Wednesday, 29 October 2008
The cynicism at the heart of the communities agenda
Dave Clements, co-author of The Future of Community argues that ostensible reforms aimed at empowering communites is hampered by a deep distrust of real democracy. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2008/oct/28/communities
Monday, 20 October 2008
Interview with George Galloway on Talk Radio
Austin Williams, co-editor of The Future of Community, was interviewed about the book by George Galloway last Friday on his talk-radio show.
Hear it on his website here
http://www.georgegalloway.com/page.php?page=content/listenlatest.html
and click on the Friday 17th of October 2008 show.
It's about 1 hour 12 minutes in.
Hear it on his website here
http://www.georgegalloway.com/page.php?page=content/listenlatest.html
and click on the Friday 17th of October 2008 show.
It's about 1 hour 12 minutes in.
The Politics of Immigration: Then and Now
We've heard so much recently about how the economic crisis has changed the rules of the political game. But it is probably more true to say that the crisis has exacerbated existing trends. This is even true of the immigration debate. Since the newly installed UK Immigration Minister, Phil Woolas, said that the crisis means that government has to get tough on immigration, the commonly accepted wisdom has been that until now the government has been naively liberal on immigration. Only new realities have forced it to change course.
Melanie McDonagh takes this line in today's Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/10/20/do2005.xml
However, as Nathalie Rothschild points out on Spiked today, the rhetoric on immigration betrays a striking similarity with the pre-crash era. There is, for example, the environmental argument about 'upper limits' on the population these islands can sustain, the proposition that immigration has to be controlled to preserve community cohesion, and the utilisation of anti-racism to justify this. Rothschild compares Woolas's argument that British workers should be given preferential treatment to the National Front's old slogan 'British jobs for British workers', but Gordon Brown had adopted this slogan long before the economic downturn.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5832/
All this begs the question of how we explain the government's current policy. While there are continuities, it is not wrong to say that this is clearly a U-turn (as McDonagh points out the government is proposing to close its own temporary workers programmes). A key factor is anxiety over community cohesion. There is already a widespread belief that different racial groups cannot be trusted to interact without being monitored, but with the economy in crisis, the government has panicked assuming that if it didn't take action tensions could boil over. But this could be a self fulfilling prophecy.
Melanie McDonagh takes this line in today's Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/10/20/do2005.xml
However, as Nathalie Rothschild points out on Spiked today, the rhetoric on immigration betrays a striking similarity with the pre-crash era. There is, for example, the environmental argument about 'upper limits' on the population these islands can sustain, the proposition that immigration has to be controlled to preserve community cohesion, and the utilisation of anti-racism to justify this. Rothschild compares Woolas's argument that British workers should be given preferential treatment to the National Front's old slogan 'British jobs for British workers', but Gordon Brown had adopted this slogan long before the economic downturn.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5832/
All this begs the question of how we explain the government's current policy. While there are continuities, it is not wrong to say that this is clearly a U-turn (as McDonagh points out the government is proposing to close its own temporary workers programmes). A key factor is anxiety over community cohesion. There is already a widespread belief that different racial groups cannot be trusted to interact without being monitored, but with the economy in crisis, the government has panicked assuming that if it didn't take action tensions could boil over. But this could be a self fulfilling prophecy.
Thursday, 9 October 2008
The all-seeing state is about to end privacy as we know it
A very good article by Jenni Russell on the Communications Data Bill which if passed will give the state the power to monitor our phone calls, e-mails and Internet activity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/08/civilliberties.privacy
The article is timely because it reminds us that with the economic crisis dominating the headlines, some seriously illiberal legislation may get in unscrutinised. Her argument that the government is trying to assert power where it can because it can't control the economic crisis may be a rhetorical hook, but it's worth thinking about. On the face of it, the assertion is wrong because successive governments have been increasingly authoritarian for the last couple of decades regardless of the state of the economy. However, Russell is right to note that the authoritarianism is born from the loss of a sense of control. But it's not just the economy the authorities feel they can't control. Terrorism, climate change, the proliferation of perceived health risks, the collapse of trust in institutions, community fragmentation, all of these over the years have made governments appear impotent and heightened their authoritarian instincts.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/08/civilliberties.privacy
The article is timely because it reminds us that with the economic crisis dominating the headlines, some seriously illiberal legislation may get in unscrutinised. Her argument that the government is trying to assert power where it can because it can't control the economic crisis may be a rhetorical hook, but it's worth thinking about. On the face of it, the assertion is wrong because successive governments have been increasingly authoritarian for the last couple of decades regardless of the state of the economy. However, Russell is right to note that the authoritarianism is born from the loss of a sense of control. But it's not just the economy the authorities feel they can't control. Terrorism, climate change, the proliferation of perceived health risks, the collapse of trust in institutions, community fragmentation, all of these over the years have made governments appear impotent and heightened their authoritarian instincts.
