Layer 285 . . . The Shock Doctrine, Privatisations, PR, and Big Issues for the Big Society

.

It's becoming clearer that come what may in the new parliament we'll be heading for more of the Shock Doctrine - using the failure of the banks and the current state of the national finances to summon up a virtual state of emergency - and then to create a huge cutting back of public services, in the name of stopping "waste", with all its consequences for unemployment and deflation.

Phase two will be more privatisations and outsourcing - even in education and health.

Cameron's piece in yesterday's Observer described his philosophy for a Big Society, which is a kind of anarcho-conservatism, through which money will be handed over to those who want to "run their own schools" etc - i.e. pay for for-profit companies to run schools, using hired hands posing as "successful" management teams.

Peter Preston wrote in yesterday's paper, talking about the debates on TV and how they're reported in the press, "We can make up our own minds . . . and you'll keep on winning, if you can be bothered to keep sitting up and taking notice."

Which is a fair point. But how many can really be bothered, how many have the time or inclination, and how many are prepared to inform themselves from the precious little quality writing about the key issues?

..............................................

More good stuff in the Observer yesterday, and some Big Issues for the Big Society:

If you're old and still in touch with your family, count your blessings

by Mary Warnock

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/ageing-healthcare-dementia

.................................................

So, how do the parties match up on protecting our freedom?

The New Labour manifesto asks you to ignore all the suspicion the government has created during its term in office

by Henry Porter

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/henry-porter-manifestos-election

......................................................

Simon Singh's historic win is also a triumph for his online allies

by Nick Cohen

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/nick-cohen-simon-singh-libel

.....................................................

In today's Guardian we have these:

Cameron, beware. Cake baking and sports clubs can't fix inequality

An east London estate offers a potent picture of the Big Society. But there is a big gap in Cameron's big idea

by Madeleine Bunting

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/19/cameron-big-society-inequality

.......................................................

On libel, the really big battle awaits

Two years on, I welcome politicians' libel pledges. But tinkering won't do. Reform must be radical

by Simon Singh

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/19/libel-laws-reform-simon-singh

.................................................

And for the Lib Dems' next trick? Electrify the foreign debate

Nick Clegg will squander his gains if he shies from a row on Europe, Iraq and Afghanistan. It's time to get properly stuck in

by Jackie Ashley

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/18/nick-clegg-europe-foreign-debate

...............................................................

In tomorrow's Guardian we have John Harris:

Clegg surge could kill first past the post

A three-way split would fatally undermine FPTP and signify the time has arrived for a historic push on our broken voting system

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/19/clegg-surge-first-past-the-post?

Some of us desperately want the political and constitutional crisis Martin Kettle wrote about on Cif the other day . . .  electoral reform is British politics' most fundamental issue.

Cleggmania notwithstanding, look at the state of the election debate. Where are such white-hot issues as housing, and low pay? The same goes for such baffling no-shows as climate change, the banks, Afghanistan, Europe, etc etc. This is what FPTP does to the national argument: it kills it.

Maybe not too late: despite the aforementioned grip exercised by the Brownites, might Labour signal its willingness to at least consider the more proportional AV-plus system, and thus begin to build a coalition for post-election reform? If, even post-election, plenty of Labour high-ups prove to be resistant, so be it: that'll be a signal that starting the realignment of the left that some of us speculate about is now a matter of urgency.

A Labour friend of mine just called me and said we seemed to have reached a Ceausescu moment: representatives of both main parties trying to sustain all the contortions of traditional politics, trying desperately to seize power on the support of around a quarter of the electorate, and triangulating their way around the meaningless middle – while their assumptions are shredded, and Britain moves somewhere else entirely. Let's hope so.

.