Therefore, under a Socialist government, every citizen
has the right to completely free or almost completely free medical treatment,
efficient and cheap public transport, an education system which is both
free and efficient, a welfare state which helps you when you're out of
work, and various other things designed to make life more equal.
Probably because it's the most 'developed' part of the
world, Socialism is most popular in Europe, whereas Communism and pure
Capitalism tend to be popular in more aggressive and less civilized parts
of the world. In Britain, Socialism is a part of culture, and the various
rights under Socialism are taken as automatic rights of all citizens. Yet
while we have a Labour government, the party which first introduced Socialism
to Britain, that party cannot truly be said to be Socialist.
After twenty years of right-wing Conservatism which caused
a massive recession in the country's economy, the electorate eventually
decided to vote for so-called New Labour, a reformed Labour party which
seemed to be losing touch with its roots; it has been said that the word
'Socialism' wasn't mentioned even once in the Labour election manifesto.
Since Labour has been in power, left-wingers outside of the Labour party
and within it have become increasingly worried about the policies being
adopted by the government. Plans to privatize the London Underground have
been proposed; attempts to partially privatize elements of the National
Health Service have been made; equally the government's policy towards
refugees trying to obtain asylum in the country have been seen as harsh,
and pandering to the prejudices of the right-wing. The policy of the government
towards cannabis has been zero-tolerance. Also the handing over of the
control of interest rates to the Bank Of England seems like taking power
from the government, and handing it to the corporations.
But mostly the government is defined by what they have
not
done; they haven't re-nationalised the railways or buses, privatized by
the previous government to the result of increased safety issues, severe
rail accidents and delays. And although a minimum wage has been introduced,
it did not apply to those most at risk, and the government's 'New Deal'
for the unemployed has been called slave-labour, as people are forced to
work just to earn their welfare cheque, without receiving any wages from
the actual work they do.
On the other hand, the government has done things which
a Socialist government would have done. Public spending has increased,
as have the taxes to pay for it (albeit only slightly). A minimum wage
has been introduced. Homeless people are now able to vote. New programs
to increase race equality in the police force have been implemented. Attempts
to join the single European currency have been tentatively made, and some
proportional representation has been used. Equally Scotland and Wales now
have their own governments (sorry, 'executives') and have attained the
greatest degree of independence for several centuries. But that's about
it. Though, compared to US standards, we're practically Communists, and
it's true that the British Conservative right-wing are more left-wing
than the supposedly left-of-centre US Democrat party.
We probably have an election coming up in a few weeks.
Everyone knows Labour are going to win, because the Conservative party
are a shambles and have no policies to speak of. But what I'm more worried
about is the way that the Labour government feel free to reject Socialism.
Simply, because there is no realistic opposition, the only hope the country
has for some kind of Socialist government is in the Labour party.
I believe that most people in this country would support
many or all of a Socialist government's plans. Re-nationalising the railways
would be extremely popular, as would increased support for the NHS and
for schools. If the government could be bothered, I think they could convince
the public to join the Euro, considering that currently Britain is losing
industry very rapidly, partly because of our lack of membership of the
single currency.
The problem is that the public are selfish. They want
Socialism, but aren't prepared to pay more in taxes for it. The public
want to have their cake and eat it, but not have to get a bill for it afterwards.
Of course, I'm the same; I might be a student (hell, I am a student)
and thus largely not subject to much taxation, but I wouldn't like it very
much if the price of, for example, alcohol went up, nor would I like it
if my parents had to pay more in direct taxation. What the government has
to do is to make real, visible differences with taxpayer's money, rather
than just hoarding it away, hamster-like. And Socialist policies are great
for spending money.
But is Socialism dead? Well, yes and no. On one level,
this government is clearly not Socialist on a direct level, in the way
they are running the country at present. And yet the optimist in me thinks
that the overall aims of the party are Socialist. That is, rather
than (as previous Labour governments have unsuccessfully done) making sudden
disastrous changes to the economy, instead gradual changes are being made
to the economy which will allow social changes to be made without
unpleasant side-effects. Or so I hope.
However, at the same time I'm not entirely sure anymore
if Socialism, or at least pure Socialism, is what this country needs. Pure
Socialism would call for a degree of equality which I don't think I'd want;
it's true that the people who go on the most about Socialism are the rich
middle classes, and there's a certain amount of hypocrisy there. Personally
I'm beginning to think that the place of government is not to be left-wing
or right-wing, but to be apolitical. This might seem strange, but I believe
that by ascribing to an ideology (whether Socialism or Capitalism, it matters
not) any individual, and by extension any government, is automatically
compromised.
There needs to be a balance between certain amenities
for all, and certain incentives to succeed. Therefore while everyone should
have access to free medical treatment, that's not to say people should
be prevented from earning more than others. Tax the rich, by all means,
but don't tax them too much. A society without something to look
towards has no motivation, even if that thing is the prospect of earning
a few pounds more each week. A government should be as equal as possible,
while being accountable to the public without being held back by the prejudices
of the electorate. I'm hoping, in their next term, the Labour government
will find a better balance between left and right.
This line of thought is essentially what New Labour call
the 'Third Way'; not right, not left, but somewhere in the middle, an ideology
stolen quite shamelessly from the Liberal Democrat party. I support the
government in trying for this ideal, I just wish they would follow it more
truthfully. Currently, I think it's fair to say the government is too far
to the right, and by extension not far enough to the left. If left was
1, and right was 10, I would say the government is at about 7 or 8, while
where they need to be is at 5, in the middle. It's true that by current
standards, a '5' on this scale would been seen as left-wing. But I don't
care. As far as I'm concerned, today's left-of-centre is where the centre
should be.
Bookmark this page