, from yours truly) – help cement the idea that the virtuous side of political blogging is to be found in the hard stuff of statistics and testable data.

Yet, I wonder if this is altogether fair, useful or – indeed – wise.  The other day I suggested:

At this point, I am reminded that statistics and evidence-based blogging are excellent measures when one wishes to rebut the arguments of the liars in government.  But, as I mentioned recently on these pages, these two tools do not fully encompass the workings of economies and their corresponding peoples.  They do not encompass the visceral side of life.  They do not communicate the emotional undertows.

So I ask the question again to underline: what’ll happen to our society when the poor begin to feel they are getting poorer?  That is the thought I have awoken to this morning.  That is what I have realised will almost certainly be my near future.  That is what I now fear for the future of my offspring.  That is what will damage and destroy the initiative and forward-looking hopes of a generation, if we are not very careful – or, alternatively, if we are not very clever.

These emotions, these perceptions, are just as important as the macro-economic stuff.  Yet who is out there to define, determine and delineate this?

And I went on to conclude as follows:

We need another website, I think.  A tactile website of emotions, where people can use a virtual community to express how they feel about this incompetent bundle of millionaire politicians – who  really have no appreciation of what feeling poor can do to one.

What you might term, in fact, a virtual  “Play for Today” for today.  Only instead of professional writers serving to filter the pain, this time we could aim to crowdsource –  through social media aficionados (more background  here to one potential approach) – the job of telling and sharing the hard and bitter truths.

So what is my challenge to the clever IT-oriented bods out there who have the skills I do not possess and could make this idea come true?  Well.  I’ve sent emails to three of them to date, but only one has replied – and with an understandable lack of comprehension.  Understandable, because the idea is still tremendously nascent and without useful form.

Where, then, do I want to go with this concept?  Firstly, I’d like to affirm what I’m not proposing.  No.  I’m not proposing a return to the rhetorical flourishes of a previous age.  The time when the Iain Dales of this world could generate those splendidly massive page impressions via clever turns of phrase and the debating strategies of stratified university societies and clubs is surely something we should not wish to re-engineer and recover.

What I am suggesting we do here is learn from the recent success of the evidence-based blogging I describe in this post and apply it to both the tracking of emotional undertow and its bespoke generation.  If we could create a community which not only used the tools Andrew Regan and others have been developing to follow existing content but also allowed and promoted the invention and distribution of new and headline-hitting Web 2.0 experience, perhaps we could recover some of the virtues of rhetorical blogging without committing the crime of returning us to the dark ages of sterile and pointless online debating chambers.

In fact, I do wonder if this community isn’t already beginning to exist.  Let’s try False Economy for starters.  A growing dataset of damning figures and statistics, videos which tell human stories, articles from the clever and good – all we need is to properly conceptualise that “Play for Today” which I mentioned the other day and the site would be about as complete as any site could ever be. 

The full gamut of human experience, that is.

From stats and reports through to videos and creative texts – content which serves to remind us all of the humanity behind the numbers.

That should be our challenge.

So that is my challenge to the IT wizards out there.

Never forget that behind the tales the clever websites tell, there are human beings who need a channel for their voices – and more now than ever before. 

Run with the trend towards evidence-based blogging, by all means – but never underestimate the importance of, also, evidencing our emotions.

Feb 062010
 

More home truths I can happily live with.  This from Next Left today on the broken nature of that tawdry and in very bad-faith broken society narrative.  Politically speaking, it’s all well and good to paint the world as it most benefits you – it’s quite a different matter, however, to deliberately generate and play on fears people have every right to be free of.

Manipulating statistics is unhappily part of the game.  Making people frightened where there is less reason to be so should definitely not be a tool we easily avail ourselves of.