Is the UK 'the obesity capital of the world'?
Obesity rates have come to be regarded as a key indicator of the break-down of society. It is therefore not surprising that in response to the Department of Health's dire warnings about how much obesity could cost in the coming years, the Local Government Association have responded by asserting that the nations widening waistline will present an unprecedented challenge for local services. The key issue, claims the LGA, is whether social services should be able to intervene in families with severely overweight children on the same basis as children suffering from neglect. That's not all. Apparently, schools will require extra large desks, public transport will be able to seat fewer people, and obese people will have to be winched out of buildings in the case of a fire.
http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/core/page.do?pageId=1077596
It would be easy to dismiss all of this as scaremongering, after all the population has surely been gaining weight for years, if not decades, without any corresponding collapse in services. It should also be said that the question of people's eating habits should not be the business of the council. However, the LGA's approach also reflects the scattergun approach that is ubiquious in the discussion about obesity. Are the authorities targeting the few 'bad' parents who allegedly over-feed their children or is the argument that society needs to be re-organised around making everybody reduce their weight? Is the failure to make such distinctions a sign of panic or interventionist instinct?
http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/core/page.do?pageId=1077596
It would be easy to dismiss all of this as scaremongering, after all the population has surely been gaining weight for years, if not decades, without any corresponding collapse in services. It should also be said that the question of people's eating habits should not be the business of the council. However, the LGA's approach also reflects the scattergun approach that is ubiquious in the discussion about obesity. Are the authorities targeting the few 'bad' parents who allegedly over-feed their children or is the argument that society needs to be re-organised around making everybody reduce their weight? Is the failure to make such distinctions a sign of panic or interventionist instinct?
Friday, 3 October 2008
Elitism and Obama
Interesting article by Richard Sennett here looking at the roots of the perception among many working-class American voters that Barack Obama is elitist. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/04/uselections2008.barackobama
Sennett rightly argues that treating ordinary Americans as victims of the system comes across as patronising and demeaning, but there is a tendency to attribute the perception of elitism to psychological flaws and fatalism in the outlook of working-class voters. Might it not in fact be the case that, given the repeated failures of the Democrats to offer an inspiring alternative to the Republicans, they are elitist?
Sennett rightly argues that treating ordinary Americans as victims of the system comes across as patronising and demeaning, but there is a tendency to attribute the perception of elitism to psychological flaws and fatalism in the outlook of working-class voters. Might it not in fact be the case that, given the repeated failures of the Democrats to offer an inspiring alternative to the Republicans, they are elitist?
Wednesday, 1 October 2008
What makes an eco-town?
A new report by CABE grapples with the difficulty of making eco-towns live up to their sustainable billing. http://www.cabe.org.uk/default.aspx?contentitemid=2771
Among the proposals the report recommends monitoring the number of car trips made by residents, the type of waste they produce, their energy use and the food they eat . Their lifestyles are also to be micromanaged by making sure they only only eat local produce and travel less. The report has generated something of a backlash http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/26/ecotowns.ethicalliving. Nonetheless Sherford the Prince of Wales' eco-town will house 12,000 people. But who would want to live there?
Among the proposals the report recommends monitoring the number of car trips made by residents, the type of waste they produce, their energy use and the food they eat . Their lifestyles are also to be micromanaged by making sure they only only eat local produce and travel less. The report has generated something of a backlash http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/26/ecotowns.ethicalliving. Nonetheless Sherford the Prince of Wales' eco-town will house 12,000 people. But who would want to live there?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
